The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has published a proposed rulemaking that every marine terminal operator, environmental compliance manager, and EMS practitioner should be reading right now. Published in the Federal Register on March 4, 2026 (Document No. 2026-04304), the proposed amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations (MTVLO) represent the EPA's most significant technology review of this source category in years.
If your facility loads petroleum liquids, chemical feedstocks, or other volatile cargoes onto marine tank vessels, this rulemaking directly affects your compliance posture — and potentially your ISO 14001 environmental management system. Here is what changed, what it means in practice, and what you need to do before the comment period closes and final deadlines arrive.
What Are the MTVLO NESHAP and Why Do They Matter?
The MTVLO NESHAP, codified at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y, regulate hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from facilities that load petroleum products and other volatile organic liquids into marine tank vessels — tankers, barges, and similar waterborne craft. These rules were promulgated under Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112, which requires the EPA to set emission standards for major source categories of HAPs.
CAA Section 112(d)(6) mandates a technology review of existing NESHAP every eight years. The purpose is to assess whether developments in practices, processes, and control technologies warrant more stringent standards. The 2026 proposed rule is the direct result of that statutory obligation.
Why this matters beyond marine terminals: According to the EPA, marine tank vessel loading operations release benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene (BTEX), and other HAPs that pose significant cancer and non-cancer health risks to surrounding communities. Facilities subject to these rules include petroleum refineries, bulk liquid terminals, and chemical manufacturing complexes located along U.S. coastlines and navigable waterways.
The Lesson: Don't Wait for Final Rules to Audit Your Controls
Compliance professionals who have watched EPA technology reviews over the past decade know a consistent pattern: proposed rules become final rules with tighter timelines than operators expect. The lesson from prior NESHAP technology reviews — including the 2020 amendments to the Petroleum Refineries NESHAP and the 2023 updates to the Marine Terminals rule — is that facilities that begin gap assessments during the comment period are far better positioned than those that wait for promulgation.
At Certify Consulting, we have guided 200+ clients through regulatory transitions with a 100% first-time audit pass rate. The facilities that succeed are those that treat a proposed rule as a compliance calendar trigger, not a future problem.
Key Proposed Changes: What the 2026 Rule Would Require
1. Enhanced Flare Monitoring Requirements
The most operationally significant proposed change is the introduction of enhanced monitoring requirements for flares used as air pollution control devices at MTVLO facilities. Under the existing rule, flare monitoring obligations are relatively limited. The 2026 proposed rule would require:
- Continuous parameter monitoring for flare operating conditions, including flare tip velocity, net heating value of the flare gas, and pilot flame presence
- Enhanced data recording and reporting to demonstrate that flares are operating within design parameters during all vessel loading events
- Deviation notification thresholds that would trigger corrective action requirements when monitored parameters exceed specified limits
This aligns with EPA's broader agency-wide initiative to strengthen flare monitoring across multiple NESHAP source categories, reflecting new continuous emissions monitoring (CEMS) and parameter monitoring technologies that have become industry-standard since the original rule was written.
2. Periodic Performance Testing Requirements
The proposed rule would establish requirements to perform periodic performance testing on emission control systems. Under current 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y requirements, some facilities have not been required to conduct performance tests on a recurring basis once initial compliance demonstrations were completed. The 2026 proposed amendments would change that by requiring:
- Scheduled re-testing intervals (specific intervals subject to final rulemaking, but the proposed framework references periodic re-testing consistent with other recent NESHAP revisions)
- Testing protocols aligned with current EPA reference methods for HAP emissions from loading operations
- Documentation requirements demonstrating that control device efficiency meets or exceeds the applicable emission reduction standards
3. Technology Review Findings on Best-Performing Sources
Consistent with the CAA Section 112(d)(6) mandate, the EPA's technology review evaluated the best-performing sources in the MTVLO source category. The proposed rule reflects findings that vapor control systems (VCS) at top-performing facilities achieve higher HAP reduction efficiencies than the current regulatory floor requires. This has implications for facilities still relying on older VCS designs or equipment.
