WASHINGTON, D.C. —  U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), senior member of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, sent a letter Tuesday to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy urging the EPA to withdraw its proposed new control requirements for petroleum refineries. In the letter, Inhofe highlights that the new requirements are not justified by a sound risk assessment; do not provide meaningful benefits to human health or the environment; and fail to comply with EPA’s mandate under Section 321(a) of the Clean Air Act, which requires a continuous evaluation of the regulations' impact to employment in the United States. 

Inhofe wrote, "The EPA is proposing new control requirements for flares, storage tanks, coking units, and fenceline monitoring at petroleum refineries.  These regulations are not justified by risk assessments and will result in an increase in the cost of producing gasoline; further, with these regulations, EPA has again failed to comply with the employment impact analysis requirements of Section 321(a) of the Clean Air Act.  In the interest of American consumers and EPA compliance with both the law and the President’s Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 concerning the principles of sound regulation, I urge you to withdraw these rules.”

The new requirements would come in the form of amendments to a variety of refinery Maximum Achievable Control Performance Standards (MACT) and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), which are collectively referred to as the Petroleum Refinery Sector Risk and Technology Review and New Source Performance Standards (RTR).

"A key principle of sound regulatory policy is that regulations be pursued only when they are targeting significant, scientifically identified risks that cannot be otherwise addressed.  In 2008, when EPA last developed an RTR rulemaking for refineries, EPA elected to take no regulatory action, citing that the public health and environmental risk of refinery operations around the country were within an adequate margin of safety and did not require additional regulation.  Under the Obama Administration, EPA conducted a massive data collection effort, assessing the same risk characteristics, and while the Agency established a nearly identical risk assessment as the 2008 rulemaking, it pursued the opposite course and elected to mandate additional, costly requirements on the industry.  As written, the RTR dismisses the instructions within EO 12866 that 'agencies should promulgate only such regulations as are required by law, are necessary to interpret the law, or are made necessary by compelling public need.'  The Clean Air Act does not mandate these regulations and EPA has failed to justify why they are 'necessary by compelling public need.’

To read the full text of the letter click here. 

###