Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: 2012 Renewable Fuel Standards, 1320-1358 [2011-33451]
Download as PDF
1320
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0133; FRL–9614–4]
RIN 2060–AQ76
Regulation of Fuels and Fuel
Additives: 2012 Renewable Fuel
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Clean Air Act
Section 211(o), the Environmental
Protection Agency is required to set the
renewable fuel standards each
November for the following year. In
general the standards are designed to
ensure that the applicable volumes of
renewable fuel specified in the statue
are used. However, the statute specifies
that EPA is to project the volume of
cellulosic biofuel production for the
upcoming year and must base the
cellulosic biofuel standard on that
projected volume if it is less than the
applicable volume set forth in the Act.
EPA is today finalizing a projected
cellulosic biofuel volume for 2012 and
annual percentage standards for
cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel,
advanced biofuel, and renewable fuels
that will apply to all gasoline and diesel
produced or imported for domestic use
in year 2012. In the NPRM we also
proposed an applicable volume of 1.28
SUMMARY:
Category
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
NAICS 1
Codes
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
1 North
billion gallons for biomass-based diesel
for 2013. The statute specifies that the
minimum volume of biomass-based
diesel for years 2013 and beyond must
be at least 1.0 billion gallons. We are
continuing to evaluate the many
comments on the NPRM from
stakeholders, and will issue a final rule
setting the applicable biomass-based
diesel volume for calendar year 2013 as
expeditiously as practicable. This action
also presents a number of changes to the
RFS2 regulations that are designed to
clarify existing provisions and to
address several unique circumstances
that have come to light since the RFS2
program became effective on July 1,
2010. Finally, today’s rule also makes a
minor amendment to the gasoline
benzene regulations regarding inclusion
of transferred blendstocks in a refinery’s
early benzene credit generation
calculations.
This final rule is effective on
January 9, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0133. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
DATES:
SIC 2 Codes
324110
325193
325199
424690
424710
424720
454319
2911
2869
2869
5169
5171
5172
5989
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
Julia
MacAllister, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Assessment and
Standards Division, Environmental
Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood
Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; Telephone
number: (734) 214–4131; Fax number:
(734) 214–4816; Email address:
macallister.julia@epa.gov, or
Assessment and Standards Division
Hotline; telephone number (734) 214–
4636; Email address
OTAQPUBLICWEB@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this
proposed rule are those involved with
the production, distribution, and sale of
transportation fuels, including gasoline
and diesel fuel or renewable fuels such
as ethanol and biodiesel. Potentially
regulated categories include:
Examples of potentially regulated entities
Petroleum Refineries.
Ethyl alcohol manufacturing.
Other basic organic chemical manufacturing.
Chemical and allied products merchant wholesalers.
Petroleum bulk stations and terminals.
Petroleum and petroleum products merchant wholesalers.
Other fuel dealers.
American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2 Standard
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this final action. This table
lists the types of entities that EPA is
now aware could potentially be
regulated by this final action. Other
types of entities not listed in the table
could also be regulated. To determine
whether your activities will be regulated
by this final action, you should carefully
examine the applicability criteria in 40
CFR part 80. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this final
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed in the preceding section.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Executive Summary
A. Standards for 2012
1. Assessment of 2012 Cellulosic Biofuel
Volume
2. Advanced Biofuel and Total Renewable
Fuel in 2012
3. Percentage Standards for 2012
4. Historical Renewable Fuel Production
B. Regulatory Changes
C. 2012 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel Waiver
Credits
D. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate
Compliance Approach
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate
Compliance Approach
II. Projection of Cellulosic Volume and
Assessment of Biomass-Based Diesel and
Advanced Biofuel for 2012
A. Statutory Requirements
B. Cellulosic Biofuel Volume Assessment
1. Existing Cellulosic Biofuel Facilities
2. Potential New Facilities in 2012
3. Imports of Cellulosic Biofuel
4. Projections From the Energy Information
Administration
5. Comments on the Proposed Rule
6. Summary of Volume Projections
C. Advanced Biofuel and Total Renewable
Fuel in 2012
D. Biomass-Based Diesel in 2012
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
III. Final Percentage Standards for 2012
A. Background
B. Calculation of Standards
1. How are the standards calculated?
2. Small Refineries and Small Refiners
3. Final Percentage Standards
IV. Changes to RFS2 Regulations
A. Summary of Amendments
B. Technical Justification for Equivalence
Value Application
C. Changes to Definitions of Terms
1. Definition of Annual Cover Crop
2. Definition of ‘‘Naphtha’’
D. Technical Amendments Related to RIN
Generation and Separation
1. RIN Separation Limit for Obligated
Parties
2. RIN Retirement Provision for Error
Correction
3. Production Outlook Reports Submission
Deadline
4. Attest Procedures
E. Technical Amendments Related to
Registration & Recordkeeping
1. Construction Discontinuance &
Completion Documentation
2. Third-Party Engineering Reviews
3. Foreign Ethanol Producers
F. Additional Amendments and
Clarifications
1. Third-Party Engineering Review
Addendum
2. RIN Generation for Fuel Imported From
a Registered Foreign Producer
3. Bond Posting
4. Prohibition Against Repeat Generation of
RINs
5. Acceptance of Separated Yard Waste and
Food Waste Separation Plans
6. Transferred Blendstocks in Early
Benzene Credit Generation Calculations
V. Annual Administrative Announcements
A. 2011 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel Waiver
Credits
B. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate
Compliance Approach
C. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate
Compliance Approach
VI. Comments Outside the Scope of This
Rulemaking
VII. Public Participation
VIII. Statutory And Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
K. Congressional Review Act
IX. Statutory Authority
I. Executive Summary
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)
program began in 2006 pursuant to the
requirements in Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 211(o) which were added
through the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct). The statutory requirements for
the RFS program were subsequently
modified through the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007
(EISA), resulting in the promulgation of
revised regulatory requirements on
March 26, 2010.1 The transition from
the RFS1 requirements of EPAct to the
RFS2 requirements of EISA generally
occurred on July 1, 2010.
Under RFS2, EPA is required to
determine and publish the applicable
annual percentage standards for each
compliance year by November 30 of the
previous year. As part of this effort, EPA
must determine the projected volume of
cellulosic biofuel production for the
following year. If the projected volume
of cellulosic biofuel production is less
than the applicable volume specified in
section 211(o)(2)(B)(i)(III) of the statute,
EPA must lower the applicable volume
used to set the annual cellulosic biofuel
percentage standard to the projected
volume of production. When we lower
the applicable volume of cellulosic
biofuel in this manner, we are also
authorized to lower the applicable
volumes of advanced biofuel and/or
total renewable fuel by the same or a
lesser amount. Since these evaluations
are based on evolving information about
emerging segments of the biofuels
industry, and may result in the
applicable volumes differing from those
in the statute, we believe that it is
appropriate to establish the applicable
volumes through a notice-and-comment
rulemaking process. Today’s notice
provides our final evaluation of the
projected production of cellulosic
biofuel for 2012, our evaluation of
whether to lower the applicable
volumes of advanced biofuel and total
renewable fuel, and the final percentage
standards for compliance year 2012. We
are finalizing a cellulosic biofuel
requirement of 10.45 mill ethanolequivalent gallons for 2012, and are not
reducing the advanced biofuel or total
renewable fuel requirements below the
levels specified in the statute. For future
years, EPA will continue to evaluate
whether it is appropriate to adjust the
volume of advanced and total renewable
fuel, if EPA adjusts the volume of
cellulosic biofuel. In making such
determinations, EPA will consider all
1 75
PO 00000
FR 14670.
Frm 00003
relevant factors. The evaluations that
led to these 2012 volume requirements
were based on our evaluation of
individual producers’ production plans
and progress, a consideration of
comments received in response to our
notice of proposed rulemaking
published on July 1, 2011,2 the estimate
of projected biofuel volumes that the
Energy Information Administration
(EIA) is required to provide to EPA by
October 31, and other information that
became available.
Today’s final rule does not include an
assessment of the environmental
impacts of the percentage standards we
are setting for 2012. All of the impacts
of the RFS2 program were addressed in
the RFS2 final rule published on March
26, 2010, including impacts of the
biofuel standards specified in the
statute. Today’s rulemaking simply sets
the standards for 2012 whose impacts
were already analyzed previously.
Today’s notice also finalizes a number
of changes to the RFS2 regulations.
These changes are designed to reduce
confusion among regulated parties and
streamline implementation by clarifying
certain terms and phrases and
addressing unique circumstances that
came to light after the RFS2 program
went into effect on July 1, 2010.
Additionally, this notice also makes a
minor amendment to the gasoline
benzene regulations regarding inclusion
of transferred blendstocks in a refinery’s
early benzene credit generation
calculations. Further discussion of all of
these changes can be found in Section
IV.
Finally, in today’s rulemaking we are
announcing the price for cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits that will be
available for compliance with the 2012
cellulosic biofuel requirement, and are
also announcing the results of our
annual assessment of the aggregate
compliance approach for U.S. crops and
crop residue. These announcements are
provided in Section V.
EPA is required to determine the
applicable volume of biomass-based
diesel (BBD) that will be required in
2013 and beyond based on
consideration of a variety of factors, and
promulgate regulations establishing the
volumes. The statute specifies that the
volume of biomass-based diesel for
years 2013 and beyond must be at least
1 billion gallons. In the NPRM we
proposed an applicable volume of 1.28
bill gallons for BBD for 2013. We are
continuing to evaluate the many
comments on the NPRM from
stakeholders as well as fulfilling other
analytical requirements. In determining
2 76
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1321
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
FR 38844.
09JAR3
1322
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
the BBD applicable volume, the statute
requires an analysis of the impact of the
BBD volume on a variety of factors such
as the impact of BBD on energy security,
transportation fuel costs, job creation,
water quality, and other factors. EPA
intends to gather additional information
to enhance our analysis of these factors
including consideration of costs and
benefits consistent with the provisions
of E.O. 13563, to ensure an
appropriately balanced decision. For
these reasons, we are not finalizing an
applicable volume for 2013 BBD in
today’s rulemaking. We recognize that
the statute calls for EPA to promulgate
the applicable volume of BBD for 2013
no later than 14 months before that year.
We do intend to issue a final
determination setting the applicable
BBD volume for calendar year 2013 as
expeditiously as practicable.
A. Standards for 2012
1. Assessment of 2012 Cellulosic Biofuel
Volume
To estimate the volume of cellulosic
biofuel that can be made available in the
U.S. in 2012, we researched all potential
production sources by company and
facility. This included sources that were
still in the planning stages, those that
were under construction, and those that
are already producing some volume of
cellulosic ethanol, cellulosic diesel, or
some other type of cellulosic biofuel.
Facilities primarily focused on research
and development work with no
intention of marketing any fuel
produced were not considered for this
assessment. From this universe of
potential cellulosic biofuel sources we
identified the subset that had a
possibility of producing some volume of
qualifying cellulosic biofuel for use as
transportation fuel in 2012.
In today’s final rule we specify the
projected available volume for 2012 that
forms the basis for the percentage
standard for cellulosic biofuel. To arrive
at this final volume, we took into
consideration additional factors such as
the current and expected state of
funding, the status of the technology,
progress towards construction and
production goals, and other significant
factors that could potentially impact
fuel production or the ability of the
produced fuel to generate cellulosic
Renewable Identification Numbers
(RINs). We also considered projections
of cellulosic biofuel provided by the
EIA. Further discussion of these factors
can be found in Section II.B.
In our assessment we focused on
domestic sources of cellulosic biofuel.
While imports of cellulosic biofuels are
possible and could be eligible to
generate RINs, we believe this is
unlikely due to local demand for
cellulosic biofuels in the countries in
which they are produced as well as the
cost associated with transporting these
fuels to the U.S. Of the domestic
sources, we estimated that six facilities
can make volumes of cellulosic biofuel
available for transportation use in the
U.S. in 2012. These facilities are listed
in Table I.A.1–1 along with our estimate
of the projected 2012 volume for each.
TABLE I.A.1–1—PROJECTED AVAILABLE CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL PLANT VOLUMES FOR 2012
Projected
available
volume
(million ethanolequivalent gallons)
Location
Fuel type
American Process Inc ...........................................................
Fiberight .................................................................................
INEOS Bio .............................................................................
KiOR ......................................................................................
KL Energy Corp .....................................................................
ZeaChem ...............................................................................
Alpena, MI .............................
Blairstown, IA ........................
Vero Beach, FL .....................
Columbus, MS .......................
Upton, WY .............................
Boardman, OR ......................
Ethanol ..................................
Ethanol ..................................
Ethanol ..................................
Gasoline, Diesel ....................
Ethanol ..................................
Ethanol ..................................
0.5
2.0
3.0
4.8
0.1
0.05
Total ................................................................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Company
................................................
................................................
10.45
Each of the facilities listed in the
Table I.A.1–1 are at different points in
their progress towards the production of
commercial volumes of cellulosic
biofuel. KL Energy Corp. is the only
facility in the United States currently
generating cellulosic biofuel RINs.
American Process Inc., Fiberight, and
ZeaChem all anticipate completing
construction on their production
facilities in late 2011 or early 2012 and
plan to begin producing biofuel soon
after their facilities are complete. INEOS
Bio and KiOR are targeting April 2012
and mid 2012 for the start-up of their
respective cellulosic biofuel production
facilities. The variation in these
expected start-up times, along with the
facility production capacities, company
production plans, and a variety of other
factors have all been taken into account
in projecting the available volume of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
cellulosic biofuel from each these
facilities.
2. Advanced Biofuel and Total
Renewable Fuel in 2012
The statute indicates that we may
reduce the applicable volume of
advanced biofuel and total renewable
fuel if we determine that the projected
volume of cellulosic biofuel production
for 2012 falls short of the statutory
volume of 500 million gallons. As
shown in Table I.A.1–1, we have
determined that this is the case.
Therefore, we also must evaluate the
need to lower the applicable volumes
for advanced biofuel and total
renewable fuel.
To address the need to lower the
advanced biofuel standard, we first
consider whether it appears likely that
the biomass-based diesel volume of 1.0
billion gallons specified in the statute
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
can be met in 2012. As discussed in
Section II.E, we believe that the 1.0
billion gallon standard can indeed be
met. Since biodiesel has an Equivalence
Value of 1.5, 1.0 billion physical gallons
of biodiesel would provide 1.5 billion
ethanol-equivalent gallons that can be
counted towards the advanced biofuel
standard of 2.0 billion gallons. Of the
remaining 0.5 bill gallons, 10.45 mill
gallons will be met with cellulosic
biofuel. Based on our analysis as
described in Section II.C, we believe
that there will be sufficient volumes of
other advanced biofuels, such as
imported sugarcane ethanol, additional
biodiesel, or renewable diesel, such that
the applicable volume for advanced
biofuel can remain at the statutory level
of 2.0 billion gallons. In addition, as
discussed in Section II.C, we believe
there will be sufficient volumes to
satisfy the 15.2 billion gallon applicable
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
volume of total renewable fuel specified
in the Act, so the 2012 total renewable
fuel percentage standard is based on
that volume.
3. Percentage Standards for 2012
The renewable fuel standards are
expressed as a volume percentage, and
are used by each refiner, blender or
importer to determine their renewable
fuel volume obligations. The applicable
percentages are set so that if each
regulated party meets the percentages,
and if EIA projections of gasoline and
diesel use are accurate, then the amount
of renewable fuel, cellulosic biofuel,
biomass-based diesel, and advanced
biofuel used will meet the volumes
required on a nationwide basis.
1323
To calculate the percentage standard
for cellulosic biofuel for 2012, we have
used the projected annual volume of
10.45 million ethanol-equivalent gallons
(representing 8.65 million physical
gallons). The applicable volumes for
biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel,
and total renewable fuel for 2012 will be
those specified in the statute. These
volumes are shown in Table I.A.3–1.
TABLE I.A.3–1—FINAL VOLUMES FOR 2012
Ethanol equivalent
volume a
Actual volume
Cellulosic biofuel .............................................................
Biomass-based diesel ....................................................
Advanced biofuel ............................................................
Renewable fuel ...............................................................
8.65 mill gal ....................................................................
1.0 bill gal .......................................................................
1.3–1.5 b bill gal .............................................................
14.5–14.7 b bill gal .........................................................
10.45 mill gal.
1.5 bill gal.
2.0 bill gal.
15.2 bill gal.
a Biodiesel and cellulosic diesel have equivalence values of 1.5 and 1.7 ethanol equivalent gallons respectively. As a result, ethanol-equivalent
volumes are larger than actual volumes for cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based diesel.
b Range depends on the equivalence values of advanced biofuels other than cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based diesel.
Four separate standards are required
under the RFS2 program, corresponding
to the four separate volume
requirements shown in Table I.A.3–1.
The specific formulas we use to
calculate the renewable fuel percentage
standards are contained in the
regulations at § 80.1405 and repeated in
Section III.B.1. The percentage
standards represent the ratio of
renewable fuel volume to projected nonrenewable gasoline and diesel volume.
The projected volume of transportation
gasoline and diesel used to calculate the
standards in today’s final rule was
provided by EIA.3
In March 2011, DOE evaluated the
impacts of the RFS program on small
entities and concluded that some small
refineries would suffer a
disproportionate economic hardship if
required to participate in the program.4
As a result, we are required to exempt
these few refineries from being obligated
parties for a minimum of two years
(2011 and 2012), and must also exempt
their gasoline and diesel volumes from
the calculation of the annual percentage
standards. In addition, EPA has
approved a number of individual small
refinery petitions submitted pursuant to
40 CFR § 80.1441(e)(2) since publication
of the proposed rule, and has also
adjusted the final 2012 percentage
standards to reflect the exemption of
these small refineries from being RFS
obligated parties in 2012. The final
standards for 2012 are shown in Table
I.A.3–2 and include the adjustment for
exempt small refineries (which
constitute about 3.6% of the gasoline
pool and 4.5% of the diesel pool).