Regulatory Snapshot: What's Changing at a Glance
| Requirement Area | Current Rule (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y) | Proposed 2026 Amendment |
|---|---|---|
| Flare monitoring | Limited parameter monitoring | Enhanced continuous monitoring (velocity, heating value, pilot flame) |
| Performance testing | Initial compliance demonstration; limited re-testing | Periodic re-testing on defined schedule |
| Deviation reporting | Standard excess emissions reporting | Tighter deviation thresholds; expanded notification requirements |
| VCS efficiency standards | Based on original MACT floor | Potentially updated to reflect best-performing sources |
| Recordkeeping | Existing Part 63 general requirements | Enhanced records for flare monitoring parameters |
| Technology basis | Original MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) | Updated technology review reflecting current industry practices |
Key Dates and Deadlines
Understanding the regulatory timeline is essential for planning your compliance response:
- March 4, 2026 — Proposed rule published in the Federal Register (Document No. 2026-04304)
- Public Comment Period — Typically 60 days from publication date; monitor the official docket for the exact close date
- Public Hearing — EPA may hold virtual or in-person hearings; check the docket at regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR) for hearing announcements
- Final Rule Promulgation — Expected following review of public comments; based on comparable rulemakings, a final rule could be published within 12–24 months of the proposed rule
- Compliance Deadlines — Final rules under CAA Section 112 typically provide existing sources with 3 years from promulgation to achieve compliance with new or revised standards, though specific deadlines will be set in the final rule
Action item: Submit or review public comments before the close of the comment period. Facility-specific data submitted during rulemaking can influence final compliance deadlines and technical requirements.
Practical Compliance Guidance: Steps to Take Now
Step 1: Conduct a Regulatory Gap Assessment
Compare your current compliance program against both the existing 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y requirements AND the proposed amendments. Identify:
- Current flare monitoring instrumentation and data systems
- Last performance test dates for all emission control devices
- Vapor control system efficiency documentation
- Existing deviation tracking and reporting procedures
Step 2: Evaluate Your Flare Monitoring Infrastructure
The enhanced flare monitoring requirements will likely require capital investment for facilities that have not upgraded their monitoring systems. Assess whether your current instrumentation can measure and continuously record:
- Flare tip velocity
- Net heating value (NHV) of combusted gases
- Pilot flame status
If gaps exist, begin procurement timelines now. Equipment lead times for CEMS components have ranged from 6 to 18 months in recent years, making early action critical.
Step 3: Schedule Performance Tests Proactively
Even before the final rule establishes mandatory re-testing schedules, conduct a voluntary performance test if your facility's last test is more than 5 years old. This serves two purposes: it establishes a current baseline and demonstrates good-faith compliance efforts that can be relevant in enforcement contexts.
Step 4: Update Your ISO 14001 Environmental Management System
Facilities operating under an ISO 14001:2015-certified environmental management system should integrate this proposed rule into their compliance obligations register (required under ISO 14001:2015 clause 6.1.3) and their operational controls (clause 8.1). Key EMS updates include:
- Adding the proposed monitoring requirements as emerging legal obligations to monitor
- Updating your environmental aspects and impacts register to reflect any changes to emission control performance data
- Scheduling a management review agenda item to discuss the proposed rule's operational and financial implications
For guidance on integrating regulatory compliance into your EMS, see our ISO 14001 compliance obligations guide and our resources on environmental legal register management.
Step 5: Engage Legal and Regulatory Counsel
If your facility is a major source under the MTVLO NESHAP, consider engaging environmental legal counsel to evaluate whether submitting facility-specific comments to the EPA docket is appropriate. Well-documented technical comments — particularly around performance test data and monitoring feasibility — can directly influence final rule requirements.
Who Is Subject to These Requirements?
The MTVLO NESHAP apply to facilities that are major sources of HAP emissions (emitting 10 tons per year or more of a single HAP, or 25 tons per year of combined HAPs) and that conduct marine tank vessel loading operations involving petroleum liquids or other regulated materials.
Typically affected facilities include:
- Petroleum bulk liquid terminals loading crude oil, gasoline, distillate fuels, or residual fuels
- Petroleum refineries with marine loading racks
- Chemical manufacturing facilities loading HAP-containing liquids onto marine vessels
- Facilities in U.S. coastal and inland waterway locations subject to Coast Guard and EPA jurisdictional overlap
According to EPA regulatory impact analyses for prior MTVLO rulemakings, there are approximately 100–150 facilities nationwide that operate as major sources in this category, concentrated in Gulf Coast, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Coast regions.
Citation Hooks: Key Authoritative Statements
The EPA's 2026 proposed rule for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations, published at 91 Fed. Reg. [March 4, 2026] (Document No. 2026-04304), proposes enhanced flare monitoring requirements and periodic performance testing obligations under CAA Section 112(d)(6) technology review authority.
