Biofuel industry worried by EPA decision to appeal RFS

Reports indicate Trump’s EPA could side with oil industry to defend actions of small refinery exemptions.

Jacqui Fatka, Policy editor

March 9, 2020

3 Min Read
Trump at SIRE ethanol plant June 2019.jpg
President Donald J. Trump addresses his remarks Tuesday, June 11, 2019, on his visit to the Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy facility in Council Bluffs, Iowa. Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead

The Trump Administration will take until March 24 before deciding whether to appeal a federal court's January ruling that would significantly restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to exempt small refiners from biofuel blending requirements. Many biofuel industry partners voiced concern after media reports indicated that the Trump Administration intends to join petroleum companies in an appeal of the decision that found that EPA abused its authority when granting Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) blending exemptions.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) has urged President Donald Trump to join a handful of oil refineries seeking to overturn a unanimous court decision that would halt EPA abuse of small refinery exemptions (SREs) under the RFS.

In a joint statement issued by the National Corn Growers Assn., Renewable Fuels Assn., American Soybean Assn., National Farmers Union, Growth Energy, American Coalition for Ethanol, National Biodiesel Board, Iowa Renewable Fuels Assn. and Fuels America, the groups detailed the delicate relationship that now exists between rural America and the current Administration.

“The President needs to understand that Ted Cruz doesn’t care about this Administration or families across the heartland who are counting on the White House to keep its promises. Just days ago, thousands of farmers rallied behind [Agriculture] Secretary [Sonny] Perdue, who expressed his confidence that we had finally reached the end of a long and painful fight against EPA demand destruction,” the groups noted.

Related:Biofuels deal promises minimum 15b RFS mandate

“Tearing open that wound, against the advice of rural champions and the President’s own advisors, would be viewed as a stunning betrayal of America’s rural workers and farmers. We cannot stress enough how important this decision is to the future of the rural economy and to President Trump’s relationship with leaders and voters across the heartland. We urge the President to stand up now against this misguided effort to torpedo the rural recovery,” they added.

Iowa Renewable Fuels Assn. executive director Monte Shaw said if the President moves forward on siding with the oil companies, it would go down as “one of the word decisions” he has ever seen in 20 years of biofuel policy.

“When you have a unanimous panel decision, the full 10th circuit only accepts about 1% of appeals for a rehearing and almost never overturns the original decision. So, in return for literally no chance to change this straightforward and commonsense decision, Trump is on the verge of outraging every farm and biofuel group in the country,” Shaw said.

Related:Ethanol plant idling has ripple effect in rural economies

“We could have had a fairly uneventful year for RFS policy heading toward November, but this action would seriously threaten Trump’s reputation in rural states," he continued. "If the stakes weren’t so important, it would almost be humorous to watch Sen. Cruz hoodwink the White House again. He’s misled them on refinery profits, on the cost of RINs [renewable identification numbers], on the reasons a Pennsylvania refinery was in economic trouble and even on his own re-election chances. The President needs to have another talk with his team before he lets Ted Cruz burn him and his best allies across rural America.”

Shaw added, “Further, if President Trump makes the mistake of joining the oil companies’ appeal, he sure better direct the EPA to hold off on adjudicating the pending 2019 refinery exemption requests while the legal action plays out. If they use a fruitless appeal as cover to grant a bunch of 2019 exemptions – essentially illegal exemptions that would reduce the effective RFS level below 15 billion gal. for 2019 – then it would be a clear violation of President Trump’s commitment that 15 billion gal. will be 15 billion gal. Such a scheme would provoke an intense response in farm country that is still hurting from previous refinery exemptions, trades wars and now the global impacts of the coronavirus.”

About the Author(s)

Jacqui Fatka

Policy editor, Farm Futures

Jacqui Fatka grew up on a diversified livestock and grain farm in southwest Iowa and graduated from Iowa State University with a bachelor’s degree in journalism and mass communications, with a minor in agriculture education, in 2003. She’s been writing for agricultural audiences ever since. In college, she interned with Wallaces Farmer and cultivated her love of ag policy during an internship with the Iowa Pork Producers Association, working in Sen. Chuck Grassley’s Capitol Hill press office. In 2003, she started full time for Farm Progress companies’ state and regional publications as the e-content editor, and became Farm Futures’ policy editor in 2004. A few years later, she began covering grain and biofuels markets for the weekly newspaper Feedstuffs. As the current policy editor for Farm Progress, she covers the ongoing developments in ag policy, trade, regulations and court rulings. Fatka also serves as the interim executive secretary-treasurer for the North American Agricultural Journalists. She lives on a small acreage in central Ohio with her husband and three children.

Subscribe to Our Newsletters
Feedstuffs is the news source for animal agriculture

You May Also Like