Detailed calculations can be found in
Section III.
TABLE I.A.3–2—FINAL PERCENTAGE
STANDARDS FOR 2012
Cellulosic biofuel ...........................
Biomass-based diesel ..................
Advanced biofuel ..........................
Renewable fuel .............................
0.006%
0.91
1.21
9.23
4. Historical Renewable Fuel Production
To provide a comparison to the 2012
volume requirements shown in Table
I.A.3–1, we determined the actual
annual production volumes for the four
RFS categories of renewable fuel. Since
data on 2011 production is currently
incomplete, we have shown the
production volumes for the full year
beginning in July 2010 and ending in
June 2011. July 2010 also marks the start
of the RFS2 program when data
collection began with the EPAModerated Transaction System (EMTS)
on production of renewable fuel and
generation of RINs.
TABLE I.A.4–1—PRODUCTION OF RENEWABLE FUEL FROM JULY 2010–JUNE 2011 a
Ethanol equivalent
volume a
Actual volume
Cellulosic biofuel .............................................................
Biomass-based diesel ....................................................
Advanced biofuel ............................................................
Renewable fuel ...............................................................
0 mill gal .........................................................................
0.43 b bill gal ..................................................................
0.47 bill gal .....................................................................
14.05 bill gal ..................................................................
0 mill gal.
0.64 b bill gal.
0.70 bill gal.
14.29 bill gal.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
a Except for biomass-based diesel, data derived from the EPA-Moderated Transaction System (EMTS) at https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/rfsdata/
index.htm.
b Due to ongoing investigations of biodiesel RIN generation, these values have been derived from Census Bureau data on fats and oils at
https://www.census.gov/manufacturing/cir/historical_data/m311k/.
3 Letter from Howard K. Gruenspecht, Acting
Administrator, Energy Information Administration,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
to Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, EPA. October 19,
2011.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
4 ‘‘Small Refinery Exemption Study: An
Investigation into Disproportionate Economic
Hardship,’’ U.S. Department of Energy, March 2011.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1324
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
B. Regulatory Changes
In today’s action we are also finalizing
a number of changes to the RFS2
regulations. These changes are intended
to:
• Clarify certain provisions because
we have learned that there is some
confusion among some regulated parties
• Clarify the application of certain
provisions to unique circumstances
• Provide greater specificity in the
definition of certain terms
• Correct regulatory language that
inadvertently misrepresented our intent
Today’s rule also makes a minor
amendment to the gasoline benzene
regulations regarding inclusion of
transferred blendstocks in a refinery’s
early benzene credit generation
calculations. A detailed discussion of
these regulatory changes is provided in
Section IV.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
C. 2012 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel
Waiver Credits
Since we are reducing the required
volume of cellulosic biofuel for 2012
below the applicable volume specified
in the statute, EPA is required to offer
biofuel waiver credits to obligated
parties that can be purchased in lieu of
acquiring cellulosic biofuel RINs.5
These waiver credits are not allowed to
be traded or banked for future use, are
only allowed to be used to meet the
2012 cellulosic biofuel standard, and
cannot be applied to deficits carried
over from 2011. Moreover, unlike
cellulosic biofuel RINs, waiver credits
may not be used to meet either the
advanced biofuel standard or the total
renewable fuel standard. For the 2012
compliance period, we are making
cellulosic biofuel waiver credits
available to obligated parties for end-ofyear compliance should they need them
at a price of $0.78 per credit. Further
discussion is provided in Section VI.A.
D. Assessment of the Domestic
Aggregate Compliance Approach
As part of the RFS2 regulations, EPA
established an aggregate compliance
approach for renewable fuel producers
who use planted crops and crop residue
from U.S. agricultural land. This
compliance approach relieved such
producers (and importers of such fuel)
of the individual recordkeeping and
reporting requirements otherwise
required of producers and importers to
verify that feedstocks used in the
production of RIN-qualifying renewable
fuel meet the definition of renewable
biomass. EPA determined that 402
5 One waiver credit would apply to one gallon of
an obligated party’s cellulosic biofuel Renewable
Volume Obligation (RVO).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
million acres of U.S. agricultural land
was available in 2007 (the year of EISA
enactment) for production of crops and
crop residue that would meet the
definition of renewable biomass, and
determined that as long as this total
number of acres is not exceeded, it is
unlikely that new land has been devoted
to crop production based on historical
trends and economic considerations. We
indicated that we would conduct an
annual evaluation of total U.S. acreage
that is cropland, pastureland, or
conservation reserve program land, and
that if the value exceed 402 million
acres, producers using domesticallygrown crops or crop residue to produce
renewable fuel would be subject to
individual recordkeeping and reporting
to verify that their feedstocks meet the
definition of renewable biomass.
The RFS2 regulations provide that
EPA will make a finding concerning
whether the 2007 baseline amount of
U.S. agricultural land has been
exceeded in a given year and will
publish this finding in the Federal
Register by November 30 of the same
year. Based on data provided by the
USDA, we have estimated that U.S.
agricultural land reached 392 million
acres in 2011, and thus did not exceed
the 2007 baseline acreage.
We also stated in the preamble to the
final RFS2 rule that if, at any point, EPA
finds that the total agricultural land is
greater than 397 million acres, EPA will
conduct further investigations to
evaluate validity of the domestic
aggregate compliance approach. The
total acreage estimate of 392 million
acres does not exceed the trigger point
for further investigation; therefore EPA
does not plan to conduct further
investigations into this matter.
Additional discussion on this matter
can be found in Section V.B of this
preamble.
E. Assessment of the Canadian
Aggregate Compliance Approach
On September 29, 2011, EPA
approved the use of an aggregate
compliance approach to renewable
biomass verification for planted crops
and crop residue grown in Canada. On
March 15, 2011, EPA issued a notice of
receipt of and solicited public comment
on a petition for EPA to authorize the
use of an aggregate approach for
compliance with the Renewable Fuel
Standard renewable biomass
requirements, submitted by the
Government of Canada. The petition
requested that EPA determine that an
aggregate compliance approach will
provide reasonable assurance that
planted crops and crop residue from
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Canada meet the definition of renewable
biomass.
The Government of Canada utilized
several types of land use data to
demonstrate that the land included in
their 124 million acre baseline is
cropland, pastureland or land
equivalent to U.S. Conservation Reserve
Program land that was cleared or
cultivated prior to December 19, 2007,
and was actively managed or fallow and
nonforested on that date (and is
therefore RFS2 qualifying land). The
total agricultural land in Canada in 2011
is estimated at 121 million acres. This
data was presented to EPA in a report
titled: Changes to the Renewable Fuel
Standard Program Aggregate
Compliance for Canadian Crops and
Crop Residues: Data Analysis and
Justification Report 2011. This report
has been docketed at EPA–HQ–OAR–
2010–0133. The total acreage estimate of
121 million acres does not exceed the
trigger point for further investigation;
therefore EPA does not plan to conduct
further investigations into this matter.
Additional discussion on this matter
can be found in Section V.B of this
preamble.
II. Projection of Cellulosic Volume and
Assessment of Biomass-Based Diesel
and Advanced Biofuel for 2012
In order to project production volume
of cellulosic biofuel in 2012 for use in
setting the percentage standard, we
collected information on individual
facilities that have the potential to
produce qualifying volumes for
consumption as transportation fuel,
heating oil, or jet fuel in the U.S. in
2012. This section describes the
projected available volume of cellulosic
biofuel in 2012 as well as some of the
uncertainties associated with those
volumes. Section III describes the
derivation of the percentage standards
that will apply to obligated parties in
2012.
The 2012 volume projections in
today’s final rule were based on several
sources of information:
• An estimate from EIA of the
volumes of transportation fuel, biomassbased diesel, and cellulosic biofuel that
they project will be sold or introduced
into commerce in the U.S. in 2012.
• Progress that the cellulosic biofuel
industry is making in 2011
• Our own assessment of the
cellulosic biofuel industry’s projected
volumes for 2012
• Comments in response to the NPRM
In addition to the sources of
information listed above EPA had also
intended to consider the Production
Outlook Reports that are required under
§ 80.1449 for all registered renewable
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
fuel producers and importers. These
Production Outlook Reports were not as
useful as EPA had hoped in helping to
provide information on the intentions of
cellulosic biofuel producers in 2012 as
very few had registered under the RFS
program and they were thus not
required to submit a report. EPA expects
that in future years as more cellulosic
biofuel producers register under the RFS
program these reports will become of
greater value in helping to determine
the appropriate projected available
volume of cellulosic biofuel.
In directing EPA to project cellulosic
biofuel production for purposes of
setting the annual cellulosic biofuel
standard, Congress did not specify what
degree of certainty should be reflected
in the projections. However, in response
to the NPRM, some commenters cited
Executive Order 13563 which states that
regulations must in general ‘‘promote
predictability and reduce uncertainty.’’
We agree that this must be a goal in the
process of determining the appropriate
cellulosic biofuel requirement for 2012.
The greatest certainty is achieved when
the level of the standard is firmly
established before it becomes
applicable, and all regulated parties can
have confidence regarding that
standard. Doing this ensures that
obligated parties know what their
obligations will be so that they can
begin efforts to meet those obligations,
and biofuel producers know what
baseline demand for their product will
be so that they can secure financing and
ramp up production with confidence.
In contrast to statements made by
several obligated parties, meeting the
dual goals of predictability and reducing
uncertainty does not require EPA to
specify an applicable volume for
cellulosic biofuel that is as low as
possible, or based only on demonstrated
(as opposed to reasonably anticipated)
production. Due to the availability of
cellulosic waiver credits, obligated
parties always have the means to
comply with the cellulosic biofuel
standard that we set,6 and at a cost that
is predictable. There is, therefore, no
uncertainty with regard to the level of
their obligations or the means available
to achieve it.
Moreover, Executive Order 13563 also
states that regulations must in general
promote ‘‘economic growth, innovation,
competitiveness, and job creation,’’
while ‘‘taking into account benefits and
1325
costs, both quantitative and qualitative.’’
While the cellulosic biofuel standard
that we set should be within the range
of what can be attained based on
projected domestic production and
import potential, the standard that we
set helps drive the production of
volumes that will be made available.
This is consistent with comments
submitted by the Biotechnology
Industry Organization and the
Renewable Fuels Association. Thus
while any standard we set for cellulosic
biofuel standard for 2012 will have
some uncertainty in terms of actual
attainment, our intention is to balance
such uncertainty with the objective of
promoting growth in the industry. Our
final projected available volume of 8.65
million gallons of cellulosic biofuel
(10.45 million ethanol-equivalent
gallons) for 2012 reflects these
considerations.
A. Statutory Requirements
The volumes of renewable fuel to be
used under the RFS2 program each year
(absent an adjustment or waiver by EPA)
are specified in CAA 211(o)(2). These
volumes for 2012 are shown in Table
II.A–1.
TABLE II.A–1—REQUIRED VOLUMES IN THE CLEAN AIR ACT FOR 2012
[Bill gal]
Actual volume
a 0.5
Cellulosic biofuel ..............................................................................................................................
Biomass-based diesel ......................................................................................................................
Advanced biofuel .............................................................................................................................
Renewable fuel ................................................................................................................................
1.0
a 2.0
a 15.2
Ethanol equivalent
volume
0.5
1.5
2.0
15.2
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
a These values assume that the biofuels would be ethanol. If any portion of the biofuels used to meet these applicable volumes has a volumetric energy content greater than that for ethanol, these values will be lower.
By November 30 of each year, the EPA
is required under CAA 211(o) to
determine and publish in the Federal
Register the renewable fuel percentage
standards for the following year. These
standards are to be based in part on
transportation fuel volumes estimated
by the EIA for the following year. The
calculation of the percentage standards
is based on the formulas in § 80.1405(c)
which express the required volumes of
renewable fuel as a volume percentage
of gasoline and diesel sold or
introduced into commerce in the 48
contiguous states plus Hawaii.
The statute requires that if EPA
determines that the projected volume of
cellulosic biofuel production for the
following year is less than the
applicable volume shown in Table II.A–
1, then EPA is to reduce the applicable
volume of cellulosic biofuel to the
projected volume available during that
calendar year. In addition, if EPA
reduces the required volume of
cellulosic biofuel below the level
specified in the statute, the Act also
indicates that we may reduce the
applicable volume of advanced biofuels
and total renewable fuel by the same or
a lesser volume.
B. Cellulosic Biofuel Volume
Assessment
In order to project cellulosic biofuel
production for 2012, EPA has tracked
the progress of over 100 biofuel
production facilities. From this list of
facilities we used publically available
information, as well as information
provided by DOE and USDA, to make a
preliminary determination of which
facilities are the most likely candidates
to produce cellulosic biofuel and make
it commercially available in 2012. Each
of these companies was investigated
further in order to determine the current
status of their facilities and their likely
cellulosic biofuel production volumes
for the coming years. Information such
as the funding status of these facilities,
announced construction and production
ramp up periods, and annual fuel
production targets were taken into
account. We also considered each
company’s history of meeting milestone
targets and production goals where
6 So long as the required volume is below the
volume specified in the statute, such that cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits are available.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1326
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
applicable. Our projection of the volume
of cellulosic biofuel production in 2012
is based on this information as well as
our own assessment of the likelihood of
these facilities successfully producing
cellulosic biofuel in the volumes
indicated. A brief description of each of
the companies we believe can produce
cellulosic biofuel and make it
commercially available in 2012 can be
found below.
1. Existing Cellulosic Biofuel Facilities
The rule that established the required
2011 cellulosic biofuel volume
identified five production facilities that
we projected would produce cellulosic
biofuel and make the fuel commercially
available in 2011. Each of these
production facilities are now
structurally complete, however they are
in various stages of biofuel production.
All of these facilities have either
produced some volume of cellulosic
biofuel in 2011, or are on schedule to do
so later in the year. Only KL Energy and
Range Fuels, however, have completed
registration of cellulosic biofuel
production facilities under the RFS2
program and as such they are currently
the only facilities of the five listed here
currently eligible to generate cellulosic
biofuel RINs. For more background
information on each of these facilities
see the 2011 standards rule.7
DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol
(DDCE) successfully started up their
small demonstration facility in Vonore,
Tennessee in late 2010. This facility has
a maximum production capacity of
250,000 gallons of ethanol per year and
uses an enzymatic hydrolysis process to
convert corn cobs into ethanol. In
conversations with EPA in July 2011
DDCE indicated that this facility was
currently producing ethanol at
approximately half the nameplate
capacity, corresponding to a volume of
125,000 gallons per year. The focus of
this facility, however, remains gathering
information to help successfully design
and operate DDCE’s first commercial
scale facility. All the cellulosic ethanol
currently produced at this facility is
used for testing purposes or given away.
No RINs are currently generated for this
ethanol and it is not available for
purchase by obligated parties. DDCE has
indicated that they have no plans to
generate RINs or sell ethanol produced
at their facility in Vonore in 2012. No
volume of cellulosic ethanol has
therefore been included in the
projections of available cellulosic
biofuel for 2012.
Fiberight uses an enzymatic
hydrolysis process to convert the
7 75
FR 76790, December 9, 2010.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
biogenic portion of separated municipal
solid waste (MSW) into ethanol.
Construction on the first stage of
Fiberight’s Blairstown, Iowa facility was
completed in the summer of 2010. The
production capacity of the first stage of
this project is 2 million gallons of
ethanol per year. Fiberight had planned
to begin production of cellulosic biofuel
from this facility in late 2010 but poor
economic conditions, due in part to low
cellulosic RIN values in 2010, caused
them to postpone fuel production.
Fiberight had also planned to begin
construction on an expansion of this
facility in late 2010 that would increase
the production potential to 6 million
gallons of ethanol per year, but were
unable to secure funding to carry out the
construction as planned. They have
since secured funding and began
construction on the expansion of their
Blairstown facility in April 2011.
Fiberight anticipates that they will begin
fuel production in early 2012 and will
ramp up production at this facility
throughout 2012. EPA projects the
production of 2 million gallons of
cellulosic ethanol from this facility in
2012.
KiOR continues to produce a small
volume of renewable crude from
agricultural residue at their
demonstration facility in Houston,
Texas using a technology they call
Biomass Catalytic Cracking (BCC). This
technology uses heat and a proprietary
catalyst to convert biomass to a
renewable crude with a relatively low
oxygen content. The renewable crude is
then upgraded to produce renewable
gasoline and diesel, as well as a small
quantity of fuel oil. While KiOR plans
to continue to operate their Houston
facility in 2012 its main purpose will be
to provide small quantities of fuel for
testing purposes and to provide data for
the optimization of KiOR’s first
commercial facility. In conversations
with EPA KiOR has indicated that it is
unlikely that any significant volume of
fuel from this facility will be sold
commercially. EPA has therefore not
included any volume from KiOR’s
Houston facility in our projected
available volumes for 2012.