Under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y, facilities that are major sources of HAP emissions conducting marine tank vessel loading operations are subject to NESHAP requirements that the EPA is now proposing to strengthen based on advances in vapor control and flare monitoring technology.
CAA Section 112(d)(6) requires the EPA to conduct technology reviews of existing NESHAP at least every eight years and to revise standards as necessary to reflect developments in practices, processes, and control technologies — the statutory driver behind the 2026 MTVLO proposed rule.
The ISO 14001 Connection: Regulatory Change as an EMS Trigger
For environmental compliance professionals who also manage ISO 14001-certified environmental management systems, proposed rules like this one are not just regulatory events — they are EMS system triggers under the standard's compliance obligation framework.
ISO 14001:2015 clause 6.1.3 requires organizations to determine and have access to their compliance obligations, including legal requirements. A proposed rule with a clear regulatory trajectory should be entered into your compliance obligations register as an emerging requirement with a monitoring status and an assigned owner.
Additionally, clause 9.1.2 requires organizations to evaluate compliance with their environmental legal requirements on a defined frequency. If your last compliance evaluation predates the 2026 proposed rule, this is a natural trigger to conduct a fresh evaluation — and to document it.
At Certify Consulting, our team helps facilities align their ISO 14001 EMS with real-time regulatory changes, ensuring that compliance calendars reflect the full landscape of applicable requirements — including proposed rules that are likely to become enforceable law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the MTVLO NESHAP and which facilities must comply?
The MTVLO NESHAP (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart Y) sets hazardous air pollutant emission standards for major source facilities that load petroleum liquids and other volatile materials onto marine tank vessels. Facilities emitting 10 tons per year or more of a single HAP, or 25 tons per year of combined HAPs, from marine loading operations are generally subject to these requirements.
What does the 2026 proposed rule change about flare monitoring?
The 2026 proposed rule (Federal Register, March 4, 2026, Document No. 2026-04304) would require enhanced continuous monitoring of flare operating parameters — including tip velocity, net heating value of combusted gases, and pilot flame status — with expanded recordkeeping and deviation notification requirements. This goes significantly beyond the flare monitoring obligations in the current rule.
When do facilities need to comply with the new requirements?
The 2026 document is a proposed rule, not yet final. The public comment period is open following the March 4, 2026 publication date. A final rule is expected within 12–24 months. Under CAA Section 112, existing sources typically receive up to 3 years from the final rule's effective date to achieve compliance, but facilities should begin gap assessments now given equipment procurement lead times.
How does this proposed rule relate to ISO 14001 compliance obligations?
Under ISO 14001:2015 clause 6.1.3, organizations must identify and track their compliance obligations, including emerging legal requirements. This proposed rule should be added to your compliance obligations register as an emerging requirement. It may also trigger updates to your environmental aspects register and operational controls under clause 8.1.
Can facilities submit comments to influence the final rule?
Yes. The EPA's public comment process allows facilities to submit technical data, operational feasibility information, and compliance cost analyses that can directly influence final rule requirements and compliance deadlines. Comments should be submitted to the official EPA docket before the comment period closes. Consider engaging environmental legal counsel to prepare technically defensible comments.
Conclusion: Proposed Today, Enforceable Tomorrow
The EPA's 2026 proposed amendments to the MTVLO NESHAP represent a meaningful tightening of HAP emission control requirements for marine terminal and petroleum loading operations. The enhanced flare monitoring requirements and periodic performance testing obligations reflect the EPA's determination that technology has advanced sufficiently to justify more rigorous standards.
The most important compliance lesson here is one I have reinforced throughout my eight-plus years working with clients across the environmental management and regulatory compliance space: the time to act on a proposed rule is during the proposal stage, not after promulgation. Facilities that conduct gap assessments now, evaluate their flare monitoring infrastructure, and integrate these emerging requirements into their ISO 14001 environmental management systems will be far better positioned when the final rule arrives.
For support with NESHAP compliance assessments, environmental legal register updates, or ISO 14001 EMS integration, visit Certify Consulting or explore our ISO 14001 compliance obligations resources.
Last updated: 2026-03-05
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register Document No. 2026-04304, "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations — Technology Review," published March 4, 2026.
Jared Clark
Certification Consultant
Jared Clark is the founder of Certify Consulting and helps organizations achieve and maintain compliance with international standards and regulatory requirements.