WATCHING GOVERNMENT EPA'S TALE FROM THE CRYPT

July 10, 1995
With Patrick Crow from Washington, D.C. The U.S. refining industry is protesting - but apparently will be unable to stop - the Environmental Protection Agency's major rule to control air pollutants. The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments required EPA to determine the best control technology, termed 11 maximum achievable control technology" (MACT), in use in an industry, then require all plants in an industry to use it. At a House commerce subcommittee oversight hearing, the National Petroleum

The U.S. refining industry is protesting - but apparently will be unable to stop - the Environmental Protection Agency's major rule to control air pollutants.

The 1990 Clean Air Act amendments required EPA to determine the best control technology, termed 11 maximum achievable control technology" (MACT), in use in an industry, then require all plants in an industry to use it.

At a House commerce subcommittee oversight hearing, the National Petroleum Refiners Association complained the proposed MACT was unrealistically tough.

EPA has changed the rule somewhat since proposing it July 15, 1994. It must issue a final rule by this July 28 or conclude that a final rule is not needed.

EPA'S STANCE

Mary Nichols, assistant EPA administrator for air and radiation, said Congress required MACT because it was a proven method to attain results.

"This straightforward, performance-based approach ensures that facilities with good controls are not disadvantaged relative to competitors with poorer controls," she said.

Robert Hahn of the American Enterprise Institute said the air pollutants rule is likely to cost U.S. industries $1 0 billion but return benefits of less than $1 billion.

Jerry Thompson, Citgo Petroleum's vice-president of corporate planning and economics, testified for NPRA.

He said EPA has estimated the MACT rule would cost refiners $110 million/year, but the figure is likely to be much higher than that - perhaps 10 times higher - and environmental benefits would be slight.

Thompson said EPA has justified the MACT with 15 year old data about refinery equipment leaks, ignoring many improvements made to reduce emissions since then.

"This misuse of data is like going to the cemetery to register voters," he said. "Many of the emissions counted by the agency are long since gone and should not be used to bolster the benefits of the proposed rule."

Thompson also said EPA inflated its estimates of how the rule would reduce volatile organic compound emissions, using 1984 air quality data when 1992 data were available.

"The 1992 data showed drastic improvements in ozone air quality since 1984, including a 60% decrease in the number of exceedances and a 12% reduction in severity," he said.

He also said EPA's regulatory impact analysis estimated the rule's higher compliance costs would force as many as seven U.S. refineries to close.

"This is not insignificant. The nation cannot afford to continue to lose more facilities, more refining capacity, and more jobs each year."

REMOTE RISK

Thompson said EPA's analysis of petroleum refineries show a present statistical risk of only one increased death from cancer every 3 years because existing rules controlling refinery emissions are so tough.

"But to get even this level of risk, EPA was forced to assume that people live within 150 ft of the center of every refinery in the country for a period of 70 years.

"Few people live within miles of any refineries. Almost no one lives within 150 ft of the center of any refinery, let alone for 70 years."

Copyright 1995 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.