KL Energy has developed a process to
convert cellulose and hemicellulose into
cellulosic sugars using a thermalmechanical pretreatment process
followed by an enzymatic hydrolysis. It
had initially planned to used woody
biomass as their feedstock for cellulosic
biofuel production; however its
production process is versatile enough
to allow for a wide variety of cellulosic
feedstocks to be used. In August 2010
KL Energy announced a joint
development agreement with Petrobras
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
America Inc. As part of the agreement
Petrobras has invested $11 million to
modify KL Energy’s facility in Upton,
Wyoming to allow it to process bagasse
and other waste products. If successful,
Petrobras and KL Energy plan to work
together to integrate the technology into
currently existing ethanol production
facilities in Brazil. The modifications to
KL Energy’s facility were completed
earlier this year. KL Energy is currently
producing small volumes of cellulosic
ethanol and plans to continue to do so
throughout 2012. In August 2011 KL
Energy successfully registered its
cellulosic biofuel production facility
under the RFS program making it
eligible to generate RINs for biofuel
produced from this facility. KL Energy
has indicated to EPA its intent to
generate RINs for the fuel it produces
and to sell it commercially in the United
States. EPA projects that 100,000 gallons
of cellulosic ethanol will be available
from this facility in 2012.
Range Fuels began production of
methanol at their Soperton, Georgia
facility in the third quarter of 2010. This
facility uses a thermochemical
technology to produce syngas
(consisting of mostly hydrogen and
carbon monoxide) from a woody
biomass feedstock. The syngas is then
converted into fuel with the aid of a
chemical catalyst developed by Range.
Range has developed the capability to
produce both methanol and ethanol,
depending on the catalyst used. In
January 2011, after producing a small
volume of ethanol from this facility and
proving this capability, Range Fuels
shut down the Soperton facility in order
to work through technical difficulties
they had been experiencing. No timeline
has been given for the restart of this
facility and fuel production from this
facility in 2012 appears unlikely. No
cellulosic fuel production from Range
Fuels has been included in EPA’s 2012
projected available volume.
2. Potential New Facilities in 2012
In the proposed rule EPA discussed
five new cellulosic biofuel production
facilities that had plans to begin
commercial production at some point in
2012. These facilities were at various
stages in the construction process, and
as such had various degrees of
uncertainty associated with any
projected 2012 commercial production.
Three of these facilities, those being
developed by INEOS Bio, KiOR, and
ZeaChem, have made significant
progress towards completion and are
expected to produce and market
cellulosic biofuel in 2012. Two of the
companies mentioned in the proposed
rule, Fulcrum Bioenergy and Terrabon,
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
are no longer on a schedule to produce
cellulosic biofuel in 2012. Finally, EPA
has become aware of a sixth company,
American Process Inc., which is
developing a cellulosic biofuel project
that is likely to produce and market
some volume of cellulosic biofuel in
2012. The following section provides
updated information on each of the
companies discussed in the proposed
rule, as well as a summary of the project
being developed by American Process
Inc.
Fulcrum Bioenergy is planning to
build a facility capable of producing
10.5 million gallons of cellulosic
ethanol and 16 megawatts of renewable
electricity per year. It has developed a
thermochemical technology to produce
ethanol from separated MSW via syngas
using a chemical catalyst. In November
2010 Fulcrum announced that it had
received a term sheet for an $80 million
loan guarantee from DOE and was
entering into the final phase of the loan
guarantee program. Prior to that
Fulcrum had announced that it had
signed long term feedstock supply
contracts for this facility as well as
engineering, procurement, and
construction contracts. In January 2011
Fulcrum announced it had closed on a
$75 million Series C financing that
would provide the remaining necessary
capital for the construction of its first
commercial production facility pending
the closing of its DOE loan guarantee.
The loan guarantee, however, has yet to
be finalized. As a result the start of the
construction of this facility, originally
planned for the second quarter of 2011,
is now expected to begin in late 2011.
EPA has not included any volume of
cellulosic biofuel from Fulcrum
Bioenergy’s facility in our 2012
projected available volume because of
this delay.
INEOS Bio has developed a process
for producing cellulosic ethanol by first
gasifying feedstock material into a
syngas and then using naturally
occurring bacteria to ferment the syngas
into ethanol. In January 2011 USDA
announced a $75 million loan guarantee
for the construction of INEOS Bio’s first
commercial facility to be built in Vero
Beach, Florida. This was in addition to
the grant of up to $50 million INEOS
Bio received from DOE in January 2010.
This facility will be capable of
producing 8 million gallons of cellulosic
biofuel as well as 6 megawatts of
renewable electricity from a variety of
feedstocks including yard, agricultural,
and wood waste, as well as separated
MSW. On February 9, 2011 INEOS Bio
broke ground on this facility. Since
February significant progress has been
made and INEOS Bio remains on target
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
to complete construction on this facility
in April 2012. Commercial production
of cellulosic ethanol is expected to
begin soon after construction is
complete. Three million gallons of
cellulosic ethanol from this facility has
been included in EPA’s projected
available volume for 2012.
After successful operation of their
demonstration plant in Houston, Texas
KiOR began construction on its first
commercial scale facility in May 2011.
This facility, located in Columbus,
Mississippi, will convert biomass to a
low oxygen biocrude using a process
KiOR calls Biomass Catalytic Cracking
(BCC). BCC uses a catalyst developed by
KiOR in a process similar to Fluid
Catalytic Cracking currently used in the
petroleum industry. KiOR’s Columbus
facility will also be capable of upgrading
this biocrude into finished gasoline and
diesel as well as a small quantity of fuel
oil. KiOR plans to finish construction on
this facility in the first half of 2012 and
begin commercial production early in
the third quarter of 2012. KiOR has also
announced plans to construct several
more commercial scale biofuel
production facilities in Mississippi and
across the southeastern United States. It
is unlikely any of these additional
facilities will begin production of
biofuel in 2012. EPA has included 3
million gallons of cellulosic biofuel (4.8
million ethanol equivalent gallons) from
KiOR’s Columbus facility in our
projected available volume for 2012.
Terrabon completed construction of a
small demonstration scale facility for
the conversion of MSW and other waste
materials into gasoline in 2010 and are
currently developing plans for their first
commercial scale facility. Terrabon
utilizes a unique production process
that can be used to produce gasoline,
diesel, or jet fuel. Feedstock is first
fermented into carboxylic acids by a
variety of micro organisms. These
carboxylic acids are then neutralized to
form carboxylate salts that are
dewatered, dried, and thermally
converted to ketones. Finally, the
ketones are hydrogenated to form
alcohols which can then be refined into
gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. Terrabon
had hoped to begin producing cellulosic
biofuel at their first commercial scale
facility some time in 2012, however
difficulties in securing the necessary
funding have delayed the expected start
up of their first commercial scale facility
to 2013. EPA has not included any
volume of cellulosic biofuel from
Terrabon in our 2012 projected available
volume.
ZeaChem has begun construction on a
small demonstration scale facility in
Boardman, Oregon capable of producing
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1327
250,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol per
year. Its production process uses a
combination of biochemical and
thermochemical technologies to
produce ethanol and other renewable
chemicals from cellulosic materials. The
feedstock is first fractionated into two
separate streams containing cellulosic
sugars and lignin. The cellulosic sugars
are fermented into ethyl acetate using a
naturally occurring acetogen, which can
then be hydrogenated into ethanol. The
hydrogen necessary for this process is
produced by gasifying the lignin stream
from the cellulosic biomass. ZeaChem’s
process is flexible and is capable of
producing a wide range of renewable
chemical and fuel molecules in addition
to ethanol. ZeaChem received a grant of
up to $25 million from DOE in January
2010 for the construction of their
demonstration facility. Since then
ZeaChem has made significant progress
on its demonstration facility and
currently plans to begin production of
cellulosic ethanol from this facility in
early 2012. It has indicated to EPA,
however, that it is highly unlikely to
achieve full production capacity at this
facility in its first year of production
and has suggested that the production of
50,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol from
this facility in 2012 is a more realistic
expectation. Despite this small volume,
ZeaChem does intend to generate RINs
for the fuel that they produce and to
market it commercially. Based on this
information EPA has included 0.05
million gallons of cellulosic ethanol in
our projected available volume for 2012.
American Process Inc. (API) is
developing a project in Alpena,
Michigan capable of producing up to
900,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol per
year from woody biomass. This facility
will use a technology developed by API
called GreenPower+TM. This technology
extracts the hemicelluloses portion of
woody biomass using hot water and
hydrolyzes it into cellulosic sugars.
These cellulosic sugars are then
converted to ethanol or other alcohols,
while the remaining portion of the
woody biomass, containing mostly
cellulose and lignin, is processed into
wood paneling at a co-located facility.
At larger scale facilities API anticipates
burning the residual biomass in a boiler
to produce renewable steam and
electricity as well as cellulosic biofuel.
In January 2010 API received a grant
from DOE for up to $18 million for the
construction of their demonstration
facility. Construction of the Alpena,
Michigan facility began in March 2011
and API anticipates beginning the
production of cellulosic ethanol at this
site early in 2012. API was not
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1328
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
discussed as a potential producer of
cellulosic biofuels in 2012 in our
proposed rule due to uncertainty about
its ability to generate RINs with the
intended feedstock and production
process. EPA anticipates these issues
will be resolved. Cellulosic biofuel
produced at API’s facility will therefore
likely be eligible for cellulosic RINs. For
our 2012 projected available volume of
cellulosic biofuels we have included
500,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol
from this facility. This volume
represents the low end of API’s
production target for that year due to the
uncertainties associated with the start
up of a new industrial facility utilizing
a technology unproven at industrial
scale.
Another potential source of cellulosic
biofuel in 2012 is the application of a
technology being developed by EdeniQ.
EdeniQ is developing a suite of enzymes
capable of breaking down cellulose into
simple sugars that can then be
fermented into ethanol. Rather than
build its own production facilities
EdeniQ plans to license its enzymes to
existing corn ethanol facilities. Such
licensing would be accompanied by the
Cellunator, an advanced milling device
EdeniQ has developed to reduce the
particle size of corn kernels to enable
greater conversion of starch to ethanol
as well as the conversion of cellulose to
simple sugars. EdeniQ claims that its
technology would allow corn ethanol
facilities to increase ethanol production
by 1–2% by converting the cellulosic
portion of the corn kernel into ethanol.
EdeniQ is also working to increase the
effectiveness of its enzymes in order to
enable ethanol production increases of
3–4% from the cellulose in the corn
kernel in the future. EdeniQ plans to
begin commercial trials of its technology
in the second half of 2011. This
technology has the potential to be
implemented rapidly and produce
significant amounts of cellulosic ethanol
in 2012 as it requires relatively small
capital additions to already existing
corn ethanol facilities. While this
technology is promising, there is
currently no pathway in the RFS2
regulations for the generation of
cellulosic biofuel RINs using the
cellulosic portion of the corn kernel as
a feedstock. Moreover, EdeniQ has not
announced any agreements with corn
ethanol producers to install this
technology to enable the production of
cellulosic ethanol. For these reasons,
EPA has not included any cellulosic
ethanol production from EdeniQ’s
technology in our 2012 projections.
In addition to the facilities mentioned
above, EPA is also aware of three
companies planning to begin the
production of cellulosic biofuels in
early 2013. Coskata, Enerkem, and Poet
are planning on completing
construction on their first commercial
scale cellulosic biofuel facilities in late
2012 or early 2013 and producing
commercial volumes of biofuels in 2013.
While all of these facilities continue to
make progress towards commercial
production of cellulosic biofuel in 2013
it is highly unlikely that any of these
facilities will be capable of producing
cellulosic biofuels by the end of 2012.
EPA has therefore not included any
volume of cellulosic biofuel from these
facilities in our projected available
volume for 2012. These facilities, along
with several other commercial cellulosic
biofuel facilities planning to begin
production in 2013, notably the first
commercial scale facilities from
Abengoa and Mascoma, indicate that the
potential exists for the rapid expansion
of production volumes in future years.
3. Imports of Cellulosic Biofuel
While domestically produced
cellulosic biofuels are the most likely
source of cellulosic biofuel available in
the United States, producers and/or
importers of cellulosic biofuel produced
in other countries may also generate
RINs and participate in the RFS2
program. While the RFS2 program does
provide a financial incentive for
companies to import cellulosic biofuels
into the United States, the combination
of local demand, financial incentives
from other governments, and
transportation costs for the cellulosic
biofuel has resulted in no cellulosic
biofuel being imported to the United
States thus far. EPA believes this
situation is likely to continue in the
near future. Additionally, the majority
of internationally based cellulosic
biofuel facilities that currently exist or
plan to complete construction by the
end of 2012 are small research and
development or pilot facilities not
designed for the commercial production
of fuel.
Two notable exceptions, both located
in Canada, are Enerkem and Iogen.
Enerkem has a currently existing
commercial production facility in
Westbury, Quebec and is expecting to
complete construction on a second
facility in Edmonton, Alberta in late
2011. Iogen has a small demonstration
facility in Ottawa and is currently
exploring the possibility of building its
first commercial facility near Prince
Albert, Saskatchewan. The large
expected production volumes and
relatively small distance this fuel would
have to be transported to reach the
United States make these facilities the
most likely candidates to import
cellulosic biofuel into the United States.
In conversations with EPA, however,
both companies indicated that they had
no current intentions of importing fuel
from their Canadian production
facilities into the United States. On
September 1, 2010 the government of
Canada finalized regulations requiring
all gasoline sold in Canada to have a
renewable content of 5% and all diesel
fuel and heating oil to have a renewable
content of 2%. These regulations will
further increase local demand for any
cellulosic biofuel produced from these
two facilities and decrease the
likelihood of any of this fuel being
exported to the United States. For these
reasons we have not included any
cellulosic biofuel production from
foreign facilities in our projections of
cellulosic biofuel availability in 2012.
4. Projections From the Energy
Information Administration
Section 211(o)(3)(A) of the Clean Air
Act requires EIA to ‘‘* * * provide to
the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency an estimate, with
respect to the following calendar year,
of the volumes of transportation fuel,
biomass-based diesel, and cellulosic
biofuel projected to be sold or
introduced into commerce in the United
States.’’ EIA provided these estimates to
us on October 19, 2011.8 With regard to
cellulosic biofuel, the EIA estimated
that the available volume in 2012 would
be 6.9 million gallons based on its
assessment of the utilization of
production capacity. A summary of the
commercial scale plants they considered
and associated production volumes is
shown below in Table II.B.4. In addition
to the facilities listed in this table EIA
also projects that three pilot-scale
facilities, those owned by American
Process (Alpena, MI), KL Process Design
(Upton, WY) and ZeaChem (Boardman,
OR) will produce an additional 0.2
million gallons of cellulosic biofuel and
make it available for sale in the U.S. in
2012.
8 Letter from Howard K. Gruenspecht, EIA Acting
Administrator, to Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator,
October 19, 2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
1329
TABLE II.B.4—COMMERCIAL-SCALE CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL PLANTS EXPECTED TO GENERATE CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL RINS
IN 2012
Nameplate capacity (million
gallons)
Projected
utilization
(%)
Projected production (million
gallons)
Year online
Company
Location
Product
2011/12 ..................
2012 .......................
2012 .......................
Fiberight, LLC ..................
INP Bioenergy a ...............
KiOR ................................
Blairstown, IA ...................
Vero Beach, FL ...............
Columbus, MS .................
Ethanol ........
Ethanol ........
Liquids .........
6.4
8.0
12.2
25
25
25
1.6
2.0
3.1
Total ................
..........................................
..........................................
.....................
26.6
25%
6.7
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
a EPA
refers to INEOS New Planet (INP) Bioenergy as INEOS Bio throughout this rule.
EIA’s projections of cellulosic biofuel
production in 2012 are very similar to
EPA’s projections discussed above and
summarized in Section II.B.6 below.
The lists of companies that EIA and EPA
expect to generate cellulosic biofuel
RINS in 2012 are the same. There are,
however, several small differences in
the volumes of cellulosic biofuel
expected to be produced at some of the
production facilities listed. EPA has
slightly higher projections of cellulosic
biofuel production for Fiberight (2
million gallons vs. 1.59 million gallons),
INEOS Bio (3 million gallons vs. 2
million gallons), and American Process
Inc. (0.5 million gallons vs. less than 0.2
million gallons). These slight variations
are a result of different methodologies
used by EIA and EPA to project biofuel
production in future years. Both
Fiberight and INEOS Bio are
commercial scale facilities that plan to
begin production in 2012. As a result,
EIA has used a standard utilization
factor of 25% (used for the first year of
production for all commercial scale
facilities) along with the nameplate
capacity of these facilities to project
their production volumes for 2012. EPA
believes it is more appropriate to
consider the timing of the anticipated
start up of these facilities within 2012.
Facilities planning to begin production
early in the year should not have the
same expected utilization factor as those
planning to begin production near the
end of the year. Both Fiberight and
INEOS Bio plan to complete
construction and begin the production
of fuel in early 2012, and therefore EPA
has projected production volumes from
these facilities that are equivalent to
2012 utilization rates of slightly higher
than 25% in comparison to their full,
long-term production potential.
EIA’s projected production volume for
American Process Inc. assumes a
utilization factor of 10%, consistent
with the factor that EIA uses for all
demonstration scale facilities. While
this may be reasonable in many cases as
the purpose of most pilot plants is not
to produce fuel for commercial scale,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
American Process Inc. has
communicated to EPA that it plans to
produce volumes approaching its
facility’s nameplate capacity in their
first year. While EPA believes this is
unlikely due to the challenges of
starting up a facility utilizing a
technology that has not been proven at
commercial scale, we believe a volume
corresponding to a utilization rate
higher than 10%, but at the low end of
American Process Inc.’s target
production range is appropriate. While
the production volumes of the other
companies listed in EIA and EPA’s
projected available volume tables are
not identical, the differences are small
and their impact on the overall volume
projection is negligible.
There is also a slight variation in the
nameplate capacities for two of the
listed facilities, Fiberight and KiOR.
