Recommendations from Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP)
to EPA on Proposed "Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards
and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements"
Unanimously adopted on September
17, 1999
BACKGROUND
Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission
In June of 1996 the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission
recommended, among other things, to "support adoption of
federal Tier II (vehicle emission) standards" and to "request
that EPA explore broader application of and additional reductions
in the sulfur content of both gasoline and diesel fuel."
WRAP Mobile Source Forum
In the spring of 1998, EPA announced its intention to proceed
to rulemaking on adoption of national Tier 2 vehicle emission
standards and a companion program to substantially reduce
the sulfur content of gasoline. Shortly thereafter, the WRAP
Mobile Source Forum decided to study this issue and consider
developing comments for the WRAP to make to EPA. In May of
1999, EPA proposed stringent new national Tier 2 vehicle
emission standards and a companion gasoline sulfur regulation.
Concurrently, EPA issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
with respect to further regulating the sulfur content of
diesel fuel.
Western Governors' Association
In June of 1999, ten Governors from the Western Governors'
Association requested that the WRAP Mobile Source Forum make
recommendations on how to address their concerns about the
impact of EPA's proposed rules on small refineries in the
West (attachment 1). While the Governors indicated they have "long
been concerned about improving and maintaining the good air
quality in the West" and "recognize that sulfur in gasoline
must be controlled," they expressed specific concern that "despite
the provisions in the proposed [EPA] rule for small and medium
size refineries, there may nonetheless be a number of these
industries that are not able to comply with the low sulfur
requirements and may be forced to close." The Western Governors
asked the Forum specifically to "evaluate the relative merits
of a national versus regional sulfur standard, develop recommendations
for allowing small and medium size refineries the ability
to comply with new standards in a manner that is practically
and economically feasible, and make recommendations regarding
any further required technical studies."
Mobile Source Forum Tier 2/Gasoline
Sulfur Drafting Team
The Mobile Source Forum responded to the request of the
Western Governors by forming a drafting team to develop recommendations
to be considered by the Forum and ultimately the WRAP. The
drafting team was composed of seven members representing
major interests (attachment 2).
EPA'S PROPOSED TIER 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION STANDARDS
AND GASOLINE SULFUR CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
Proposed Standards
EPA has proposed new national vehicle emission standards
that would be phased in beginning with the 2004 model year.
EPA has proposed to reduce the sulfur levels in gasoline
from a national average of more than 300 ppm to an average
of 30 ppm. These standards would be phased in beginning on
October 1, 2003. EPA indicates the reduction in the sulfur
content of gasoline is needed because sulfur fouls catalytic
converters, the devices that destroy a major portion of the
emissions from vehicles. With a combination of the new vehicle
emission standards and much lower gasoline sulfur levels,
emissions from passenger cars would be 77% cleaner than today's
new models and emissions from SUV's and other light-duty
trucks would be 95% cleaner than today's new models.
Proposed Refinery Provisions
EPA proposes to phase in a gasoline sulfur standard of 30
ppm annual average with a maximum per gallon cap of 80 ppm.
Under EPA's proposal, most refineries would be given until
January 1, 2006 to comply with these standards. Small refiners
would be given an additional two years to comply and, if
necessary, could request an additional two-year economic
hardship extension that would delay compliance until January
1, 2010. EPA's proposed standards for small refiners were
developed under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, a statute
designed to provide compliance flexibility for small businesses.
EPA used a provision of a Small Business Administration definition
for a small refiner in its proposed rules, which is a company
with 1500 employees or less (hereafter referred to as a "SBREFA" refiner).
Expected Air Quality Benefits
When the Tier 2 program is fully implemented in 2030, that
is when the national vehicle fleet will have turned over
to essentially all Tier 2 vehicles, the proposed standards
will reduce NOx emissions from vehicles by about 74% and
particulate matter, or soot, from vehicles by about 84%.
These reductions will greatly help to reduce and prevent
ground level ozone, PM2.5 and regional haze air quality problems,
as well as address other air pollution problems such as acid
deposition and toxic air pollutants. Additionally, the early
reductions in sulfur content of gasoline will provide substantial
immediate air quality improvements from the current fleet
of vehicles. >
WRAP COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE
The following recommendations of the WRAP are made to
address concerns of western inland small refineries about
the impact of EPA's proposed national gasoline sulfur control
program while at the same time providing for compliance
with the proposed national low sulfur gasoline standards.
