HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Assn.

Background

Three small refineries (HollyFrontier Cheyenne, HollyFrontier Woods Cross, and Wynnewood) applied for hardship exemptions from the federal renewable fuel program (RFP). Congress created the RFP to require refineries to blend renewable fuel and initially exempted all small refineries until 2011, then authorized the EPA to extend that exemption for a period and to let a “small refinery” petition “at any time” for an extension for disproportionate economic hardship. EPA granted new hardship exemptions to these three refineries after gaps in coverage. A group of renewable fuel producers challenged those grants in the Tenth Circuit, which vacated EPA’s actions.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the statute’s word “extension” requires an unbroken, continuous exemption. Looking at the statute’s text and neighbors, the Court read “extension” in a temporal sense but concluded that ordinary usage and the statute’s language do not demand continuity after an interruption. The opinion pointed to the temporal descriptions in the adjacent provisions, the “at any time” phrase, and examples where extensions occur after lapses. The Court declined to decide whether to defer to EPA under Chevron because the government did not press that argument. It held the Tenth Circuit erred and allowed EPA to grant the requested extensions.

Real world impact

The ruling lets EPA grant hardship extensions to small refineries even when an earlier exemption had lapsed, affecting who must blend or buy renewable-fuel credits and how the market adjusts. Renewable fuel producers who challenged the grants lose in these cases, while small refineries gain an avenue for relief. The decision resolves the specific statutory question but leaves EPA’s future discretion and policy choices in administering exemptions.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Barrett dissented, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, arguing “extension” ordinarily means a continuation and that the statute’s structure and other waiver provisions support a continuity requirement.