This is once again the result of differing
methods for determining the nameplate
capacities used by EIA and EPA. EIA
used publically available information to
calculate the nameplate capacities for
these two facilities. The Fiberight plant
is a converted corn ethanol facility that
had a production capacity of 25.5
million gallons per year. Fiberight
announced they expected to be able
produce cellulosic ethanol at 25% of the
original capacity and these numbers
formed the basis for EIA’s nameplate
capacity. Similarly for KiOR EIA’s
nameplate capacity was based on the
number of tons the facility could
process per day and the expected yield.
EPA’s nameplate capacities, conversely,
are based on conversations with each of
these companies. EPA does not believe
these slight differences in nameplate
capacities have a significant impact on
the cellulosic biofuel volume
projections made by EPA and EIA.
While the cellulosic biofuel volume
projections for 2012 provided by EIA are
not identical to those being finalized in
this rule EPA believes that they are
similar enough to support the volumes
we are finalizing. Where differences
exist they are primarily due to EPA’s
consideration of facility specific
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
situations rather than use of uniform
utilization factors. As discussed above,
EPA believes this is appropriate, and
that wherever possible these facility
specific factors should be taken into
account. CAA 211(o)(7)(D) vests the
authority for making the projection with
EPA, since it provides that the
projection is ‘‘determined by the
Administrator based on the estimate
provided [by EIA].’’ If Congress
intended that EPA simply adopt EIA’s
projection without an independent
evaluation, it would not have specified
that the projection is ‘‘determined by
the [EPA] Administrator’’. Although the
statute provides that our determination
must be ‘‘based on the estimate
provided’’ by EIA, we believe that our
consideration of EIA’s estimate in
deriving our own projection as
described above satisfies this statutory
requirement.
5. Comments on the Proposed Rule
EPA received comments on our
proposed rule recommending various
methodologies or suggested volumes for
the final rule. Several parties supported
our projected volumes and emphasized
the importance of maintaining a
consistent policy supporting growth in
the cellulosic biofuel industry. Other
comments we received recommended
that the volume we set for cellulosic
biofuel be based only on the
demonstrated production rates of
facilities that have been in production
for at least three months. EPA believes
this approach is inconsistent with the
requirement that the mandated volume
of cellulosic biofuel be based on the
projected, not demonstrated, volume for
any given year. Using the approach
recommended by the commenters
would effectively project no market
growth from the end of 2011 through
2012, and would lead to no 2012 market
demand for additional cellulosic biofuel
capacity that comes on line during the
course of 2012, hindering industry
growth. As a result, the incentives for
the cellulosic biofuels industry to grow,
which are one of the primary purposes
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1330
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
of the RFS program and which are
consistent with Executive Order 13563,
would be compromised.
Several other commenters claimed
that cellulosic biofuel technology was
not yet capable of producing the
volumes of fuel indicated in our
proposal and that the proposed range of
cellulosic biofuels was too high.
Chevron suggested that EPA finalize the
lower end of the proposed range (3.55
million ethanol-equivalent gallons).
After reassessing the state of the
cellulosic biofuel industry and tracking
the progress being made towards the
production of cellulosic biofuels at
commercial scale facilities, EPA
believes the industry is capable of
exceeding the lower end of the range of
projected volume from our proposed
rule. In order to provide the appropriate
economic conditions for the cellulosic
biofuel industry to grow in accordance
with the objectives of the statute, it is
important that these fuels, once
produced, have a viable market. EPA
believes that setting the 2012 standard
for cellulosic biofuels at the low end of
the proposed range, or some lower
volume, could potentially result in a
depressed market for cellulosic biofuel
and would discourage cellulosic biofuel
producers from producing quantities of
fuel in 2012 that are actually attainable.
Alternatively, we also received
comments requesting that EPA finalize
the high end of the proposed volume
(15.7 ethanol-equivalent gallons). While
this approach would provide a strong
incentive for potential cellulosic biofuel
producers to maximize their production
of fuel, EPA does not believe it would
be consistent with the requirement that
the volume mandate be based on the
projected production volume. As
discussed above, several companies
have experienced delays in their
construction plans since the proposed
rule has been published, and others
have lowered their production targets or
indicated that they no longer intend to
generate RINs for the cellulosic biofuel
they produce. While it is possible that
one or more of the companies for whom
we have included volumes in our 2012
projection may produce a greater
volume of fuel than we currently
anticipate, EPA does not believe it
would be appropriate to rely on such
speculation in setting the applicable
volume of cellulosic biofuel for 2012.
We believe that the 2012 cellulosic
biofuel applicable volume of 8.65
million gallons (10.45 million ethanolequivalent gallons) finalized in this rule
is a reasonable projection of the volume
of cellulosic biofuel that will be
produced and made available for RFS
compliance in 2012. While this volume
is slightly higher than the volume
projected by EIA we believe this is
appropriate based on the consideration
of company specific factors such as
when in the year the companies
anticipate the start of fuel production
and production targets shared with EPA.
The difference in the methodologies
used for EIA and EPA’s projections is
discussed in further detail in Section
II.B.4.
The Consumers Energy Alliance, in
addition to suggesting that the range of
cellulosic biofuel production in our
proposed rule was too high, also
requested that EPA perform a costbenefit analysis to determine the
implications of our proposed standards.
The Clean Air Act clearly states that in
the event that the projected volume of
cellulosic biofuel production for the
following year is less than the
applicable volume shown in Table II.A–
1, EPA is to reduce the applicable
volume of cellulosic biofuel to the
projected volume available during that
calendar year. Since the mandated
volume for any given year is to be based
solely on the projected volume available
for that year, a cost-benefit analysis is
not necessary.
Two cellulosic biofuel companies,
American Process Inc. and ZeaChem,
commented on the volume of cellulosic
biofuels they expect to produce in 2012
and requested that EPA’s projections of
available volumes of cellulosic biofuel
be adjusted accordingly. After
consideration of these comments and
additional information provided by
these two companies EPA agrees that
the adjustments they suggested are
appropriate. As a result a volume of
500,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol
from American Process Inc., a volume
representing the lower end of their
production target for 2012, has been
included in our projected available
volume. The volume of fuel projected
from ZeaChem’s facility has been
changed to 50,000 gallons of cellulosic
ethanol in 2012 to more accurately
reflect their current expectations for
their facility.
Finally, EPA received several
comments from obligated parties
requesting that in any year in which
actual annual production of cellulosic
biofuel falls below the applicable
volume used to set the annual standard,
that EPA use its waiver authority to
waive a volume of cellulosic biofuel
equal to the shortfall in February of the
following year, prior to the February 28
deadline for submission of compliance
demonstration reports by obligated
parties. This approach, these
commenters argued, would ensure that
their obligations match the number of
cellulosic biofuel RINs that are available
in the market. These comments deal
with EPA’s general waiver authority
under CAA 211(o)(7)(A), and thus are
not directly related to the annual
standard setting process or the waiver
authority that is specific to cellulosic
biofuel under 211(o)(7)(D). At this time
EPA has received no petitions for a
waiver of the 2011 cellulosic biofuel
volume under 211(o)(7)(A) due to
inadequate domestic supply, and thus
we are not considering at this time
whether and how any portion of the
2011 cellulosic biofuel applicable
volume should be waived.
6. Summary of Volume Projections
The information EPA has gathered on
the potential cellulosic biofuel
producers in 2012, described above,
allows us to project facility-specific
volumes of cellulosic biofuel production
for 2012. This information is
summarized in Table II.B.6–1 below.
TABLE II—B.6–1—CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL 2012 PROJECTED AVAILABLE VOLUME
2012 Projected available volume
(MG)
Ethanol
equivalent
gallons (MG)
Early 2012 .........
0.5
0.5
6
8
Early 2012 .........
May 2012 ...........
2.0
3.0
2.0
3.0
10
1.5
Mid 2012 ............
Online ................
3.0
0.1
4.8
0.1
Capacity
(MGY)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Company name
Location
Feedstock
Fuel
American Process Inc.
Fiberight .............
INEOS Bio a .......
Alpena, MI .........
Waste Wood ......
Ethanol ..............
0.9
Blairstown, IA ....
Vero Beach, FL
Ethanol ..............
Ethanol ..............
KiOR ..................
KL Energy ..........
Columbus, MS ...
Upton, WY .........
MSW ..................
Ag Residue,
MSW.
Pulp Wood .........
Bagasse .............
Gasoline, Diesel
Ethanol ..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Earliest
production
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
1331
TABLE II—B.6–1—CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL 2012 PROJECTED AVAILABLE VOLUME—Continued
Location
Feedstock
Fuel
ZeaChem ...........
Boardman, OR ..
Planted Trees ....
Ethanol ..............
0.25
Total ............
............................
............................
............................
Ethanol
equivalent
gallons (MG)
Early 2012 .........
0.05
0.05
............................
8.65
10.45
Earliest
production
......................
a This
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2012 Projected available volume
(MG)
Capacity
(MGY)
Company name
facility is listed as INP Bioenergy in EIA’s projections.
While the production volumes in
Table II.B.6–1 have some uncertainty,
we believe that a total volume of 8.65
million gallons (10.45 million ethanolequivalent gallons) is reasonably
attainable. By basing the 2012 cellulosic
biofuel standard on the reasonably
attainable volumes rather than proven
production volumes, we aim to avoid a
scenario in which cellulosic biofuel
production exceeds the mandated
volume; no mechanism exists for this
standard to be raised should cellulosic
biofuel production exceed the 2011
standard. Such a scenario would result
in weak demand for cellulosic biofuels
and RINs. Moreover, the standard that
we set determines in large part the
volumes of cellulosic biofuel that will
be produced. We believe that the intent
of Congress in establishing steadily
increasing applicable volumes of
cellulosic biofuel in the RFS program
through EISA was to provide a reliable
market for these fuels and in so doing
to spur growth in the cellulosic biofuels
industry. EPA believes the projected
available volume finalized in this rule
best reflects these intentions.
Based on our assessment of the
potential production capabilities of
individual companies as described
above, EPA is finalizing the cellulosic
biofuel standard for 2012 at 10.45
million ethanol-equivalent gallons of
cellulosic biofuel. This number
represents the volume of RIN-generating
cellulosic biofuel that we believe can be
made available for use as transportation
fuel, heating oil, or jet fuel in 2012. It
incorporates reductions from the annual
production capacity of each facility
based on when fuel production can
begin and assumptions regarding a
ramp-up period to full production. We
believe that a production volume of
10.45 million ethanol-equivalent gallons
is reasonably attainable despite the
uncertainties. Moreover, by setting the
standard for cellulosic biofuel based on
the volumes that are reasonably
attainable, we are providing incentives
for producers to overcome uncertainties
and greater opportunities for funding
based on an established demand.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
There are also a variety of factors that
could lead to production volumes
greater than those listed in Table II.B.6–
1 and make up for potential shortfalls
elsewhere. For instance:
• For each of the facilities listed, we
are projecting that their production will
be some volume less than the capacity
of their facility. It is possible, however,
that these companies could produce a
greater volume of fuel than they are
currently anticipating or has been
projected by EPA.
• It is possible that companies that
are currently targeting 2013 for
commercial production may produce
cellulosic biofuel ahead of schedule and
generate RINs in 2012. None of this
volume was included in our projection
for 2012.
• A high demand for cellulosic
biofuels may be sufficient to cause
companies to import fuel into the
United States, even if they currently
have no plans to do so. As described in
Section II.B.3 above, there are several
foreign producers that are either
producing cellulosic biofuel now, or
could potentially produce some
cellulosic biofuel volume in 2012.
Finally, we note that if the actual
volume of cellulosic biofuel RINs that
are available in 2012 falls short of the
10.45 million gallon RINs used to derive
the 2012 cellulosic biofuel standard,
obligated parties have other recourses:
• Purchase cellulosic biofuel waiver
credits from the EPA (see further
discussion in Section V.A)
• Carry over a deficit from 2012 into
2013 according to § 80.1427(b) under
certain conditions
C. Advanced Biofuel and Total
Renewable Fuel in 2012
Under CAA 211(o)(7)(D)(i), EPA has
the discretion to reduce the applicable
volumes of advanced biofuel and total
renewable fuel in the event that the
projected volume of cellulosic biofuel
production is determined to be below
the applicable volume specified in the
statute. As described in Section II.B
above, we are indeed projecting the
volume of cellulosic biofuel production
for 2012 at significantly below the
statutory applicable volume of 500
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
million gallons. Because cellulosic
biofuel is used to satisfy the cellulosic
biofuel standard, the advanced biofuel
standard, and the total renewable fuel
standard, any reductions in the
applicable volume of cellulosic biofuel
will also affect the means through
which obligated parties comply with the
advanced biofuel standard and the total
renewable fuel standard. Therefore, we
have considered whether and to what
degree to lower the advanced biofuel
and total renewable fuel applicable
volumes for 2012.
If the required volume of cellulosic
biofuel for a given year is less than the
volume specified in the statute, it is
important to evaluate whether there
would be sufficient volume of advanced
biofuels to satisfy the applicable volume
of advanced biofuel volume set forth in
the statute. Even with a reduced volume
of cellulosic biofuel, other advanced
biofuels, such as biomass-based diesel,
sugarcane ethanol, or other biofuels,
may be available in sufficient volumes
to make up for the shortfall in cellulosic
biofuel.
Several commenters stated their belief
that the applicable volume of advanced
biofuel should always be lowered
concurrently, and to the same degree,
that the applicable volume of cellulosic
biofuel is lowered from the levels set
forth in the statute. Since we are
finalizing a cellulosic biofuel applicable
volume today that is approximately 490
million gallons below the 500 mill gal
applicable volume specified in the
statute, this approach would lead to a
reduction in the advanced biofuel
standard of 490 million gallons as well,
from 2,000 mill gallons to 1,510 mill
gallons. However, as described in the
NPRM, we believe that it would not be
consistent with the energy security and
greenhouse gas reduction goals of the
statute to reduce the applicable volume
of advanced biofuel set forth in the
statute if there are sufficient volumes of
advanced biofuels available, even if
those volumes do not include the
amount of cellulosic biofuel that
Congress may have desired. Our
authority to lower the advanced biofuel
and/or total renewable fuel applicable
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1332
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
volumes is discretionary, and in general
we believe that actions to lower these
volumes should only be taken if
insufficient volumes of qualifying
biofuel can be made available, based on
such circumstances as insufficient
production capacity, insufficient
feedstocks, competing markets,
constrained infrastructure, or the like.
As discussed below, we project that
sufficient volumes of advanced biofuel
can be made available in 2012 such that
the 2.0 bill gallon advanced biofuel
requirement need not be reduced.
If we were to maintain the advanced
biofuel, biomass-based diesel, and total
renewable fuel volume requirements at
the levels specified in the statute, while
also lowering the cellulosic biofuel
standard to 10.45 million ethanol-
equivalent gallons, then 1,510 million
gallons of the 2.0 billion gallon
advanced biofuel mandate would be
satisfied automatically through the
satisfaction of the cellulosic and
biomass based diesel standards. An
additional 490 million ethanolequivalent gallons of additional
advanced biofuels would be needed. See
Table II.C–1.
TABLE II—C–1—PROJECTED FUEL MIX IN 2012 ASSUMING NO CHANGE IN ADVANCED BIOFUEL OR TOTAL RENEWABLE
FUEL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS
[Mill gallons]
Ethanol-equivalent volume
Total renewable fuel ............................................................................................
Conventional renewable fuel a .............................................................................
Total advanced biofuel ........................................................................................
Cellulosic biofuel ..................................................................................................
Biomass-based diesel ..........................................................................................
Other advanced biofuel b .....................................................................................
Physical volume
15,200
13,200
2,000
10.45
1,500
490
14,535–14,698
13,200
1,335–1,498
8.65
1,000
c 326–490
a Predominantly
corn-starch ethanol.
to nearest million gallons for simplicity.
volume is a range because other advanced biofuel may be ethanol, biodiesel, or some combination of the two.
b Rounded
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
c Physical
The most likely sources of additional
advanced biofuel would be imported
sugarcane ethanol and additional
biomass-based diesel, though there may
also be some volumes of other types of
advanced biofuel available as discussed
below. To determine if there are likely
to be sufficient volumes of these
biofuels to meet the need for 490
million gallons of other advanced
biofuel, we first examined historical
data on ethanol imports and projections
from EIA and USDA for 2012. Brazilian
imports have made up a sizeable portion
of total ethanol imported into the U.S.
in the past, and these volumes were
predominantly produced from
sugarcane. Ethanol imports averaged
about 380 million gallons per year over
the last five years, and reached an alltime high of 730 million gallons in
2006.9 However, ethanol imports were
significantly lower in 2010 than in
previous years, and continue to be low
in the first half of 2011. This decline in
imports may be related to the cessation
of the duty drawback that became
effective on October 1, 2008, to changes
in world sugar prices, and increases in
demand within Brazil.10 Several
commenters cited these lower import
volumes in the last two years as
evidence that importation of sugarcane
ethanol will be low in 2012 as well.
9 ‘‘Monthly
U.S. Imports of Fuel Ethanol,’’ EIA,
released 3/30/2011.
10 Lundell, Drake, ‘‘Brazilian Ethanol Export
Surge to End; U.S. Customs Loophole Closed Oct.