When the WRAP was examining the concerns of small, geographically
isolated western inland refineries, the WRAP also recognized
that some of the compliance concerns raised by these refineries
also were raised by similarly sized refineries elsewhere.
Accordingly, the WRAP has recommended revisions to EPA's
proposal that would apply nationally, with a few exceptions
discussed below. These recommendations will not significantly
delay nor significantly reduce the overall effectiveness
of EPA's proposed national sulfur control program. Indeed,
by further staggering refinery compliance, the WRAP's recommendations
should help address general refinery concerns that have
been raised about the number of refineries required to
meet the final national sulfur standards by January 1,
2006. EPA should maintain a dialog with the WRAP regarding
any significant changes EPA may be considering to its proposal
that may interact with or have a direct effect on these
recommendations, as they are fundamentally premised on
EPA's currently proposed program. Also, these recommendations
are not intended to apply to EPA's forthcoming diesel fuel
sulfur control program. EPA needs to gather accurate data
on sulfur levels in diesel fuel before the WRAP can evaluate
the applicability of its recommendations to a new diesel
sulfur control program. Finally, no recommendations are
being made with respect to the SBREFA program, and it is
explicitly intended that the 2-year economic hardship extension
that is available under SBREFA not be available to the
new small refinery category recommended herein.
1. National versus Regional Sulfur Program.
A consensus in the WRAP exists to support a national
gasoline sulfur control program to help protect western
air quality if EPA adopts a program that recognizes the
regional characteristics and circumstances of inland western
refineries as reflected by the recommendations and rationale
that follow.
Rationale
Refineries in the inland West are mostly small to medium
size and, in the geographically isolated Rocky Mountain region,
they are all in the smaller size category. EPA's proposed
SBREFA refiner definition does not encompass the majority
of these refineries. EPA acknowledges that it is proportionately
more costly for small refineries to install desulfurization
equipment. Small refineries are concerned they will have
a much more difficult time competing for engineering and
construction resources if their compliance time under a national
program is the same as large refineries. Small refineries
indicate they need relief in the form of relaxed compliance
schedules and interim standards compared to large refineries
in order to avoid possible closures that could result in
regional gasoline shortages. The WRAP recommendations are
designed to give these refineries additional compliance flexibility
in a manner that is rational, equitable, sensitive to air
quality concerns, and sensibly integrated with other aspects
of EPA's national proposal.
The short and long term air quality benefits of a national
sulfur control program for the West are recognized by the
WRAP in terms of remedying existing and preventing future
adverse health impacts from motor vehicle emissions, reducing
regional haze, acid deposition and positively addressing
conformity of transportation plans with air quality plans.
Data submitted by the auto industry suggest that there is
at least some irreversible adverse effect on certain vehicle
emission control systems from sulfur in gasoline and that
this effect will worsen with emerging new technologies. Several
stakeholders strongly believe that a national sulfur control
program compared to a regional program would better address
this problem, given the mobility of motor vehicles between
states and regions. Finally, the WRAP believes that there
are few alternatives that could be implemented at the state
or local level to provide the degree of motor vehicle emission
control that would be provided by EPA's proposed national
Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur
Control Requirements.
The net effect of the WRAP recommendations on EPA's proposed
national program to reduce the sulfur content of gasoline
would be to diminish the total possible reductions in sulfur
content of gasoline in the 2004 through 2007 national program
implementation period to 98% of what it would be under an
unaltered program. This would be a relative indication of
the national loss in vehicle emission control and potential
air quality improvement from the WRAP recommendations.
2. Definition of Small Refineries
A third category of refineries should be created in
addition to the large refinery and the SBREFA category
proposed by EPA that would encompass small refineries.
This category should be defined as refineries with a 1998
crude oil throughput of 60,000 bbls/day or less as reported
to the federal Department of Energy. EPA should seek to
resolve any accuracy issues that may arise regarding this
database. Refineries in NOx SIP call states with a crude
oil throughput of 50,000 bbls/day or more, as well as refineries
outside the continental U.S. should be excluded from this
category.
Rationale
There are a large number of relatively small and medium
size refineries in the country compared to large refineries.
