skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report

Abstract

This report summarizes the policy, regulatory, legal, and permitting requirements to-date for the siting of a CO 2 injection and storage project in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-feasibility study area. Where applicable, the East Sub-Basin case study focuses on a proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) site location in West Terre Haute, Indiana. Indiana has established the legal mechanisms to obtain rights to the subsurface mineral estate with the expectation to apply to reservoir pore space for CO 2 storage in an analogous manner to storage of natural gas, which is a common practice in Indiana. There is, however, no precedent in Indiana to take liability for stored CO 2. There are currently no Indiana State incentives for CCS, but at the Federal level, tax credits for carbon capture and storage under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q constitute the greatest incentive targeted at CCS projects. The amendment to these credits put forth in the Bipartisan Budget Act (the FUTURE Act) of 2018 substantially increases the per-ton incentive for CCS—from $22.66 per ton in tax year 2017 up to $50 per ton in tax year 2027, for CO 2 not used as an injectant (i.e. saline storage). Additional economic opportunitiesmore » may exist for the provision of CO 2 for potential EOR in the Illinois Basin. Policies that may support the development of CO 2 pipelines and/or CCS projects in Indiana include: 1) Title 41 of the FAST Act (2015), which created a new governance structure, procedures, and funding authorities in order to improve and expedite Federal review and authorization of covered infrastructure projects, including pipelines, and 2) the Eminent Domain for Transportation of Carbon Dioxide by Pipeline (IC 14-39, Indiana State, 2011), which declares pipeline transportation of CO 2 exclusively to a carbon management application, including sequestration, enhanced oil recovery, and deep saline injection as a benefit to the welfare of Indiana and the people. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Class VI rule and permit requirements address all components pertaining to CO 2 injection and monitoring for long-term storage, and outline the minimum technical criteria to protect underground sources of drinking water at, and surrounding, injection well sites. The Class VI requirements also address financial responsibility for corrective action, post-injection site care, and site closure. In addition, UIC Program public notice requirements include that the EPA issue notice of the draft permit preparation to key stakeholders, and open a public comment period of not less than 30 days. A public hearing about the permit would also be held, if specifically requested by the public. A potential Class VI CO 2 injection well permit for the East Sub-Basin case study site would be obtained through the US EPA Region 5, because the State of Indiana does not have UIC Class VI primacy. Although no CO 2 injection wells have been permitted in Indiana, the US EPA Region 5 (which covers Illinois and Indiana) and the East Sub-Basin CarbonSAFE team (via the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium [MGSC]) have Class VI permitting experience from several projects located in Illinois. Based on our experience, applying for a Class VI permit can be an intensive and iterative process requiring clear communication and numerous interactions with EPA staff. In addition to gathering and preparing the data/models and documentation necessary for a permit application’s initial submittal, the subsequent public comments, EPA response and review, and answering of any follow-up questions/requests by the EPA could significantly increase the timeframe of draft permit issuance. The US EPA offers guidance documents regarding the specific Class VI permit requirements, and shows a general permitting timeline example from the FutureGen Alliance 2.0 covering one-and-a-half years from permit submittal to issuance. However, the overall permitting process to-date has a high degree of variability, and in MGSC’s project experience we observed a more extended timeline to receive Class VI permits for each of two CO 2 injection wells.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [1]
  1. University of Illinois
  2. Indiana Univ., Bloomington, IN (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
University of Illinois
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Fossil Energy (FE), Clean Coal and Carbon (FE-20)
OSTI Identifier:
1479644
Report Number(s):
DOE/ FE0029445‐4
DOE Contract Number:  
FE0029445
Resource Type:
Other
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT; 20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS; 29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY; CarbonSAFE Illinois; CCS incentives

Citation Formats

Korose, Christopher, Rupp, John, and Greenberg, Sallie. Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report. United States: N. p., 2018. Web.
Korose, Christopher, Rupp, John, & Greenberg, Sallie. Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report. United States.
Korose, Christopher, Rupp, John, and Greenberg, Sallie. Tue . "Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report". United States. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1479644.
@article{osti_1479644,
title = {Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report},
author = {Korose, Christopher and Rupp, John and Greenberg, Sallie},
abstractNote = {This report summarizes the policy, regulatory, legal, and permitting requirements to-date for the siting of a CO2 injection and storage project in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-feasibility study area. Where applicable, the East Sub-Basin case study focuses on a proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) site location in West Terre Haute, Indiana. Indiana has established the legal mechanisms to obtain rights to the subsurface mineral estate with the expectation to apply to reservoir pore space for CO2 storage in an analogous manner to storage of natural gas, which is a common practice in Indiana. There is, however, no precedent in Indiana to take liability for stored CO2. There are currently no Indiana State incentives for CCS, but at the Federal level, tax credits for carbon capture and storage under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q constitute the greatest incentive targeted at CCS projects. The amendment to these credits put forth in the Bipartisan Budget Act (the FUTURE Act) of 2018 substantially increases the per-ton incentive for CCS—from $22.66 per ton in tax year 2017 up to $50 per ton in tax year 2027, for CO2 not used as an injectant (i.e. saline storage). Additional economic opportunities may exist for the provision of CO2 for potential EOR in the Illinois Basin. Policies that may support the development of CO2 pipelines and/or CCS projects in Indiana include: 1) Title 41 of the FAST Act (2015), which created a new governance structure, procedures, and funding authorities in order to improve and expedite Federal review and authorization of covered infrastructure projects, including pipelines, and 2) the Eminent Domain for Transportation of Carbon Dioxide by Pipeline (IC 14-39, Indiana State, 2011), which declares pipeline transportation of CO2 exclusively to a carbon management application, including sequestration, enhanced oil recovery, and deep saline injection as a benefit to the welfare of Indiana and the people. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Class VI rule and permit requirements address all components pertaining to CO2 injection and monitoring for long-term storage, and outline the minimum technical criteria to protect underground sources of drinking water at, and surrounding, injection well sites. The Class VI requirements also address financial responsibility for corrective action, post-injection site care, and site closure. In addition, UIC Program public notice requirements include that the EPA issue notice of the draft permit preparation to key stakeholders, and open a public comment period of not less than 30 days. A public hearing about the permit would also be held, if specifically requested by the public. A potential Class VI CO2 injection well permit for the East Sub-Basin case study site would be obtained through the US EPA Region 5, because the State of Indiana does not have UIC Class VI primacy. Although no CO2 injection wells have been permitted in Indiana, the US EPA Region 5 (which covers Illinois and Indiana) and the East Sub-Basin CarbonSAFE team (via the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium [MGSC]) have Class VI permitting experience from several projects located in Illinois. Based on our experience, applying for a Class VI permit can be an intensive and iterative process requiring clear communication and numerous interactions with EPA staff. In addition to gathering and preparing the data/models and documentation necessary for a permit application’s initial submittal, the subsequent public comments, EPA response and review, and answering of any follow-up questions/requests by the EPA could significantly increase the timeframe of draft permit issuance. The US EPA offers guidance documents regarding the specific Class VI permit requirements, and shows a general permitting timeline example from the FutureGen Alliance 2.0 covering one-and-a-half years from permit submittal to issuance. However, the overall permitting process to-date has a high degree of variability, and in MGSC’s project experience we observed a more extended timeline to receive Class VI permits for each of two CO2 injection wells.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {10}
}