1,’’ Ethanol and Biodiesel News, Issue 45,
November 4, 2008.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
However, we believe that the broader
view of historical data on sugarcane
ethanol imports supports our view that
Brazil has significant export potential
under the appropriate economic
circumstances. Monthly ethanol imports
in June and July of 2011 were
significantly higher than during any of
the previous 16 months, at 3 and 13
million gallons, respectively.11
Moreover, Brazil continues to be second
worldwide in the production of ethanol,
producing a total of 6.9 bill gallons in
2009.12 By establishing an increased
U.S. demand for 490 million gallons of
other advanced biofuel in 2012, we
would be enhancing the export market
for Brazilian sugarcane ethanol. This
could increase the percentage of ethanol
produced from sugarcane (as opposed to
sugar production), and lead to higher
volumes of sugarcane ethanol exported
to the U.S. Insofar as there is
insufficient availability of domestically
produced advanced biofuel to meet the
need for 490 mill gallons, the price of
advanced biofuel RINs would likely
increase, providing the incentive for
Brazil to export more sugarcane ethanol
into the U.S. California’s Low Carbon
Fuel Standard also went into effect in
2010, and may result in some refiners
importing additional volumes of
sugarcane ethanol from Brazil into
California in 2012. These same volumes
11 Monthly
U.S. Imports of Fuel Ethanol, Energy
Information Administration, Release Date 9/29/
2011.
12 Portal Brasil, Energy Matrix for Ethanol, https://
www.brasil.gov.br/sobre/economy/energy-matrix/
ethanol/br_model1?set_language=en.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
would count towards the federal RFS2
program as well.
Projections from other sources also
suggest that a large portion of the 490
million gallons of advanced biofuel
needed could be supplied by imported
sugarcane ethanol. For instance, in its
Annual Energy Outlook 2011, EIA
projects ethanol imports of
approximately 300 million gallons for
2012.13 In addition, the university-based
Food and Agricultural Policy Research
Institute (FAPRI) released its 2011 U.S.
and World Agricultural Outlook report
in which it projects 2012 ethanol
imports of 728 million gallons.14 This is
a substantial increase compared to
FAPRI’s previous projection of 317 mill
gallons as cited in our NPRM. While
other sources suggest that total
Brazillian exports of sugarcane ethanol
decreased in 2011 and may decrease in
2012, the higher RIN prices associated
with the advanced biofuel mandate
would be expected to create an
incentive for a greater proportion of
Brazillian exports to be imported into
the U.S. For instance, according to the
FAPRI report, the increase in imports
into the U.S. would be concurrent with
reductions in imports into other
countries rather than an increase in
exports of sugarcane ethanol from
Brazil.
13 Table 11 of AEO2011, Report Number DOE/
EIA–0383(2011). https://www.eia.doe.gov/forecasts/
aeo/tables_ref.cfm.
14 Table ‘‘Ethanol Trade’’, Commodity Outlook/
Biofuels, FAPRI–ISU 2011 World Agricultural
Outlook. https://www.fapri.iastate.edu/outlook/
2011/.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
We also examined the potential for
excess biodiesel to help meet the need
for 490 million gallons of advanced
biofuel. The applicable volume of
biomass based diesel established in the
statute for 2012 is 1.0 billion gallons
(which corresponds to 1.5 billion
ethanol-equivalent gallons). As
discussed more fully in Section II.D
below, we believe that the biodiesel
industry has the potential for producing
volumes above 1.0 billion gallons if
demand for such volume exists.
There are also other potential sources
of advanced biofuels. Based on RIN
generation reports collected via the
EPA–Moderated Transaction System
(EMTS), 32 million ethanol-equivalent
gallons of advanced biofuel with a D
code of 5 were produced in the first half
of 2011.15 Extrapolated to the end of the
year, it would be reasonable to expect a
total of over 60 million ethanolequivalent gallons of such advanced
biofuel to be produced in 2011.
Production Outlook Reports also
provided some insight into producers’
expectations for 2012. For 2012,
producers of advanced biofuel projected
that they would produce about 80
million ethanol-equivalent gallons,
composed of some combination of
ethanol, renewable diesel, and heating
oil.
Another potential source of advanced
biofuels is electricity generated from
renewable biomass that is used as a
transportation fuel. EIA data indicates
that in 2009, the most recent year for
which data is available, 36.05 million
megawatt-hours of electricity was
generated from wood and wood derived
fuels, and an additional 18.4 million
megawatt-hours was generated from
other biomass in the United States.16
This is significantly more than the 6.8
million megawatt-hours of electricity
used in the transportation sector in
2009,17 equivalent to about 300 mill
ethanol-equivalent gallons. While not
all the feedstocks used to generate the
electricity included in these totals
would meet the RFS2’s renewable
biomass definition, this remains a very
large potential source of advanced
biofuel RINs.
Currently, there are no valid pathways
in Table 1 to § 80.1426 for the
generation of RINs representing
15 RFS2 EMTS Informational Data, updated on
August 18, 2011. https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/compliancehelp/rfsdata.htm.
16 Table ES1 of Electric Power Industry 2009:
Year in Review. Available online: https://
www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epayir.pdf.
17 Table 36 of AEO2011, Report Number DOE/
EIA–0383(2011). Number based on the conversion
that 1 megawatt hour is equivalent to 3.41 million
BTU https://www.eia.doe.gov/forecasts/aeo/
tables_ref.cfm.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
electricity used as transportation fuel.
However, several companies have
approached EPA with requests for such
a pathway, and investigations are
underway. It is possible that one or
more new pathways for electricity may
be available for use in 2012.
In addition to verifying that the
feedstocks used to generate renewable
electricity meet the renewable biomass
definition, producers would also be
required to document that the electricity
they produce is used as a transportation
fuel in order to be eligible to generate
RINs. Until recently there were very few
vehicles capable of using electricity as
a transportation fuel, limited mainly to
electric trains and trolley cars. Expected
increases in the number of vehicles with
this capability, such as electric vehicles
and plug in hybrids, has the potential to
dramatically increase the degree to
which electricity is able to be used as a
transportation fuel. Verifying that the
renewable electricity produced is used
as a transportation fuel would still
remain a challenge, however the
potential for capitalizing on the RIN
value, without the necessity of making
major changes in the areas of fuel
production, distribution, or end use,
may be a large enough incentive to
overcome this challenge. While the
uncertainties associated with the
generation of advanced biofuel RINs
representing renewable electricity used
as transportation fuel prevent EPA from
making a quantitative projection for
2012, such RINs may nevertheless play
a role in meeting the advanced biofuel
standard.
In light of the potential volumes of
imported sugarcane ethanol, excess
biodiesel, and other sources of advanced
biofuel, we continue to believe that
there will likely be sufficient volumes of
advanced biofuels to meet the need for
490 million ethanol-equivalent gallons.
As a result, the applicable volume of
advanced biofuel set forth in the statute
need not be lowered. A number of
commenters on the NPRM agreed with
this assessment. However, several
commenters raised a concern about the
ethanol blendwall, saying that the
volume of ethanol that can be legally
and practically consumed in 2012 is a
limiting factor in how much advanced
biofuel can be consumed. We disagree.
Based on gasoline energy demand
projections from EIA,18 a total of about
14.3 bill gallons of ethanol could be
consumed in 2012 if all gasoline
18 Total energy demand for light-duty vehicles,
motorcycles, and nonroad per AEO 2011 Tables 10,
45, and 46.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1333
contained 10% ethanol.19 Under the
requirements of the RFS program,
however, the total volume of ethanol
that would need to be consumed to meet
the RFS standards would be no more
than 13.7 bill gallons in 2012.20 This
assumes an extreme case in which all
renewable fuel that is not advanced
biofuel is assumed to be ethanol, and all
advanced biofuel other than biomassbased diesel is also assumed to be
ethanol.
It is possible that more ethanol may
be produced/imported in 2012 than is
necessary to meet the RFS requirements,
and such circumstances could
accelerate the arrival of the blendwall.
However, this would only occur if
market forces favored the consumption
of higher volumes of ethanol, and we
cannot make reliable predictions of such
market forces. Since the applicable
standards are set before a given
compliance year begins, obligated
parties should be coordinating with
producers, distributors, and blenders of
the various forms of ethanol (e.g.
cellulosic ethanol, corn-ethanol,
sugarcane ethanol) to ensure that all
RFS standards are met by the end of the
compliance period.
Based on our assessment of the
availability of volumes of advanced
biofuel beyond those required to meet
the cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based
diesel standards, we do not believe that
the advanced biofuel standard need be
lowered below the 2.0 billion gallon
level specified in the Act. Thus, we are
not reducing the applicable volume of
advanced biofuel for 2012.
A number of parties that commented
on the NPRM requested that the
applicable volume for total renewable
fuel in 2012 be reduced. However, all
such commenters tied the reduction in
total renewable fuel to a reduction in
the advanced biofuel standard. Since we
are not lowering the advanced biofuel
standard for 2012, and there are
expected to be sufficient volumes of
corn-ethanol to meet the need for 13.2
bill gallons of conventional renewable
fuel (see Table II.C–1), we do not believe
that there is a need to lower the total
renewable fuel standard.
D. Biomass-Based Diesel in 2012
Unlike for cellulosic biofuel, the
statute does not require EPA to project
available volumes of biomass-based
19 In reality, there may be some areas where
gasoline without ethanol endures, but there will
also be some E85 and potentially other gasolineethanol blends as well. We have used a scenario
consisting of 100% E10 for this exercise.
20 From Table II.C–1, sum of ethanol-equivalent
gallons of conventional renewable fuel, cellulosic
biofuel, and other advanced biofuel.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1334
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
requirements of 800 mill gallons in 2011
and 1.0 bill gallons in 2012 are not
achievable. However, many of the
activities of the biodiesel industry in
2010 were due to unique circumstances
that may not apply in 2012. It is likely
that a contributing factor to the lower
production volumes in 2010 was the
expiration of the biodiesel tax credit at
the end of 2009 and its absence
throughout 2010, and the fact that the
RFS program effectively created a
demand for about 345 mill gallons in
2010.22 A more comprehensive view of
historical biodiesel production levels
strongly indicates that the U.S. biodiesel
industry has produced higher volumes
when demand for it existed, and that as
a result the industry has the capability
to produce greater volumes than it did
in 2010 under the appropriate
circumstances. This point is illustrated
in Figure II.D–1 below.
estimated at 2.4 billion gallons per year
across 148 facilities.23 We expect the
time and reinvestment required to ramp
up production at existing facilities to be
less than the time required to build and
begin production at new plants, which
takes about a year on average.24 Thus,
restarting idled plants will not be a
hindrance to meeting the applicable
volumes for biomass-based diesel in
2011 or 2012. A higher mandate for
biomass-based diesel will increase
demand for biodiesel with associated
increases in RIN prices. This in turn
21 Consists of approximately 209 mill gallons as
recorded through EMTS for volume produced under
the RFS2 regulations in July through December, and
approximately 171 mill gallons as recorded through
RIN generation reports submitted by producers for
volume produced under the RFS1 regulations in
January through June.
22 See question 6.7 in EPA’s ‘‘Questions and
Answers on Changes to the Renewable Fuel
Standard Program (RFS2)’’, https://www.epa.gov/
otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/compliancehelp/rfs2aq.htm#6.
23 Figures taken from National Biodiesel Board’s
Member Plant List as of August 22, 2011. Some
plants did not report production capacity. https://
biodiesel.org/buyingbiodiesel/plants/showall.aspx.
24 Based on construction times for new plants
listed in Biodiesel Magazine from July 2006 through
May 2009.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
ER09JA12.000
applicable volume of 1.0 bill gallons for
biomass-based diesel is achievable in
2012, and whether additional volumes
are also feasible.
We examined recent production rates,
production capacity of the industry, and
projections for future production from a
variety of sources. Although there are
several different fuel types that can
qualify as biomass-based diesel,
biodiesel is by far the predominant type.
Thus, our assessment focused primarily
on biodiesel, though we also
investigated potential volumes of
renewable diesel.
According to information from the
EPA–Moderated Transaction System
(EMTS) and RIN generation reports
submitted to EPA from producers, we
estimate that the volume of biomassbased diesel produced in 2010 was
about 380 mill gallons.21 A number of
commenters pointed to this low volume
as an indication that the volume
The biodiesel industry’s production
potential supports the view that it can
more than satisfy the applicable volume
of biomass based diesel specified in the
statute for 2012. As of August, 2011, the
aggregate production capacity of
biodiesel plants in the U.S. was
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
diesel for years up through 2012 and to
base the standard on the projected
available volume. Instead, the standard
for 2012 is to be based on the statutory
applicable volume of 1.0 bill gallons.
However, the statute does include
waiver provisions that allow for
lowering the applicable volume of
biomass-based diesel under certain
circumstances. Moreover, as described
more fully in Section II.C above, we
must determine whether the required
volumes of advanced biofuel and/or
total renewable fuel should be reduced
if we reduce the required volume of
cellulosic biofuel. Since biomass-based
diesel is also an advanced biofuel, the
amount of biomass-based diesel that is
consumed in 2012 directly affects our
consideration of adjustments to the
volumetric requirements for advanced
biofuel and total renewable fuel. We
therefore investigated whether the
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
1335
biodiesel have increased steadily in the
first half of 2011, reaching about 78 mill
gallons by July.25 See Figure II.D–2.
underutilized production capacity that
exists within the biodiesel industry,
there is also reason to believe that
monthly production volumes will
increases after July 2011 at a rate that is
more than needed to meet the statutory
biomass-based diesel volume
requirements, providing additional
volumes that can be used to meet the
advanced biofuel standard.
Projections from other sources
provide additional support to our
conclusions that 1.0 bill gal biomassbased diesel can be produced in 2012.
For instance, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture projects that over 400 mill
gallons of biodiesel will be produced
from soybean oil in 2012, and adds that
‘‘Although some other first-use
vegetable oils are also used to produce
biodiesel, most of the remaining
biodiesel production needed to reach
the 1-billion-gallon mandate of the 2007
Energy Act uses animal fats or recycled
vegetable oil as the feedstock.’’ 26 This
projection is further supported by the
Agricultural Marketing Resource Center
at Iowa State University, which projects
that soy-oil biodiesel production may
reach as high as 470 mill gallons and
that non-soy biodiesel may reach as
high as 460 mill gallons.27 Both of these
sources project more growth in non-soy
oil feedstock volumes than soy oil.
Finally, EIA projects that the total
volume of biodiesel in 2012 would be
about 830 mill gallons.28 While all of
these projections suggest that volumes
of biodiesel may fall short of 1.0 bill
gallons, they do not take into account
the increase in monthly production
volumes as noted above, nor sources of
renewable diesel that will also be
available. For instance, Dynamic Fuels
has constructed one plant in Geismar,
Louisiana that started production of
renewable diesel in November, 2010.29
In the final RFS2 rule, we projected that
25 U.S. Census Bureau, Fats and Oils, Production,
Consumption, and Stocks, Survey M311K. https://
www.census.gov/manufacturing/cir/historical_data/
m311k/. Assumes 7.68 lb/gal conversion.
26 USDA Agricultural Projections to 2020, LongTerm Projections Report OCE–2011–1, February
2011. See Table 24. Assumes 7.68 lb/gal.
27 Soybean Oil and Biodiesel Usage Projections
and Balance Sheet, updated 2/18/2011. A version
made available on 8/1/2011 shows similar volumes
of soybean oil for biodiesel use, but does not
provide information about non-soy oil sources of
biodiesel. https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/
crops/outlook/soybeanbalancesheet.pdf. Values
cited are for the ‘‘High’’ case.
28 Short-Term Energy Outlook, August 2011.
Table 8.
29 Project status updates are available via the
Syntroleum Web site, https://dynamicfuelsllc.com/
wp-news/.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
ER09JA12.001
Additionally, information from the
U.S. Census Bureau indicates that
monthly production volumes of
Over the seven months shown in this
figure, biodiesel production increased
by an average of about 16% each month.
This trend demonstrates that the
industry is responding to the higher
demand created by the 800 mill gal
biomass-based diesel volume
requirement under the RFS program in
2011. Biodiesel production will only
need to increase at a more modest rate
of about 3% each month after July in
order for the total 2011 production
volume to reach 800 mill gallons.
Moreover, further increases in monthly
production volumes would not be
necessary after December 2011 for the
industry to reach a total production
volume of 1.0 bill gallons in 2012. We
believe, therefore, that the 1.0 bill gallon
requirement for biomass-based diesel in
2012 can be met. Moreover, given the
increases in monthly production
volumes that occurred in the first half
of 2011 and the significant amount of
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
will create the incentive for biodiesel
producers to put idled capacity into
production.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1336
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
annual renewable diesel production
could reach 150 mill gallons based on
feedstock availability. Renewable diesel
can also be produced at existing
refineries with little modification to
processing equipment.30 Thus, we
currently believe that the total
production volume of biomass-based
diesel can readily reach 1.0 bill gal in
2012.
We also reviewed information
submitted by registered producers of
biomass-based diesel under the
requirements of § 80.1449 for
Production Outlook Reports. Of the 65
facilities that submitted a report, the
total projected 2012 volume of biomassbased diesel was 937 mill gallons. We
believe that this projection is indicative
of the industry’s expectation that the
applicable volume requirement for 2012
will be 1.0 bill gallons and its intention
to meet that requirement. Moreover, the
projection provided in these reports
likely underestimates the actual
expectations and capabilities of the
industry, since the number of facilities
that submitted a report is far less than
the total number of facilities capable of
producing biodiesel and renewable
diesel.
In additional to production capacity
and projections of 2012 production
volume, we also investigated feedstocks
used to produce biomass-based diesel.
We believe that there will be sufficient
sources of qualifying renewable biomass
to more than meet the needs of the
biodiesel industry in 2012. The largest
sources of feedstock for biodiesel in
2012 are expected to be soy oil, canola
oil, rendered fats, and corn oil extracted
during production of fuel ethanol. In
response to the NPRM, the National
Biodiesel Board (NBB) cited historically
high soybean production rates for 2011
as evidence that there will be ample
volumes of soybean oil available for
biodiesel production. Likewise, the
Renewable Energy Group (REG)
provided information on significant
increases in the availability of inedible
corn oil from ethanol producers that it
believes will occur in the next 1–2
years.