These smaller refineries collectively represent a small amount
of the nation's refining capacity. For instance, 91 of the
154 refineries in this country have a refining capacity of
less than 75,000 bbls/day, yet they represent only about
20% of the nation's refining capacity. The majority of these
refineries are in the West. In the Rocky Mountain PADD IV
area (U.S. Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts),
all are in this size category, and, currently, PADD IV has
the most isolated petroleum distribution system in the U.S.
In fact, almost the entire volume of gasoline manufactured
by the small refineries in this area is sold and used in
this region.
Current information indicates there would be 15 refineries
in the nation categorized as SBREFA refineries. There are
concerns in the refining industry that this would exclude
many small refineries of similar size (crude oil capacity)
to SBREFA refineries which do not fall within EPA's proposed
SBREFA definition of a company that has 1500 employees or
less . In the PADD IV area, based on current information,
all sixteen refineries are comparable in size to those included
in EPA's SBREFA refiner category, although a number of these
refineries are owned by major companies with relatively large
national refining capacity. Five of these sixteen would actually
qualify for SBREFA treatment.
The oil industry believes that small refineries, owned by
large or small companies, would face proportionately higher
costs to install desulfurization equipment compared to large
refineries. They also believe that small refineries likely
will be lower on the priority list for desulfurization equipment
and construction vendors, making the ability to achieve compliance
on the same schedule with large refineries problematic.
In particular, the refining industry is concerned that EPA's
SBREFA refiner definition of small refiners, based on employment
(companies with 1500 employees or less), does not directly
relate to the gasoline producing capacity of the company.
Some companies with over 1500 employees, because of interests
in other non-refining businesses, have been excluded from
the SBREFA definition even though they own small refineries
that are in the same size range encompassed by EPA's proposed
SBREFA definition. Refiners in the inland West also expressed
concern that EPA's proposed definition does not recognize
the economic competitiveness between small non-SBREFA refineries
located in the same geographic area as SBREFA refineries.
The refining industry is concerned that these similar size
small refineries would be at a significant competitive disadvantage
with refineries that qualify under the SBREFA definition.
Several alternatives were considered for developing a more
workable definition of small refineries, to address the refining
industry concerns. In particular, the refining industry suggested
that a workable definition to address the inland western
refineries' issues would be to include all small refineries
operating within and near the unique PADD IV area. Based
on industry concerns, it was also desired to select a definition
that was not dependent on the refining capacity of the corporation.
Further, to ensure a reasonable approach that was based on
sound information, a definition was developed that would
be fairly applied nationwide, that excludes certain refineries
that would be in extremely sensitive air quality areas and
that would not apply outside the continental U.S.
It was concluded that a definition of small refineries based
on a crude oil throughput of 60,000 bbls per day (barrels
per calendar day as reported to the federal Department of
Energy) or less best fit desired criteria when coupled with
an exclusion for refineries in states subject to EPA's NOx
SIP call with crude oil throughput of 50,000 bbls/day or
more and refineries outside the continental U.S. (attachment
3). The refineries in NOx SIP call states are recommended
to be excluded because a principal goal of EPA's Tier 2 vehicle
standards is to control NOx emissions; therefore, it would
be inappropriate to include any but the smallest refineries
in areas needing immediate NOx reductions (e.g., NOx SIP
call states). Refineries with crude oil throughput of less
than 50,000 bbls/day in NOx SIP call states are not included
in this exclusion provision because they are considered the
smallest refineries in the country that still deserve special
small business protection. Small refineries outside the continental
U.S. are recommended to be excluded because insufficient
information was available to evaluate the multi-faceted implications
of these recommendations in such areas.
3. Small Refinery Interim Sulfur Standards
Refineries in the new small refinery category should
be subject to interim phase-in period gasoline sulfur standards
of a 300 ppm per gallon cap and a 150 ppm annual average.
These standards should apply to only the first three years
of the 4-year interim phase-in period, that is 2004 through
2006. Small refineries should be required to meet the proposed
national gasoline sulfur standards of an 80 ppm per gallon
cap and 30 ppm annual average beginning January 1, 2007.
Small refineries should be allowed to demonstrate compliance
with the recommended interim and proposed national annual
average standards with the use of sulfur credits generated
by the proposed banking and trading program.
