Industry lost no opportunity to respond to EPA’s request for comment on the impact of regulations on the public and business and suggestions on repealing, replacing, or modifying those regs.
The call for comments responds to President Donald Trump’s February 24, 2017, Executive Order, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, which established a federal policy “to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens” on the American people.
Present Rules and Future Rulemaking
Overall, the EPA received over 31,000 comments. Generally, individuals asked that the Agency maintain its regulations to protect and improve clean air, clean water, and human health. While in the minority in terms of number of responses, industry took the opposite position, arguing that many deregulatory changes are desirable. For example, the American Petroleum Institute (API) provided the Agency with two response documents. One offered general comments on the criteria that should be applied on how existing oil and gas (O&G) rules should be reviewed and how future rules should be developed. The API also referenced specific economic impact studies the Agency should make use of in rulemaking.
The second document comprises API’s comments on 67 EPA regulations, each accompanied by an “opportunity for improvement.” The number of regulations cited is indicative of the size of the regulatory compliance obligation borne by the O&G sector. Still, in its list, the API has three “priority” concerns: (1) the renewable fuels standard (RFS); (2) O&G Clean Air Act (CAA) New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); and (3) the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Three Priorities
- RFS. With its emphasis on petroleum-based transportation fuel, the traditional O&G sector has been long opposed to this statutory program, which the API calls “unworkable” and in need of congressional amendment. Specific recommendations to the Agency include reducing the advanced, cellulosic, and total renewable fuel obligations to ensure the mandate does not exceed the ethanol (E10) blend wall; not setting an RFS mandate that would cause the average ethanol content to exceed 9.7 percent of projected gasoline demand; and not moving the RFS point of obligation, an action that would “simply reallocate the program’s problems to a different group of fuel supply chain participants.”
- NSPS. This rule regulates methane, a major greenhouse gas (GHG). According to the API, the previous NSPSs, issued in 2012, are effectively reducing emissions. The API adds that the EPA should revisit the final rule process because the Agency failed to demonstrate that the source category represents a “significant contribution” to endangering public health.
- Ozone NAAQS. The 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion was promulgated “without a sufficient basis,” says the API. The organization adds that the NAAQS “could result in potential long term non-attainment and over-control of domestic sources attempting to overcome background ozone concentrations.” This rule should be reconsidered in a timely fashion, says the API. The organization also recommends that EPA’s NAAQS implementation rules should be more flexible.
Other Rules, Other Statutes
In addition to these big-ticket items, the API provides recommendations on specific regulatory items, including leak detection requirements for O&G facilities in Alaska; emissions standards for remote incinerators, also in Alaska; electronic reporting of performance tests; Clean Water Act (CWA) effluent limitations and guidelines for the O&G sector; discharges from vessels; the volume threshold for tanks regulated under the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) program; addition of natural gas processing facilities to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI); premanufacture notices under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) financial responsibility requirements for facilities in the chemical, petroleum, and electric power industries.
All the above represent just 16 percent of API’s recommended changes. Given that virtually all these changes would require formal federal rulemaking, it is unlikely that the current EPA, which is faced with potential budget cuts, will be able to finalize revisions on more than a handful. It is also likely that revisions that are made final will face legal challenges that history shows do not always go industry’s or EPA’s way.
API’s comments are available here.
All comments on EPA’s request are at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190.