While commenters did not provide
any information suggesting that the
applicable volume of 1.0 bill gallons
cannot be reached, some raised
concerns about impacts on other
industries and feedstock price. For
instance, the American Trucking
Association (ATA) stated that feedstocks
will need to be diverted from other uses
30 For such a product to qualify for biomass-based
diesel, however, it cannot be co-processed with
petroleum feedstock. This might limit its potential
for refinery-based production of qualifying product.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
in order to meet the 1.0 bill gallon
requirement, and the American
Cleaning Institute (ACI) provided
information about how such a diversion
could affect the oleochemical industry.
We address concerns about price in
more detail below in our discussion of
ATA’s request for a waiver of the 2012
applicable volume of 1.0 bill gallons.
While we agree that the total volume
of animal fats is largely inelastic and is
unlikely to grow significantly due to the
presence of the increasing market for
biomass-based diesel, we also agree
with the statement from ACI that ‘‘there
is nothing in EISA or the proposed rule
that limits the amount of animal fats
that can be used to meet the mandate.’’
Under the statutory definition of
renewable biomass, valid feedstocks
include animal waste material and
animal byproducts. We believe that
animal fats fall into these categories,
and as a result we do not have the
authority to exclude or limit volumes of
animal fats that are used for production
of biomass-based diesel. Such wastes
could potentially be considered
‘‘biogenic waste oils/fats/greases’’ or
‘‘non-cellulosic portions of separated
food waste’’ under the RIN-generating
pathways listed in Table 1 to § 80.1426,
and could thus be eligible for the
production of RIN-generating biofuel.
In response to the NPRM, we received
comments both in support of and
opposed to our proposal to maintain the
statute’s applicable volume of 1.0 bill
gallons for biomass-based diesel in
2012. In general, producers of biodiesel
and crop-based feedstocks were
supportive, citing the sufficiency of
available feedstocks and production
capacity. Several supporters indicated
that historically low biodiesel
production volumes are not an
appropriate reference point on which to
base the capabilities of the industry for
the future, since the higher biomassbased diesel mandates established by
Congress for 2011 and 2012 are
expected to drive production volumes
more than any other factor.
Parties opposed to maintaining the
statutory applicable volume of 1.0 bill
gallons for 2012 were primarily
obligated parties, as well as
representatives of diesel trucking
companies and the oleochemical
industry. To a large degree, these
commenters pointed to historical
biodiesel production levels in support
of their belief that 1.0 bill gallons in
2012 is not achievable. As described
above, we do not agree with this
conclusion.
One party opposed to maintaining the
1.0 bill gal requirement for 2012 also
raised concerns about infrastructure. We
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
acknowledge that the required
expansion of the biodiesel handling
capacity at terminals will represent a
challenge to industry. However, as
discussed in the NPRM, we continue to
believe that there will be sufficient
biomass-based diesel distribution
infrastructure in place to support the
use of 1.0 bill gal biodiesel in 2012. For
instance, NBB stated in their comments
that in most markets, terminals can treat
5% biodiesel blends as a fungible
commodity like diesel fuel and that they
believe that many terminals may be
storing B5 blends. To the extent
terminals store a finished B5 blend, it
would obviate the need for much of the
segregated biodiesel storage and
blending capability that is assumed in
our infrastructure analysis. The Iowa
Biodiesel Board stated that claims that
industry cannot accommodate the
distribution of the target gallons are
baseless and cited various examples of
recent biodiesel blending initiatives at
Iowa terminals.
Industry activities are currently
progressing to ramp up biodiesel
consumption from the approximately
380 mill gallons estimated to be used in
the U.S. in 2010 to the volumes that will
be needed in 2011 to meet the biomassbased diesel volume requirement. For
example, Kinder Morgan and the
Renewable Energy Group opened a
substantial biodiesel distribution facility
to serve the Chicago area in December
of 2010.31 Magellan also recently
announced that it plans to complete its
biodiesel blending facility in Sioux Falls
Minnesota in 2011.32 In June of this
year, Sunoco Logistics and Sprague
Energy opened a new terminal facility to
supply biodiesel blended transportation
fuel and heating fuel to New Jersey.33
These new terminal facilities employ
segregated biodiesel storage and
blending capability. Just as there has
been considerable biodiesel production
capacity idled due to lack of demand
which will be brought back on line as
biodiesel volumes ramp up, we believe
that there may also be substantial idled
biodiesel distribution assets that could
be brought back into service. It seems
reasonable to assume that at least some
of the distribution assets used
previously to deliver biodiesel
31 Biodiesel Magazine, November 17, 2010.
https://www.biodieselmagazine.com/articles/4568/
chicago-area-terminal-soon-to-offer-biodiesel.
32 Report to the Legislature, Annual Report on
Biodiesel, Minnesota Department of Agriculture,
January 15, 2011. https://www.mda.state.mn.us/en/
news/government/∼/media/Files/news/govrelations/
legrpt-biodiesel2011.ashx.
33 https://www.tankterminals.com/
news_detail.php?id=1284.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
manufactured at now idled production
plants would still be available.
Of the parties that requested a
reduction in the applicable volume of
1.0 bill gallons for 2012, the American
Trucking Association (ATA) and
Chevron explicitly invoked the waiver
mechanism provided at 211(o)(7)(E).
The full text of this statutory provision
is shown below:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
(E) BIOMASS-BASED DIESEL.—
(i) MARKET EVALUATION.—The
Administrator, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of
Agriculture, shall periodically evaluate the
impact of the biomass-based diesel
requirements established under this
paragraph on the price of diesel fuel.
(ii) WAIVER.—If the Administrator
determines that there is a significant
renewable feedstock disruption or other
market circumstances that would make the
price of biomass-based diesel fuel increase
significantly, the Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary of Energy and
the Secretary of Agriculture, shall issue an
order to reduce, for up to a 60-day period, the
quantity of biomass-based diesel required
under subparagraph (A) by an appropriate
quantity that does not exceed 15 percent of
the applicable annual requirement for
biomass-based diesel. For any calendar year
in which the Administrator makes a
reduction under this subparagraph, the
Administrator may also reduce the applicable
volume of renewable fuel and advanced
biofuels requirement established under
paragraph (2)(B) by the same or a lesser
volume.
(iii) EXTENSIONS.—If the Administrator
determines that the feedstock disruption or
circumstances described in clause (ii) is
continuing beyond the 60-day period
prescribed in clause (ii) or this clause, the
Administrator, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of
Agriculture, may issue an order to reduce, for
up to an additional 60-day period, the
quantity of biomass-based diesel required
under subparagraph (A) by an appropriate
quantity that does not exceed an additional
15 percent of the applicable annual
requirement for biomass-based diesel.
The waiver authority provided in
paragraph 211(o)(7)(E)(ii) is based on an
EPA determination that there ‘‘is’’ a
feedstock disruption or other market
circumstance that would make the price
of biomass-based diesel rise
significantly. The authority to extend a
temporary waiver in paragraph (iii) is
based on an EPA determination that
such disruption or circumstance ‘‘is
continuing.’’ Thus, we believe that any
waiver of the 2012 biomass-based diesel
requirements under this statutory
provision must be based on an
evaluation of feedstock conditions or
other circumstances that exist currently
and ‘‘would make’’ the price of biomass
based diesel rise significantly in 2012. If
Congress had intended that we project
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
future market circumstances that might
lead to significant prices increases, it
could have used ‘‘will be’’ in place of
‘‘is’’ in paragraph 211(o)(7)(E)(ii). Thus,
we believe that any waiver of the
biomass-based diesel requirements for
2012 must be based on a current
evaluation of the market, rather than a
projected one.
We do not believe that the
information provided by Chevron and
ATA warrants a waiver of the 2012
biomass-based diesel volume at this
time. While ATA provided some
information on the relative price of
biodiesel and conventional diesel, it did
not demonstrate how this price
difference represented a price increase
as required under the statute. Also, they
did not cite any particular renewable
feedstock disruption or other market
circumstance to demonstrate how the
difference in price between
conventional diesel fuel and biomassbased diesel meets the statutory
criterion for a significant increase in the
price of biomass-based diesel.
Both Chevron and ATA cite an
expected expiration of the biodiesel tax
credit at the end of 2011 as a reason that
prices will increase significantly. EPA
has not determined whether the
expiration of a tax credit should be
considered a ‘‘market circumstance’’
within the meaning of CAA
211(o)(7)(E)(ii), and is making no
determination regarding that matter at
this time. Whether or not such a
development would be a ‘‘market
circumstance,’’ it is clear that it is not
an existing circumstance, and
conjecture that the tax credit may not be
continued in the future does not provide
an appropriate basis for a waiver under
211(o)(7)(E)(ii). Apart from possible
consideration under the statutory
waiver provisions, however, we note
that the applicable volumes set by
Congress must be met regardless of the
status of Federal or state tax credits,
subsidies, incentives, and the like.
One commenter requested a costbenefit analysis in the context of
determining the appropriate volume for
biomass-based diesel in 2012. Under the
statute, we are to set the percentage
standard for biomass-based diesel for
2012 based on the applicable volume of
1.0 bill gallons specifically set forth in
the statute in CAA 211(o)(2)(B)(IV).
While the statute does provide limited
mechanisms for waiving all or a portion
of any annual biomass-based diesel
standard in 2012 under CAA 211(o)(7),
the statute does not require a costbenefit analysis either in setting a
standard based on the statutory
applicable volume or in considering
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1337
whether or not to issue a waiver. For
instance, under 211(o)(7)(A), waivers
can be granted based on an EPA finding
of severe harm to the economy or
environment of a state, region, or the
United States, or inadequate domestic
supply. Under 211(o)(7)(E) waivers can
be granted based on a significant
renewable feedstock disruption or other
market circumstance that would make
the price of biomass-based diesel fuel
increase significantly. Neither of these
statutory provisions provides for a
comparison of the costs associated with
meeting the biomass-based diesel
standard to the benefits of meeting that
standard. Therefore, we do not believe
that cost-benefit analyses are necessary
or appropriate in the context of
considering the 2012 biomass-based
diesel volume of 1.0 bill gallons.
Based on our review of the production
potential of the biodiesel industry,
projections from several sources, and
our assessment of available feedstocks,
we believe that the 1.0 billion gallons
needed to satisfy the applicable volume
of biomass-based diesel specified in the
statute can be produced in 2012, and
that more than 1.0 bill gallons of
production is possible. Moreover, we do
not believe that waiving a portion of the
2012 biomass-based diesel volume of
1.0 bill gallons under the provisions of
211(o)(7)(E) is appropriate at this time.
III. Final Percentage Standards for 2012
A. Background
The renewable fuel standards are
expressed as a volume percentage, and
are used by each refiner, blender or
importer to determine their renewable
volume obligations (RVO). Since there
are four separate standards under the
RFS2 program, there are likewise four
separate RVOs applicable to each
obligated party. Each standard applies
to the sum of all gasoline and diesel
produced or imported for use in the U.S.
The applicable percentage standards are
set so that if each regulated party meets
the percentages, then the amount of
renewable fuel, cellulosic biofuel,
biomass-based diesel, and advanced
biofuel used will meet the volumes
required on a nationwide basis.
As discussed in Section II.B.6, we are
finalizing a required volume of
cellulosic biofuel for 2012 of 8.65
million gallons (10.45 million ethanol
equivalent gallons). The advanced
biofuel and total renewable fuel
volumes will not be reduced below the
applicable volumes specified in the
statute. The final 2012 volumes used to
determine the four percentage standards
are shown in Table III.A–1.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1338
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III.A–1—FINAL VOLUMES FOR 2012
Ethanol equivalent
volume
Actual volume
Cellulosic biofuel .............................................................
Biomass-based diesel ....................................................
Advanced biofuel ............................................................
Renewable fuel ...............................................................
8.65 mill gal ....................................................................
1.0 bill gal .......................................................................
2.0 bill gal .......................................................................
15.2 bill gal ....................................................................
10.45 mill gal.
1.5 bill gal.
2.0 bill gal.
15.2 bill gal.
fuels, are not subject to the standards,
and volumes of such fuels are not used
in calculating the annual standards.
Since the standards apply to producers
and importers of gasoline and diesel,
these are the transportation fuels used to
set the standards, and then again to
determine the annual volume
obligations of an individual gasoline or
diesel producer or importer.
Where:
StdCB,i = The cellulosic biofuel standard for
year i, in percent.
StdBBD,i = The biomass-based diesel standard
(ethanol-equivalent basis) for year i, in
percent.
StdAB,i = The advanced biofuel standard for
year i, in percent.
StdRF,i = The renewable fuel standard for year
i, in percent.
RFVCB,i = Annual volume of cellulosic
biofuel required by section 211(o) of the
Clean Air Act for year i, in gallons.
RFVBBD,i = Annual volume of biomass-based
diesel required by section 211(o) of the
Clean Air Act for year i, in gallons.
RFVAB,i = Annual volume of advanced
biofuel required by section 211(o) of the
Clean Air Act for year i, in gallons.
RFVRF,i = Annual volume of renewable fuel
required by section 211(o) of the Clean
Air Act for year i, in gallons.
Gi = Amount of gasoline projected to be used
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
Di = Amount of diesel projected to be used
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
RGi = Amount of renewable fuel blended into
gasoline that is projected to be consumed
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
RDi = Amount of renewable fuel blended into
diesel that is projected to be consumed
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
GSi = Amount of gasoline projected to be
used in Alaska or a U.S. territory in year
i if the state or territory opts-in, in
gallons.
RGSi = Amount of renewable fuel blended
into gasoline that is projected to be
consumed in Alaska or a U.S. territory in
year i if the state or territory opts-in, in
gallons.
DSi = Amount of diesel projected to be used
in Alaska or a U.S. territory in year i if
the state or territory opts-in, in gallons.
RDSi = Amount of renewable fuel blended
into diesel that is projected to be
consumed in Alaska or a U.S. territory in
year i if the state or territory opts-in, in
gallons.
GEi = The amount of gasoline projected to be
produced by exempt small refineries and
small refiners in year i, in gallons, in any
year they are exempt per §§ 80.1441 and
80.1442, respectively.
DEi = The amount of diesel projected to be
produced by exempt small refineries and
small refiners in year i, in gallons, in any
year they are exempt per §§ 80.1441 and
80.1442, respectively.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
B. Calculation of Standards
1. How are the standards calculated?
The following formulas are used to
calculate the four percentage standards
applicable to producers and importers
of gasoline and diesel (see § 80.1405):
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
ER09JA12.002
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
The formulas used in deriving the
annual renewable fuel standards are
based in part on estimates of the
volumes of gasoline and diesel fuel, for
both highway and nonroad uses, that
will be used in the year in which the
standards will apply. Producers of other
transportation fuels, such as natural gas,
propane, and electricity from fossil
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
The four separate renewable fuel
standards for 2012 are based in part on
the gasoline and diesel consumption
volumes projected by EIA. The Act
requires EPA to base the standards on
an EIA estimate of the amount of
gasoline and diesel that will be sold or
introduced into commerce for that year.
EIA estimates 8.85 million barrels per
day of gasoline (∼136 billion gallons)
and 3.36 million barrels per day of
transportation diesel (∼ 52 billion
gallons) will be sold or introduced into
commerce in 2012.34 Because diesel
used in ocean-going vessels is excluded
from the RFS2 program, that amount
must be subtracted from the total
projected transportation diesel value.
EIA estimates approximately 26,000
barrels per day of transportation diesel
will be used in ocean-going vessels in
2012, resulting in approximately 3.334
million barrels per day (51.11 billion
gallons) projected for all other
transportation uses in 2012.
The gasoline and diesel volumes are
adjusted to account for renewable fuel
volumes—ethanol (estimated by EIA)
and biodiesel (based on EIA’s ShortTerm Energy Outlook (STEO)). For
2012, these values are 0.87 million
barrels per day (∼13 billion gallons) and
0.119 quadrillion Btu 35 (∼ 0.9 billion
gallons), respectively.
In addition, because Alaska does not
participate in the RFS2 program, the
gasoline and diesel volumes must be
further reduced by Alaska’s projected
share of transportation fuels. To
determine the 49-state values for
gasoline and diesel, the amounts of
these fuels used in Alaska is subtracted
from the totals provided by DOE. Just as
with its corresponding gasoline and
diesel volumes, renewable fuels used in
Alaska are not included in the
renewable fuel volumes that are
subtracted from the total gasoline and
diesel volume estimates. Section 211(o)
of the Clean Air Act requires that the
renewable fuel be consumed in the
contiguous 48 states, and any other state
or territory that opts-in to the program
(as Hawaii has done). However, because
renewable fuel produced in Alaska is
unlikely to be transported to the
contiguous 48 states or to Hawaii,
including Alaska’s renewable fuel
volumes in the calculation of the
standard would not serve the purpose
intended by section 211(o) of the Clean
Air Act of ensuring that the statutorily
required renewable fuel volumes are
consumed in the 48 contiguous states
and any state or territory that opts-in.
1339
The 2012 Alaska fractions of U.S.
consumption are determined from the
most recent (2009) EIA State Energy
Data System (SEDS) estimates, assuming
fairly constant Alaska to U.S. year-toyear ratios. We used Table CT1 ‘‘Energy
Consumption Estimates for Major
Energy Sources in Physical Units, 1960–
2009, Alaska’’ to get total gasoline and
ethanol consumption for Alaska for
2009. We coupled this data with total
U.S. estimates from Table C2 ‘‘Energy
Consumption Estimates for Major
Energy Sources in Physical Units, 2009’’
to determine the corresponding Alaska
fractions. The gasoline fraction is
approximately 0.2%. Ethanol use in
Alaska is estimated at 8.4% of its
gasoline consumption (based on the
data in Table CT1), or approximately
0.2% of national ethanol consumption.