Rationale
The WRAP considers progress of small refineries towards
the manufacture of low sulfur gasoline meeting the national
standard an extremely important goal. In fact, the proposed
interim gasoline sulfur standards of a 300 ppm per gallon
cap and a 150 ppm annual average requires small refineries
to demonstrate they are producing lower sulfur gasoline during
the compliance phase-in period. It was felt that it would
be reasonable and equitable to establish these sulfur standards
and a phased-in compliance time for the new small refinery
category somewhere in between the stringency of the proposed
requirements for large refineries and SBREFA refiners. Under
EPA's proposal, large refineries would be subject to a 2-year
phase-in program essentially beginning in 2004 and would
be required to achieve the proposed national 30 ppm annual
average and 80 ppm per gallon cap by January 1, 2006. Large
refineries would be subject to a 300 ppm per gallon cap in
2004 and a 180 ppm per gallon cap in 2005. They would be
subject to the proposed national 30 ppm annual average standard
during this period that could be met with sulfur credits
generated by the proposed banking and trading program. Corporations
would be subject to a 120 ppm corporate annual average in
2004 and 90 ppm in 2005. Sulfur credits could not be used
for demonstrating compliance with the cap and corporate average.
SBREFA refiners would be subject to a 4-year phase in program
also beginning in 2004. SBREFA refineries with current sulfur
levels near the national average sulfur content of gasoline
(330 ppm) would be subject to a 450 ppm per gallon cap and
a 200 ppm annual average for the full four-year interim phase-in
period. SBREFA refineries with current sulfur levels above
the national average sulfur content of gasoline would have
higher annual average standards up to a maximum of 300 ppm
but their cap would remain at 450 ppm. SBREFA refineries
with current annual average sulfur levels between 200 ppm
and 300 ppm would continue to have an annual average standard
of 200 ppm but their cap would range from 300 ppm to 450
ppm. SBREFA refineries with current annual average sulfur
levels below 200 ppm would have lower caps and annual average
standards. Sulfur credits could not be used for demonstrating
compliance with the cap and annual average.
A 3-year phase in program for the new recommended small
refinery category was felt to be adequate to provide the
needed compliance flexibility for these refineries. This
schedule would, in particular, more equally spread out the
equipment procurement and construction schedule among the
whole industry to avoid potential logjams that would most
likely jeopardize small refineries' abilities to achieve
timely compliance.
A 300 ppm per gallon cap and 150 ppm annual average for
the 3-year phase in program were felt to be reasonable middle
ground standards between applicable large refineries and
SBREFA refiners standards (attachment 4). These standards
would help ensure that refineries producing very high sulfur
fuel and others at or above the national average are required
to make a significant reduction in the sulfur content of
that gasoline during the interim phase-in compliance period.
4. Averaging, Banking and Trading
To provide additional flexibility to achieve compliance,
it is recommended that small refineries be allowed to participate
in a limited banking and trading program. Early actual
reductions in sulfur content of gasoline between 2000 and
the beginning of the compliance phase in period (January
1, 2004) should be allowed to be counted as sulfur reduction
credits to be used internally or interchangeably with any
other small or large refinery or refiner credits generated
pursuant to EPA's proposed rules. Credits should be allowed
for actual reductions below an annual average of 300 ppm
in 2000-2001 and 225 ppm in 2002 and 2003 or from the actual
annual average, which ever is lower. Credits should also
be allowed in the phase in period (January 1, 2004 to December
31, 2006) for actual reductions below the 150 ppm annual
average standard.
Rationale
It is believed the recommended banking and trading program
for small refineries would be somewhat more restrictive then
the banking and trading program proposed by EPA for large
refineries. Even though large refineries would have a lower
trigger point for generating credits (150 ppm), EPA would
allow credits to be calculated from the refineries' baseline
even if it is well above the national average of about 300
ppm. This policy of giving credits for reductions from high
sulfur baselines as proposed by EPA is questioned. It is
particularly felt that, in light of the other benefits suggested,
small refineries should not be given this reward for reducing
sulfur from relatively high levels, which can be done with
relatively low cost techniques because these refineries are
already getting the benefit of an extended compliance period
as well as less stringent phase-in period standards.
5. Corporate Average
The annual average sulfur content for small refineries
should be accounted for in the applicable corporate annual
average standards required in EPA's large refinery's program.
The underlying concept for all recommendations is to
give small refineries limited compliance relief. There
is no intent to give corporations with multiple refineries
direct relief. Therefore, it is reasonable to maintain
the compliance requirement for corporations to include
all refineries, large and small, in the corporate average
as embodied in EPA's current proposal.
