The Bay Area Air District (the District) is developing conceptual amendments to Regulation 12, Rule 11 (Flare Monitoring at Refineries) and Rule 12 (Flaring at Refineries). These updates are driven by the District’s Strategic Plan and the Path to Clean Air Community Emissions Reduction Plan (CERP), with a focus on improving flare minimization planning, enhancing monitoring and reporting, and further reducing flaring emissions and frequency. Although draft regulatory language has not yet been released, the District has outlined key amendment concepts that signal potentially significant changes for refinery operations across the Bay Area. A formal concept paper is anticipated in mid-2026.
The proposed amendments center on two overarching goals:
- Goal 1: Streamline the flare minimization plan (FMP) update process and improve monitoring and reporting requirements
- Goal 2: Reduce flaring emissions and frequency through strengthened limits, controls, and accountability mechanisms.
Goal 1 Enhanced Flare Minimization Plans and Reporting
1.1 Enhanced FMP Content and Increased Enforceability
The District is considering requiring more detailed FMPs to increase enforceability, which includes mitigation measures to address rule violations. In addition, the District is considering increasing the required frequency for updating FMPs.
1.2 Standardized Reporting Requirements
To improve consistency across facilities, the District is considering standardizing reporting requirements. This could include developing standardized report templates, causal categorization system, and prescribed emission calculations methodologies.
1.3 Expanded Reporting Categories
The District is proposing expanding the definition and categories for reporting causes of flaring. Facilities may need to classify and report flaring events into expanded categories such as:
- Emergency (Update current emergency flaring definition in Rule 12-12 to clarify that flaring due to poor maintenance or operator error do not qualify as an emergency which is in alignment with the federal definition of “Malfunction”)
- Planned
- Unplanned
1.4 Enhanced Monitoring and Real‑Time Transparency
The District is evaluating potential requirements to strengthen monitoring and reporting requirements which include, but are not limited to:
- Continuous monitoring for total sulfur in the vent gas and flow downstream of water seal
- Requiring data acquisition and handling system (DAHS) which continuously validates monitoring data and calculates emissions for reporting
- Require facilities to provide access to real time video data to the District and submit images through an online submittal cloud service
- New infrared camera monitoring to detect emissions
- Real‑time notification systems for flaring events
- Adding review and approval process for causal reports and flaring monitoring systems
Goal 2 Reducing Flaring Emissions and Frequency
2.1 Alignment with Federal Requirements
The amendments are expected to incorporate elements of the U.S. EPA Refinery Sector Rule, aligning local requirements with federal standards where appropriate.
2.2 Establishing Annual Flare Limits
The District is evaluating the implementation of annual flare limits as follows:
- Requiring annual limits for the following parameters:
- SO₂ limits for non‑hydrogen flares
- NOx limits for hydrogen flares
- Vent gas flow limits
- Decreasing annual limits over time
- Further review to evaluate how these limits would apply to emergency vs non-emergency flaring (i.e., beyond what can be reasonably controlled by the facility vs what can be reasonably controlled)
2.3 Emission Reduction Measures and Fees
The District is also considering:
- Implementation of emission reduction measures following violations such as an annual limit which might require facilities to conduct a more comprehensive evaluation of emission reduction measures.
- Establishing a fee structure similar to South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1118
- Requiring more stringent mitigation measures in cases of larger exceedances
2.4 Require Causal Reports Based on Triggers
Additional triggers may be introduced for requiring submittal of causal reports such as violations of key operating parameters. This would result in decreasing the frequency of flaring events and expand reporting requirements.
2.5 Third‑Party Audit Provisions
Facilities could be required to conduct third‑party audits under certain conditions, such as:
- Recurrent flaring from the same source
- Exceedance of emergency flaring thresholds
- Insufficient internal audit performance
Potential Impacts to Refinery Operators
If adopted, these amendments could significantly affect refinery operations in several ways:
- Increased compliance burden: Enhanced monitoring, reporting, and documentation requirements will require additional resources and system upgrades.
- Operational changes: Facilities may need to modify processes to meet declining emission limits and reduce flaring frequency.
- Greater transparency and scrutiny: Real‑time reporting and expanded data availability will increase public visibility into flaring events.
- Heightened enforcement risk: More prescriptive requirements and expanded audit triggers will likely increase enforcement exposure.
Timeline
The District is expected to release a formal concept paper in mid‑2026, with draft rule language to follow thereafter. Interested parties can review the potential rule amendment concepts on the District’s website.
If you would like to discuss the potential updates to Rule 12-11 and 12-12 and how they may impact your facility, please contact Trinity’s Oakland office or call 510.285.6351.