Because only transportation diesel fuel
is subject to the RFS program, we need
more specific data than that used to
calculate the gasoline and ethanol
fractions. We used data from Table C8
‘‘Transportation Sector Energy
Consumption Estimates, 2009’’ to
calculate the Alaska transportation
distillate fuel oil fraction, 0.8%.
Biodiesel use is assumed to be zero. The
Alaska and U.S. data just described are
shown in Table III.B–1.
TABLE III.B–1—ALASKA AND U.S. DATA
Alaska
6725 Mbbl a ...............................................
565 Mbbl a .................................................
46.1 tBtu c .................................................
Motor Gasoline ..........................................
Fuel Ethanol ..............................................
Transportation Distillate ............................
U.S.
3283.7 MMbbl b .........................................
262.8 MMbbl b ...........................................
5528.3 tBtu c .............................................
Alaska
fractionx
(in percent)
0.2
0.2
0.8
a Source: EIA State Energy Data System, Table CT1 ‘‘Energy Consumption Estimates for Major Energy Sources in Physical Units, 1960–2009,
Alaska’’.
b Source: EIA State Energy Data System, Table C2 ‘‘Energy Consumption Estimates for Major Energy Sources in Physical Units, 2009’’.
c Source: EIA State Energy Data System, Table C8 ‘‘Transportation Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2009’’.
x Calculated value.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2. Small Refineries and Small Refiners
In CAA section 211(o)(9), enacted as
part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005,
Congress provided a temporary
exemption to small refineries (those
refineries with a crude throughput of no
more than 75,000 barrels of crude per
day) through December 31, 2010. In
RFS1, we exercised our discretion under
section 211(o)(3)(B) and extended this
temporary exemption to the few
remaining small refiners that met the
Small Business Administration’s (SBA)
definition of a small business (1,500
34 Letter, Howard K. Gruenspecht, Acting
Administrator, U.S. Energy Information
Administration, to Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 19,
2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
employees or less company-wide) but
did not meet the statutory small refinery
definition as noted above. Because EISA
did not alter the small refinery
exemption in any way, the RFS2
program regulations exempted gasoline
and diesel produced by small refineries
and small refiners in 2010 from the
renewable fuels standard (unless the
exemption was waived), see 40 CFR
80.1141.
Under the RFS program, Congress
provided two ways that small refineries
can receive a temporary extension of the
exemption beyond 2010. One is based
on the results of a study conducted by
the Department of Energy (DOE) to
determine if small refineries would face
a disproportionate economic hardship
under the RFS program. The other is
based on EPA determination of
disproportionate economic hardship on
a case-by-case basis in response to
refiner petitions.
In January 2009, DOE issued a study
which did not find that small refineries
would face a disproportionate economic
hardship under the RFS program.36 The
conclusions were based in part on the
expected robust availability of RINs and
35 Table 8 ‘‘U.S. Renewable Energy Supply and
Consumption,’’ Short Term Energy Outlook, U.S.
Energy Information Administration, October 2011.
36 DOE report ‘‘EPACT 2005 Section 1501 Small
Refineries Exemption Study’’, (January, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1340
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
EPA’s ability to grant relief on a case-bycase basis. As a result, beginning in
2011 small refiners and small refineries
were required to participate in the RFS
program as obligated parties, and there
was no small refiner/refinery volume
adjustment to the 2011 standard as there
was for the 2010 standard.
Following the release of DOE’s 2009
small refinery study, Congress directed
DOE to complete a reassessment and
issue a revised report. DOE recently reevaluated the impacts of the RFS
program on small entities and
concluded that 21 small refineries
would suffer a disproportionate
hardship if required to participate in the
program.37 As a result, these refineries
will be exempt from being obligated
parties for a minimum of two additional
years, 2011 and 2012.38 In 2009, the
gasoline produced by refineries
identified in the DOE report as well as
those refineries exempted through the
petition process constituted
approximately 3.6% of total US
gasoline, and 4.5% of total US diesel.
Applying these percentages to the 2012
projections of gasoline and diesel
volumes yields exempt small refinery
gasoline volume of 4.87 billion gallons
and diesel volume of 2.28 billion
gallons.
CAA section 211(o) requires that the
small refinery adjustment also account
for renewable fuels used during the
prior year by small refineries that are
exempt and do not participate in the
RFS2 program. Accounting for this
volume of renewable fuel would reduce
the total volume of renewable fuel use
required of others, and thus
directionally would reduce the
percentage standard. However, as we
discussed in RFS1, the amount of
renewable fuel that would qualify, i.e.,
that was used by exempt small
refineries but not used as part of the
RFS program, is expected to be very
small. In fact, these volumes would not
significantly change the resulting
percentage standards. Whatever
renewable fuels small refineries blend
will be reflected as RINs available in the
market; thus there is no need for a
separate accounting of their renewable
fuel use in the equations used to
determine the standards. Thus we
assign a value of zero to small refinery
renewable fuel use.
37 ‘‘Small Refinery Exemption Study: An
Investigation into Disproportionate Economic
Hardship,’’ U.S. Department of Energy, March 2011.
38 Since the standards are applied on an annual
basis, the exemptions are likewise on an annual
basis even though the determination of which
refineries would receive an extension to their
exemption did not occur until after January 1, 2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
The 2012 standards reflect the
exemption of these refineries. In
addition, and separate from the DOE
determination, EPA may extend the
exemption for individual small
refineries on a case-by-case basis if they
demonstrate disproportionate economic
hardship.
In the NPRM, we stated that ‘‘requests
for exemptions that are approved after
the release of the final 2012 RFS
standards will not affect the 2012
standards.’’ This position is unchanged
from that set in the final rule
establishing the 2011 standards.39 At
that time, we stated, ‘‘EPA believes the
Act is best interpreted to require
issuance of a single annual standard in
November that is applicable in the
following calendar year, thereby
providing advance notice and certainty
to obligated parties regarding their
regulatory requirements. Periodic
revisions to the standards to reflect
waivers issued to small refineries or
refiners would be inconsistent with the
statutory text, and would introduce an
undesirable level of uncertainty for
obligated parties.’’ However, a few
commenters took issue with this
approach. Specifically, these
commenters maintain that EPA did not
provide notice and comment
opportunities regarding the extensions
of the small refinery exemptions for the
current compliance period (2011), and
that EPA cannot grant such extensions
(mid-year) without modifying the
standards because such authority is not
provided in the statute. In addition,
these commenters extend the
application of their comments to any
extensions of exemptions that may
occur after issuance of the final 2012
standards. Commenters suggested
requiring petitions to be submitted in
time to be considered in the annual
standard-setting process. One
commenter also suggested that the
volumes waived in 2011 as a result of
the small refiner waivers be ‘‘made up’’
in setting the 2012 standards. EPA
understands the desire of the
commenters to have the annual required
volumes of renewable fuels realized.
However, while the statute requires EPA
to publish the standards for the
following year by November 30 of the
preceding year, there is no provision for
changing the percentage standards once
they are set outside of the waiver
provisions of CAA 211(o)(7). In
addition, we are not required to ensure
that the biofuel volumes in the statute
are precisely met. We are required to
use the specified volumes to set the
percentage standards, but there are no
39 See
PO 00000
75 FR 76805, December 9, 2010.
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
provisions for ensuring that the
percentage standards actually result in
the specified volumes actually being
consumed. This outcome is evidenced
by the fact that we use projections of
gasoline and diesel volume for the next
year which might turn out to be too high
or too low. Insofar as those projections
are wrong, the percentage standards will
not produce a demand for biofuels that
exactly corresponds to the volumes in
the statute. Thus Congress allowed for
some imprecision to exist in the actual
volumes of renewable fuel that are
consumed as a result of the percentage
standards that we set each November,
and did not provide a means for
correcting the percentage standards after
November to ensure that the applicable
volumes of renewable fuel are exactly
met in a given compliance year.
3. Final Percentage Standards
As finalized in the March 26, 2010
RFS2 rule, the standards are expressed
in terms of energy-equivalent gallons of
renewable fuel, with the cellulosic
biofuel, advanced biofuel, and total
renewable fuel standards based on
ethanol equivalence and the biomassbased diesel standard based on biodiesel
equivalence. However, all RIN
generation is based on ethanolequivalence. More specifically, the
RFS2 regulations provide that
production or import of a gallon of
biodiesel will lead to the generation of
1.5 RINs. In order to ensure that demand
for 1.0 billion physical gallons of
biomass-based diesel will be created in
2012, the calculation of the biomassbased diesel standard provides that the
required volume be multiplied by 1.5.
The net result is a biomass-based diesel
gallon being worth 1.0 gallons toward
the biomass-based diesel standard, but
worth 1.5 gallons toward the other
standards.40
The levels of the percentage standards
would be reduced if Alaska or a U.S.
territory chooses to participate in the
RFS2 program, as gasoline and diesel
produced in or imported into that state
or territory would then be subject to the
standard. Neither Alaska nor any U.S.
territory has chosen to participate in the
RFS2 program at this time, and thus the
value of the related terms in the
calculation of the standards is zero.
Note that the terms for projected
volumes of gasoline and diesel use
include gasoline and diesel that has
been blended with renewable fuel.
Because the gasoline and diesel volumes
estimated by EIA include renewable fuel
use, we must subtract the total
renewable fuel volume from the total
40 75
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
FR 14716, March 26, 2010.
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
gasoline and diesel volume to get total
non-renewable gasoline and diesel
volumes, as discussed earlier. The
values of the variables described above
are shown in Table III.B.3–2. Terms not
included in this table have a value of
zero.
TABLE III.B.3–2—VALUES FOR TERMS
IN CALCULATION OF THE STANDARDS
[Bill gal]
Term
Value
RFVCB,2012 .................................
RFVBBD,2012 ..............................
RFVAB,2012 ................................
RFVRF,2012 .................................
G2012 .........................................
D2012 ..........................................
GE2012 .......................................
DE2012 .......................................
RG2012 .......................................
RD2012 .......................................
0.01045
1.0
2.0
15.20
135.39
50.68
4.87
2.28
13.31
0.93
1341
these problems and to amend regulatory
language that inadvertently
misrepresented our intent as reflected in
the preamble to the final RFS2
regulations. In addition, as we have
TABLE III.B.3–3—FINAL PERCENTAGE worked with regulated parties to ensure
that the RFS program is operating as
STANDARDS FOR 2012
intended, we identified areas in the
Cellulosic biofuel ...........................
0.006% regulations that could benefit from
Biomass-based diesel ..................
0.91% streamlining. We also identified one
Advanced biofuel ..........................
1.21% provision in the gasoline benzene
Renewable fuel .............................
9.23% regulations that misrepresented our
intent as stated in the preamble. As a
IV. Changes to RFS2 Regulations
result, we are finalizing a number of
As the RFS2 program got underway in amendments to the RFS regulations, and
one amendment to the gasoline benzene
the second half of 2010, we discovered
that a number of regulatory provisions
regulations, in 40 CFR Part 80.
were causing confusion among
A. Summary of Amendments
regulated parties. In some cases the
confusion was due to a lack of
Below is a table listing the provisions
specificity in terms, while in others it
that we are amending in today’s action.
was due to unique circumstances that
We have provided additional
were not sufficiently addressed in the
explanation for several of these
RFS2 regulations. A few amendments
amendments in Sections IV.B through
are being finalized in order to correct
IV.F below.
Using the volumes shown in Table
III.B.3–2, we have calculated the
percentage standards for 2012 as shown
in Table III.B.3–3.
TABLE IV.A–1—SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS
Section
Description
80.1275(d)(3) ............................................................................
Removed to allow for the inclusion of transferred blendstocks in the calculation of
benzene early credits.
Amended definition of ‘‘annual cover crop’’ to clarify that the crop has no existing
market to which it can be sold except for its use as feedstock for the production of renewable fuel.
Amended definition of ‘‘naphtha’’ to clarify that it applies to hydrocarbons only,
must be commonly or commercially known as naphtha, and is used for producing gasoline.
Amended to state the standards for 2012 and the date of the annual standards
calculation.
Amended terms ‘‘GEi’’ and ‘‘DEi’’ to reference the amount of gasoline and/or diesel produced by small refineries and small refiners that are exempt pursuant to
§§ 80.1441 and 80.1442.
Amended to state the specific requirements needed for technical justifications for
applications for Equivalence Values.
Corrected typographical error in cross reference to paragraph (f)(6) of § 80.1426.
Amended requirements so that the separated yard waste plans and separated
food waste plans need not be approved by EPA, but instead only need to be
accepted by EPA under the registration provisions.
Amended to clarify that ‘‘fossil-based’’ diesel fuel is different from renewable diesel fuel.
Amended to include RIN separation limitations on parties whose non-export
RVOs are solely related to imports of gasoline and diesel or the use of
blendstocks to produce gasoline or diesel.
Amended Production Outlook Report due date; added allowance for unregistered
renewable fuel producers and importers to submit Production Outlook Reports.
Amended to add more specificity on when updates, addenda, or resubmittals are
required for engineering reviews and to include references to foreign ethanol
producers.
Amended to clarify that this section references RFS1 RINs retired for compliance.
Corrected typographical error.
Amended to clarify that a RIN-generating importer must submit to EMTS the EPA
facility registration number of the facility at which the renewable fuel producer
or foreign ethanol producer produced the batch.
Amended to clarify that for imports of renewable fuel, the RIN-generator must
submit to EMTS the EPA facility registration number of the importer that imported the batch.
Adds the existing prohibition against generating a RIN for fuel for which RINs
have previously been generated.
Added to clarify that auditors must verify that product transfer documents for RIN
transactions contain the required information for obligated parties/exporters
and for renewable fuel producers/importers.
80.1401 .....................................................................................
80.1401 .....................................................................................
80.1405(a), (b), and (d) ............................................................
80.1405(c) ................................................................................
80.1415(c)(2) ............................................................................
80.1426(f)(1) .............................................................................
80.1426(f)(5)(ii) .........................................................................
80.1429(b)(2) ............................................................................
80.1429(b)(9) ............................................................................
80.1449(a) ................................................................................
80.1450(d)(1)–(d)(3) .................................................................
80.1451(a)(1)(xi) .......................................................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
80.1452(b)(2) ............................................................................
80.1452(b)(4) ............................................................................
§ 80.1452(b)(5) .........................................................................
80.1460(b)(6) ............................................................................
80.1464(a)(2)(iii), (a)(2)(iv), (b)(2)(iii), (b)(2)(iv), (c)(1)(iii), and
(c)(1)(iv).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1342
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE IV.A–1—SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS—Continued
Section
Description
80.1464(a)(2)(i), (a)(3)(ii), (b)(2)(i), (b)(3)(ii) ............................
Amended to clarify that auditors must validate RIN separations for obligated parties/exporters and for renewable fuel producers/importers; amended to correct
typographical error.
Amended to remove the option of using an alternative commitment in lieu of paying a bond and to clarify the amount of bond a foreign entity must post.
80.1465(h)(2); 80.1466(h)(2); and 80.1467(e)(1), (e)(2), and
(g)(2).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
There are also two changes to Table
1 to § 80.1426 that we proposed in the
July 1, 2011 NPRM that we are not
finalizing in today’s action, but which
instead will be finalized in a separate
action. The first change would amend
the table to include ID letters for each
pathway to facilitate references to
specific pathways. The second change
would add ‘‘rapeseed’’ to the existing
pathway that currently allows canola oil
to be used as a valid feedstock in the
production of biodiesel. These two
changes are being finalized in a separate
action in order to ensure that multiple
changes to Table 1 to § 80.1426 that are
made sequentially do not inadvertently
result in later changes over-writing
earlier changes.
B. Technical Justification for
Equivalence Value Application
A producer or importer of renewable
fuels is required to submit an
equivalence value (EV) application in
accordance with § 80.1415(c) for any
renewable fuel that does not have an EV
listed in § 80.1415(b). In addition, a
producer or importer could apply for an
alternative EV if the producer or
importer has reason to believe that a
different EV than that listed in
§ 80.1415(b) is warranted. Section
80.1415(c) provides the calculation
equation for the EV of the renewable
fuel and the requirements for the
technical justification to be submitted in
the EV application.
We have received many inquires from
producers and importers of renewable
fuels requesting clarification of the
specific requirements for the technical
justification listed in § 80.1415(c). In
addition, based on the many EV
applications we have evaluated, we
have found that we needed to request
additional information from producers
and importers to better understand the
composition of the renewable fuel they
produced, such as intermediate steps
and energy inputs in production
process, sources of renewable and nonrenewable feedstock, and so forth, to
better evaluate and assign the correct EV
to the producer or importer’s renewable
fuel.
Therefore, we are finalizing in this
rulemaking amendments to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
§ 80.1415(c)(2) to clarify the current
requirements and to include additional
requirements for the technical
justification to be submitted in the EV
application. The final amendments to
§ 80.1415(c)(2) include:
—A calculation for the requested
equivalence value according to the
equation in § 80.1415(c)(1), including
supporting documentation for the
energy content (EC) of the renewable
fuel such as a certificate of analysis
from a laboratory that verifies the
lower heating value in Btu per gallon
of the renewable fuel produced.
—For each feedstock, component or
additive used to make the renewable
fuel, provide a description, the
percent input and identify whether or
not it is renewable biomass or is
derived from renewable biomass.
—For each feedstock that could
independently qualify as a renewable
fuel, state whether or not RINs have
been previously generated for the
feedstock.
—A description of renewable fuel and
the production process, including a
block diagram that shows quantities
of all inputs and outputs required at
each step of the production process
for the production of one batch of
renewable fuel.
