COMMITTEE ON


ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

SUirCOMMITIa ON COMMIALL, 

MANLIIACIUIONO UNU Tnnu 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ 

MEMRES OF CONC.iIThSS 

2Oi Dsriucr, TOXAD 

€onrz of th Uuiitd tats 

touBc of Rpitsrntatiutz


Wat1il1gtofl, DI 2O5)-32O 

1436 LONCIwOD ri-I	OrFICE SLOWING


Vr/Arrr ANGI IN, DC 206104320


(202) 220 3236 PHONE


(202) 225-1915 FA>c 

0-124 (- LOLIIAL (OUILLANG


727 EAST DILOANGO


SAN AN1OI4rO, TEXAS 782O6--126


(210) 4726190 PsosE


210) 4724000 FAX

SonIrIMMrTTrL AN 

ENCFII3V AND I'Owtrr 

SLII3COrAMITTEI ON HEALTh 

COMMITTEE ON


HOIJSF ADMINJISTRAIION 

SU000NIMlILE ON Ecuerrous 

SIETOMMI rIFE Oil OVENSILIri 

CIhoro


CONGOESSIGNAL ElISIONS. Caucus 

The Honorable Gina McCarthy 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Air and Radiation 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Ariel Rios Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue Nw 

Washington, D.C. 20460-0001 

Dear Assistant Administrator McCarthy: 

J write to express my concerns with EPA's intent to proceed with "Tier 3" rulemaking 

that would establish more stringent fuel specifications and light-duty vehicle emissions 

standards. It is my understanding that EPA will likely issue a proposed rule by the end of the 

year and a final rule in 2012 with compliance expected in 2016. 

The Anti-Backsliding provision of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 

directs EPA to study and implement fuel changes to negate any detrimental air quality impacts 

resulting from the Renewable Fuels Standard. However, given that EPA has not conducted the 

required EISA study, whether EPA has overcome the burden of proof to justify these 

specification changes and meet the statutory requirements has come into question. Not 

surprisingly, industry has voiced concerns about the effects these new regulations would have on 

the refining industry, including increased costs, decreased gasoline supplies, and possible 

refinery closures, as well as on our nation's energy security. 

As you know, during House consideration of the FY 12 Interior-Environment 

appropriations bill an amendment will likely be offered that would withhold funds from the EPA 

to implement "Tier 3" regulations until a study is completed. While I am inclined to oppose such 

an amendment because of its adverse effect on the agency to carry out its responsibilities 

conferred by Congress, I have concerns that EPA is exercising its authority without adequate 

analysis contemplated by the required study. Specifically, by failing to provide the supporting 

data that the agency is required to use as the basis for this rulemaking, EPA is limiting public 

comment and input. As with the Cross-State Air Pollution and Utility MACT rules, I am 

concerned that EPA may be moving too quickly with Tier 3 regulations and that stakeholders 

will once again believe that they are unable to provide adequate feedback or comply with the 

rule's deadline for compliance. 

Therefore, I urge you to complete the Anti-Backsliding study first and allow public 

comment and input on the research and data underlying EPA's efforts to promulgate "Tier 3" 

rules. Should you wish to discuss the matter further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Page 2 

July 26, 2011