Fuel STAR Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 28, 2026
Bottom line
This bill aims to reduce compliance burdens on petroleum refiners, particularly small ones, while promoting the year-round availability of higher ethanol blends like E15, potentially shifting the dynamics of the renewable fuel market.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Clean Air Act to reform the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) by capping annual renewable fuel volumes, extending the validity of certain compliance credits (RINs), prohibiting the use of electric credits (e-RINs), and expanding exemptions for small refineries based on new economic hardship criteria. It also allows for year-round sale of E15 fuel blends by equalizing Reid vapor pressure limitations.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue the bill provides much-needed regulatory relief to refiners, preventing disproportionate economic hardship and ensuring the viability of domestic fuel production. They also contend that expanding E15 sales year-round will offer consumers more choices and potentially lower fuel costs, while addressing the 'blend wall' issue.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that the bill undermines the environmental goals of the RFS by capping renewable fuel volumes and expanding exemptions, potentially reducing demand for biofuels and hindering investment in advanced biofuels. They may also raise concerns about the impact on the agricultural sector and the effectiveness of the RFS in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The bill is concise, making it accessible for a reader to understand its core provisions within a short timeframe.
Section 2(a)(1), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(2)(B)
Cap on Conventional Renewable Fuel Volumes
This provision limits the annual volume of renewable fuel (excluding advanced biofuel) that can be mandated under the RFS. Specifically, it cannot exceed the projected annual domestic consumption of ethanol blended fuel, as projected by the Energy Information Administration. This aims to prevent mandates that exceed the practical limits of ethanol blending in the existing fuel infrastructure.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue this cap provides regulatory certainty and prevents the RFS from mandating volumes that exceed practical blending limits, effectively addressing the 'blend wall' issue.
Critics contend
Opponents argue this weakens the RFS, reducing incentives for biofuel production and hindering the program's environmental goals by limiting the growth of renewable fuel use.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the regulatory burden on refiners and the practical limits of fuel infrastructure with the RFS's goal of promoting increased renewable fuel use.
Section 2(a)(2)(B), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(5)
Extended Duration of Certain RIN Credits
This provision allows compliance credits (RINs) generated between calendar years 2020 and 2022 to be used for compliance in any of the five calendar years following the bill's enactment. However, these extended credits cannot account for more than 20% of a person's annual compliance obligation, providing flexibility without completely flooding the market.
Section 2(a)(2)(B), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(5)
Prohibition on Electric Credits (e-RINs)
This provision prohibits the Administrator from imposing a requirement to use electric credits (e-RINs) when promulgating RFS regulations. This effectively prevents the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from including electricity generated from renewable sources (e.g., biogas) used in electric vehicles as a compliance pathway under the RFS program.
Section 2(a)(3)(A), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(9)
New Small Refinery Exemption Category
This provision creates a new category of small refineries eligible for RFS exemptions due to disproportionate economic hardship. This applies to refineries with an average daily crude oil throughput not exceeding 10,000 barrels that began production on or after January 1, 2007. These exemptions are deemed extensions of existing exemptions, streamlining the process.
Section 2(a)(3)(B)(ii), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(9)(B)
Revised Economic Hardship Criteria for Small Refineries
This provision establishes new, specific economic factors the Administrator must consider when evaluating small refinery exemption petitions, starting one year after enactment of the 'Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026.' These factors include the cost of credits relative to holding company revenue, impact on efficiency gains (referencing a 2011 DOE study), likelihood of refinery ceasing operation, exceptional state regulatory environment, and active infrastructure building for biofuels.
Section 2(a)(3)(C)(ii), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(o)(9)(C)
Prohibition on Reallocation of Exempted Obligations
This provision states that if the Administrator grants a petition for an extension of an exemption to a small refinery, the Administrator may not reallocate that small refinery's renewable fuel obligation to other refineries. This means that the total mandated volume of renewable fuel for the industry will be reduced by the amount exempted.
Section 2(b), amending Clean Air Act Section 211(f) and (h)
Year-Round Sale of E15
This provision amends the Clean Air Act to ensure that fuel blends containing gasoline and 10-15% denatured anhydrous ethanol (E15) have the same Reid vapor pressure (RVP) limitation as fuel blends containing 10% ethanol (E10). This regulatory change effectively allows E15 to be sold year-round, removing a barrier that previously restricted its sale during summer months in many areas.
The new economic factors for small refinery exemptions become effective 'Beginning on date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026'.
Section 2(a)(3)(B)(ii)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to link effective dates to other major legislative packages, but it makes the immediate applicability unclear without knowing the status of the referenced bill.
Case for: Ensures a coordinated implementation timeline with broader agricultural or energy policy, allowing for a comprehensive approach to related reforms.
Case against: Creates uncertainty regarding the precise effective date of these RFS reforms, as it depends on the passage and enactment of another bill, which may or may not occur.
Estimated impact: Delays the implementation of new RFS exemption criteria, potentially prolonging current regulatory uncertainty for a period.
Mandates the granting of small refinery exemptions if the Secretary of Energy determines that the 'disproportionate impacts index' or 'viability index' from a specific 2011 Department of Energy report ('Small Refinery Exemption Study: An Investigation into Disproportionate Economic Hardship' dated March 2011) is greater than or equal to 1.
Section 2(a)(3)(B)(iv)
Why it matters:Could be seen as an attempt to enshrine specific, potentially outdated, metrics into law, limiting future flexibility without explicitly detailing those metrics in the bill itself, making it harder for a casual reader to assess.
Case for: Provides objective, pre-established criteria, reducing administrative discretion and potential for political influence in exemption decisions by relying on a prior, independent analysis.
Case against: Ties future regulatory decisions to a report that may not reflect current market conditions or technological advancements, potentially making the criteria rigid or irrelevant over time without legislative update.
Estimated impact: Could lead to a significant number of mandatory exemptions if many small refineries meet these historical thresholds, potentially reducing the overall RFS obligation.
Prevents the Administrator from approving an exemption for a small refinery under the control of a holding company if the total exempted volume for that holding company (including all its refineries) exceeds 75,000 barrels of oil produced per day or 50% of the total barrels produced per day by such refineries, whichever is greater; or if it exceeds the combined total capacity for barrels of oil produced per day by any small refinery under such control.
Section 2(a)(3)(B)(v)
Why it matters:This is a technical detail designed to prevent larger corporate entities from exploiting small refinery exemptions on a massive scale, a common legislative technique to prevent unintended broad application.
Case for: Prevents larger entities from exploiting small refinery exemptions to avoid RFS obligations on a massive scale, ensuring the RFS still applies to a significant portion of their operations.
Case against: May be seen as unfairly penalizing holding companies that genuinely own multiple small, struggling refineries, potentially limiting their ability to receive comprehensive relief.
Estimated impact: Limits the aggregate volume of exemptions that can be granted to large corporate entities, ensuring a floor for RFS compliance from these groups.