The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently extended the comment period for a proposed rule seeking to further regulate the oil and gas industry, but the 16-day extension isn’t enough, according to U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and a bicameral contingent of 19 other GOP lawmakers, who also cited other issues with the agency’s action.
“On top of the inadequate amount of time provided for public comment, the 154-page proposed rule is devoid of rule text and the kind of specificity that the public and regulated community are due,” they wrote in a Jan. 31 letter sent to EPA Administrator Michael Regan regarding the proposed rule, Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review.
“However, the intention behind the proposed rule remains clear: an increase in costly regulations that will harm the oil and natural gas industry and increase energy costs for Americans,” wrote Rep. Cheney and her colleagues, who included U.S. Sens. John Hoeven (R-ND) and Steve Daines (R-MT), as well as U.S. Reps. Stephanie Bice (R-OK) and Rodney Davis (R-IL).
In their letter, they also called the EPA’s desire to implement a community monitoring program to detect large emission events “troubling.”
“To be clear, this regulatory approach should be abandoned; however, if the EPA is insistent on pursuing this course of action, it is vital that the program be carefully crafted to ensure protections from overzealous activists seeking to induce financial hardship on producers with false reports,” wrote the lawmakers.
Additionally, while there are some concessions for smaller producers, the proposed EPA regulations could place extreme financial burdens on them, according to the letter, which cited the $100,000 optical gas imaging cameras required under the proposal as an example.
“These added costs are simply not feasible for smaller operations. Smaller producers do not have the same economies of scale as larger producers and cannot spread increases in fixed compliance costs over as many projects,” Rep. Cheney and her colleagues wrote. “This could result in many of them going out of business as they struggle to maintain profitability.”
The lawmakers urged Regan to withdraw the proposed rule pending further environmental and economic study.
“Barring that,” they wrote, “we call for a further extension of the comment period, of not less than 60 days, to give the public, regulated community, and other stakeholders the time necessary to analyze the proposal and fully participate in the rulemaking process.”