6. Anti-backsliding
Small refineries should be subject to an anti-backsliding
requirement to prevent significant increases in sulfur
content from their baseline level, which should be specifically
defined by EPA.
Rationale
Some refineries have current gasoline sulfur levels that
are well below recommended phase-in period standards. SBREFA
refiners, which are given compliance relief in EPA's proposed
regulations, are subject to phase in period sulfur limits
which in essence is an anti-backsliding provision that would
prevent increases in sulfur levels from their actual baseline
level. It is reasonable, in light of recommending to give
non-SBREFA small refineries additional compliance flexibility,
to also subject these non-SBREFA small refineries to an anti-backsliding
provision.
The WRAP recognizes that there are concerns with guarding
against backsliding in sulfur content from current levels
while at the same time allowing reasonable operational flexibility.
Restrictions are necessary to ensure there is no significant
backsliding at any individual refinery. This will help preserve
the overall reductions in sulfur levels during the interim
compliance period in areas affected by these recommendations.
It is not clear that using the existing EPA anti-dumping
provisions would be appropriate to use as an anti-backsliding
program to prevent significant increases in emissions from
Tier 2 vehicles. Other options that may be viable include
allowance for a small percentage or absolute increase in
sulfur levels over baseline levels. Because of the lack of
data available to the WRAP to predict and analyze the factors
relevant to a well-designed anti-backsliding program, it
is suggested that EPA practically define "anti-backsliding" to
protect existing achievements in low sulfur gasoline levels.
7. Impact of Recommendations on Other Areas
The recommendations made by the WRAP are sensibly integrated
with EPA's proposal. They should help in addressing general
concerns that have been raised about the number of refiners
required to comply by January 1, 2006 by more evenly staggering
construction of desulfurization equipment by refineries,
including SBREFA refineries, over the 4-year program phase-in
period. They should also provide justified relief for an
appropriate, but small number of refineries outside the
Rocky Mountain area. The WRAP recommendations should not
give rise to higher sulfur gasoline in the Rocky Mountains.
Indeed they would prevent backsliding and spur refineries
with particularly high sulfur gasoline to begin making
early reductions in sulfur.
Rationale
Consideration was given to the impact of the WRAP recommendations
on areas inside PADD IV and outside the West. There are some
small refineries in the eastern part of the country that
were not encompassed by the SBREFA refinery definition but
who would justifiably benefit from the proposed definition.
Some of these refineries were not included under SBREFA because
their parent corporation, with more interests than just refining,
had more than 1500 employees, even though the small refinery
owned by the corporation included only a fraction of this
employment.
The recommended small refinery program would most likely
result in a much more equal spread of construction of refinery
desulfurization equipment over the 4-year interim phase-in
period throughout the country. This should help to avoid
problems in achieving timely compliance because of potential
construction logjams.
The WRAP is concerned with the air quality problems in the
Rocky Mountain West and recognizes the importance of making
continued air quality progress in this region of the country.
Accordingly, the WRAP has recommended interim compliance
standards, anti-backsliding provisions, and only a one-year
extension in achieving compliance with the proposed national
low sulfur fuel standards to try and ensure adequate protection
of western air quality while addressing concerns raised by
the refining industry. The net effect of the WRAP recommendations
on the PADD IV (Rocky Mountain area) would be to diminish
the total possible reduction in sulfur content of gasoline
in the 2004 through 2007 national program implementation
period to 83% of what it would be under an unaltered program.
In addition, evaluation of the likely impact of WRAP recommendations
on major urban areas in the Rocky Mountain area during the
interim compliance period concluded that it would be unlikely
that sulfur levels in gasoline would rise in these areas
and likely they would decrease some because of the recommended
interim requirements. Finally, the WRAP received comments
regarding public disclosure of low sulfur gasoline availability.
Because there will be different sulfur levels in gasoline
on the market for several years during the phase-in period,
the WRAP recommends EPA explore methods, including incentives,
to encourage voluntary retail disclosure of low sulfur
gasoline levels where practical.
Attachment 1 - June 15, 1999 Letter to Administrator
Browner, EPA
Attachment 2 - MSF Tier 2/Sulfur Task Force Roster
Attachment 3 - SBREFA and Small Refineries in 60,000
bbls/day or less Category, Refineries in New Small Refinery
Category
Attachment 4 - Refinery Averages in Per Gallon CAPS
Attachment 5 - Fact Sheet
|