We received no adverse comments on
our proposed changes to § 80.1415(c)(2),
and so are finalizing the changes as
proposed.
C. Changes to Definitions of Terms
1. Definition of Annual Cover Crop
As explained in the preamble of the
RFS2 final rulemaking, EPA extended
modeling for cellulosic biofuel made
from corn stover and biodiesel/
renewable diesel made from waste oils/
fats/greases to certain fuels made from
annual cover crops, based on the
expectation that cultivation of annual
cover crops, as defined in § 80.1401,
will have little impact on the
agricultural commodity markets and
therefore little or no land use impact
associated with them. Therefore, certain
fuels (as specified in Table 1 to
§ 80.1426) derived from annual cover
crop feedstocks qualify for D-codes
under the advanced biofuel, biomass-
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
based diesel, and cellulosic renewable
fuel categories.
Section 80.1401 of the final RFS2 rule
defines ‘‘annual cover crop.’’ We
proposed to amend the definition of
annual cover crop in order to more
clearly define those feedstocks that meet
the intent of including cover crops in
several pathways in Table 1 to
§ 80.1426.
As explained in the proposal, in order
to extend our modeling to cover crops,
we used the rationale that annual cover
crops would have no indirect land use
impact since they are planted on land
otherwise used for crop production.
Direct greenhouse gas emissions would
only be associated with growing,
harvesting and transporting the cover
crop, and then processing into biofuel.
(See 75 FR 14794 col. 3.) These direct
impacts could include requiring the
farmer to use more commercial fertilizer
in compensation for removing cover
crops that would have been plowed into
the field, or in decreasing yield of food
crops. However, our determination that
cover crops qualified for D-codes under
the advanced biofuel, biomass-based
diesel, and cellulosic renewable fuel
categories was based on the fact that
they did not have any indirect impacts.
Thus, we assumed that no additional
land would be required to plant annual
cover crops, that cover crops would not
displace primary crop production, and
that the use of the cover crop as a
feedstock for renewable fuels would not
have secondary impacts on other
agricultural commodity markets. This
implies that annual cover crops would
not be planted and harvested for the
purpose of being sold to existing
markets. If a cover crop already had an
existing market, then the increased use
of cover crops as feedstocks for
renewable fuel production could
potentially impact the existing markets.
Therefore, we proposed to amend the
current definition for ‘‘annual cover
crop’’ to clarify that for purposes of the
RFS program the term only includes
crops that have no existing market to
which they can be sold except for the
use of the feedstock for renewable fuel.
This will ensure that no unintended
land use or significant indirect effects
result from the use of annual cover
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
crops as feedstocks for renewable fuel
production.
Several parties commented against
this change, stating that it is too
restrictive and thus would prevent some
crops they considered cover crops from
qualifying as eligible feedstock under
the RFS2 program. While this change
clarifies that crops having existing
market impacts would not qualify as
cover crops, such exclusion is
consistent with the basis for including
the cover crop provision. EPA
determined that crops with no market
value could be planted on land without
any expected impact on other crops and
thus no expected indirect land use
impact. This amendment clarifies that
only crops with no market impact can
qualify as cover crops and is consistent
with the underlying analysis. However,
even if a crop does not qualify under
this revised cover crop definition, that
does not prevent it from being included
as an eligible feedstock under the RFS2
program. As stated in the proposal, EPA
recognizes that there may be additional
fuel pathways requiring lifecycle
greenhouse gas (GHG) assessments and
the assignment of appropriate RIN D–
Codes, including those using feedstocks
that do not meet the proposed amended
definition of annual cover crop. For
further guidance on the process for
requesting EPA evaluation of new fuel
pathways, please refer to the following
sites:
https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/compliancehelp/rfs2lca-pathways.htm
https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/compliancehelp/lcapetition-instructions.htm#1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2. Definition of ‘‘Naphtha’’
In the RFS2 final rule, we included
several RIN-generating pathways in
Table 1 to § 80.1426 for naphtha made
from renewable biomass. We also
provided a definition of naphtha in
§ 80.1401. However, the definition we
finalized was overly broad and did not
adequately represent our intent to limit
naphtha to gasoline blendstocks. As a
result, some biofuel producers have
expressed interest in interpreting the
term ‘‘naphtha’’ to include materials
that, while falling within the boiling
range of gasoline, are not used as a
blendstock to produce gasoline.
To remedy this situation, we
proposed to revise the definition of
naphtha to also specify that it applies
only to blendstocks which are
composed of only hydrocarbons, are
commonly or commercially known as
naphtha, and are used to produce
gasoline. We received no adverse
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
comments on this proposal, and so are
finalizing it as proposed.
D. Technical Amendments Related to
RIN Generation and Separation
1. RIN Separation Limit for Obligated
Parties
We proposed to amend section
§ 80.1429(b)(9) to limit the amount of
RINs a company who is an obligated
party solely by virtue of importation of
obligated fuel can separate to meet their
Renewable Volume Obligation (RVO).
This proposal was designed to prevent
abuse of the obligated party RIN
separation provision by a company that
imports a relatively small amount of an
obligated volume, but then separates a
large amount of RINs. It was also
designed to help prevent hoarding of
RINs by parties that do not need them
for compliance purposes, and to
generally increase the liquidity of RINs.
EPA structured the original RFS1
separation regulations around
facilitating compliance by obligated
parties who must acquire RINs to meet
their RVOs. This change is consistent
with the original design and also
ensures that importers can separate
enough RINs to meet their obligations.
Overall, commenters were against this
amendment with many companies
indicating that they are currently taking
advantage of the ability to separate all
RINs in their possession if they are an
obligated party solely related to their
gasoline and/or diesel imports, and that
they wish to continue to do so.
One commenter opposed this change,
stating that the RIN life limitation
would prevent hoarding. EPA does not
agree with this; the life of a RIN
prevents use for compliance after a
designated amount of time, see
§ 80.1447(a)(6), this does not provide an
adequate mechanism to prevent
hoarding of RINs.
Several commenters stated that the
carryover provisions prevent RIN
hoarding. EPA does not agree; the
carryover provisions, § 80.1428(a)(5),
refer only to the ratio of assigned RINs
to volumes of renewable fuel owned at
the end of a quarter. There is no limit
on the amount of separated RINs that a
party may own at the end of a quarter.
Several commenters stated that
market liquidity would decrease if
obligated importers could not separate
all RINs that they own. They also stated
that RINs will be held by fewer
obligated parties. We believe that
market liquidity would not be
decreased; RIN separation would still
occur according to § 80.1429 and
obligated parties would still have access
to the separated RINs needed for
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1343
compliance. In fact, to the extent that
the provision prevents RIN hoarding, as
intended, it should increase RIN
liquidity. EPA has determined that this
will not change or limit who can
participate in the RFS program or
become an obligated party; it will only
limit the number of RINs that certain
importers can separate. In addition,
these obligated importers and any other
RIN owning party can separate RINs
without being subject to the limitation
in § 80.1429(b)(9) for any of the reasons
outlined in § 80.1429(b)(2)–(b)(5) and
(b)(8).
One commenter was concerned about
how an obligated importer would know
how many RINs they could separate for
‘‘receipt of fuel by an obligated party’’
noting that they will not know their
exact RVO until the end of the
compliance year. EPA believes that
obligated importers should separate
RINs on the basis of ‘‘receipt of fuel by
an obligated party’’ only to the extent
necessary to meet their existing
obligation.
One commenter felt that the proposed
amendment would limit the actual
capacity of an importer to introduce a
volume of renewable fuel into the
marketplace. EPA does not agree with
this statement and believes that limiting
RIN separation using the reason ‘‘receipt
of fuel by an obligated party’’ would not
reduce the amount of renewable fuel
that is in demand and may be sold.
One commenter requested
confirmation of the following statement:
‘‘this change would, in no way, limit the
right of a company to separate RINs
from renewable fuel if that entity is
acting as a blender and blending
renewable fuel into transportation,
heating fuel or jet fuel.’’ EPA confirms
the previous statement with one
clarification. Amended § 80.1429
applies ‘‘except as provided in
paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(5) and
(b)(8).’’ Since the obligation for blenders
to separate RINs for renewable fuel that
they blend to produce a transportation
fuel, heating oil or jet fuel appears in
(b)(2), the limitations in (b)(9) are not
applicable to RIN separations pursuant
to that provision. We clarify, however,
that (b)(2) applies to blending ‘‘to
produce’’ a transportation fuel, heating
oil or jet fuel. For example, blending
biodiesel at a rate of 5% into motor
vehicle diesel fuel would produce a
transportation fuel.
One commenter indicated that this
method of separation helped companies
that did not want to be involved with
the RFS program; allowing obligated
importers to transfer renewable fuel
without RINs and not violating the
quarterly check outlined in
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1344
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
§ 80.1428(a)(5). EPA notes that all
parties have the ability to separate up to
2.5 RINs per gallon pursuant to
§ 80.1429. This amendment, which will
limit obligated importers’ ability to
separate RINs, would not change this
feature. This provision could facilitate
the transfer of fuel with separated RINs
to parties not wishing to receive RINs.
Also, small blenders have the ability to
delegate all RIN related responsibilities
to the party directly upstream as long as
they are blending less than 125,000
gallons of renewable fuel per year
(§ 80.1440). In addition to separating up
to their RVO, obligated importers and
any other RIN owning party can
separate for any of the reasons outlined
in § 80.1429(b)(2)–(b)(5) and (b)(8)
without being subject to the limitation
in (b)(9).
One commenter argued that the
ability to separate as an obligated
importer allowed them more flexibility
with RIN transfer dates. EPA believes
that this implies that the party uses its
ability to separate to avoid the
requirement in § 80.1428(a)(3) ‘‘an
assigned RIN cannot be transferred to
another person without simultaneously
transferring a volume of renewable fuel
to that same person.’’ The commenter
indicated that a reason for becoming an
obligated importer is to be able to
separate all RINs and avoid the
previously referenced regulatory
requirement. This also allows them to
remain in compliance with the EMTS
transaction reporting time frames laid
out on § 80.1452(c). EPA believes that
transfer date and the ability to transfer
separated RINs without renewable fuel
are not relevant to this amendment. The
commenter’s use of the provision is
counter to how the program was set up
to ensure the distribution of RINs and
could be used not only to slow the
transfer of RINs downstream to the
blender or final user of the renewable
fuel, but also allow hoarding. The
commenter also stated that there is no
requirement to report physical fuel
inventory and number of assigned RINs
(§ 80.1428(a)(5)). EPA has determined
that this statement is not accurate
pursuant to § 80.1451. Currently,
§ 80.1451(c)(2)(xiv), requires the volume
of renewable fuel owned at the end of
the quarter. This volume must meet the
requirements of § 80.1428(a)(5).
EPA believes that while commenters
were mainly against the amendment,
specific arguments presented supported
EPAs reason for the amendment. For the
reasons stated above, we are finalizing
the regulatory changes as proposed.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
2. RIN Retirement Provision for Error
Correction
As we stated in the proposal, in some
instances, renewable fuel producers or
importers may improperly generate
RINs in EMTS as a result of calculation
errors, meter malfunctions or clerical
errors. Pursuant to § 80.1431(a),
improperly generated RINs are invalid,
and cannot be used to achieve
compliance with any Renewable
Volume Obligations (RVOs).
EPA sought comment on the
possibility of amending § 80.1431 to
provide the regulated community with
limited flexibility to allow certain RINs
that were improperly generated to
nevertheless be transferred and used for
compliance, provided the RIN-generator
retires equivalent RINs (the same
quantity and fuel category (D-code) of
RINs with the same RIN year) in order
to make the market whole.
We sought comment on whether EPA
should amend the regulations to include
the flexibility for EPA to allow
improperly generated RINs to be used
for compliance, whether the conditions
set forth in the proposal were
appropriate, and whether there are
additional or alternative conditions that
should be imposed if the flexibility were
to be granted. We proposed that the
following general limitations should
apply to any flexibility to allow
improperly generated RINs to be
transferred and used for compliance: (1)
The RINs must have been improperly
generated as a result of an inadvertent
error, (2) the improperly generated RINs
must have the correct D code, (3) the
RIN generator must correct the
information submitted to EMTS and
retire an equivalent number and type of
any excess RINs that were generated as
a result of the error within a fixed time
period of 60 days, (4) the flexibility to
allow improperly generated RINs to be
used for compliance would only apply
if the number of excess RINs generated
for a particular batch exceeds the
number of RINs that should have been
generated by no more than two percent,
and (5) the flexibility to allow
improperly generated RINs to be used
for compliance should be limited to a
certain number of times per year per
RIN generator.
We received several comments in
support of providing EPA with some
sort of flexibility to allow improperly
generated RINs to be used for
compliance, and a few comments that
did not support EPA providing any
flexibility of this type. Supporters of the
flexibility believe that this flexibility is
necessary for good faith RIN generators
who have made inadvertent mistakes.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
They argue that the flexibility will avoid
time spent by both EPA and regulated
parties tracking invalidly generated
RINs to their current owner when
equivalent RINs could be retired to
make the system whole. Commenters
believe EPA’s time is better spent
investigating more egregious violations.
Many supporters of the flexibility,
however, believe that, given the
proposed limitations, the proposed
flexibility would be too narrow.
Commenters believe that EPA should
take into consideration the totality of
the circumstances, including the
number of RINs/percent of the batch
that are invalid, the frequency of
improper generation on the part of the
producer and indications of good faith
mistake when determining whether to
allow the flexibility for improperly
generated RINs to be used for
compliance, rather than imposing strict
limitations on the use of the flexibility.
EPA believes that providing this type
of flexibility will reduce disruptions to
the RIN market while continuing to
apply appropriate pressure on parties
that generate, transfer and use RINs to
comply with the regulations. However,
EPA disagrees with the commenters that
advocated that the flexibility should be
unlimited. EPA believes that by limiting
the use of this flexibility, RIN generators
are provided an incentive to implement
and utilize measures and controls to
ensure the validly of information sent to
EMTS in a more timely manner.
Therefore, in today’s rule in 80.1431(c)
and (d), EPA is finalizing an approach
that provides flexibility to RIN
generators to retire equivalent RINs in
situations where they have overgenerated RINs on a batch due a broken
meter, an inadvertent temperature
correction error, or an inadvertent
administrative error. This flexibility
may only be used under certain
conditions, though, in order to mitigate
harm to the RIN market, as specified in
the regulations and discussed in detail
below.
Some commenters supported the
proposed 60-day time allowance for a
RIN generator to correct RIN generation
information submitted to EMTS. The
commenters believe 60 days is sufficient
to identify and correct inadvertent
mistakes, and the time limit provides an
incentive for the regulated community
to regularly verify that RINs have been
correctly generated. On the other hand,
another commenter thought that the
correction period should be longer than
60 days. One commenter suggested 18
months for RIN generators to notify EPA
of improperly generated RINs at which
point EPA would determine whether to
allow those invalid RINs to be used for
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
compliance. The commenter believed
this would allow invalid RINs to be
discovered during the attest audit
conducted each year concerning the
renewable fuel producer’s compliance
records.
Additionally, commenters generally
disagreed with EPA’s proposal to limit
the flexibility to situations where the
number of excess RINs generated for a
particular batch exceeds the number of
RINs that should have been generated
by no more than 2%. Commenters
argued that a simple typing error in any
digit can easily result in an overgeneration that far exceeds 2%. One
commenter suggested that the number of
RINs eligible for the flexibility be
limited to no more than 2% of a specific
RVO category (e.g. Cellulosic Biofuel,
Advanced Biofuel, etc.) for any given
year. Another suggested that there is no
reason to limit the flexibility this way,
and that EPA should maintain
discretion to determine when invalid
RINs can be used for compliance,
regardless of what percentage of the RIN
batch is invalid. The commenter states
that there is no reasonable equitable
basis for limiting the availability of the
flexibility to situations involving an
error of no more than 2%, since there
can be significant variability in the size
of renewable fuel batches; for example,
2% of a large batch could consist of
more RINs than an entire batch for a
smaller facility.
In today’s final rule, EPA did not limit
the ability to use the flexibility to a
certain number of RINs or percentage of
a batch as proposed because we agree
with commenters’ suggestion that a
simple typing or meter error may result
in a large number of excess RINs just as
easily as it could result in an error that
constitutes only a small number of RINs.
EPA’s decision to eliminate the two
percent limitation may result in more
regulated parties taking advantage of the
flexibility created by this rule.
Nevertheless, EPA is limiting the use of
the flexibility to situations in which RIN
generators who improperly overgenerated RINs on a batch fit certain
criteria, including taking remedial
action to retire equivalent RINs within
30 days of the original invalid RIN
generation submission in EMTS, as
specified in 80.1431(c)(7). EPA believes
that it is appropriate to require RIN
generators to correct the information
submitted to EMTS within 30 days to
encourage the regulated community to
take prompt corrective action, which
will aid in maintaining market integrity.
EPA believes that limiting the amount of
time that RIN generators are afforded to
avail themselves of this flexibility is
necessary to provide an incentive to RIN
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
generators to conduct timely internal
inspections of their RIN generation
activities in order to ensure that RINs
are properly generated and the accuracy
of RIN information in EMTS.
We also sought comment on the
possibility of establishing a limit on the
number of times this flexibility could be
requested within a compliance period
by a given RIN generator. We stated that
we believe such a limitation could
encourage RIN generators to take
appropriate measures to avoid
generating invalid RINs, and limit the
possibility that RIN generators would
intentionally generate invalid RINs to
take advantage of short term RIN price
spikes. Some commenters argued that
there should not be a limit on the
number of times a RIN generator can
request EPA allow them to use the
flexibility, but that if a particular
company regularly generates RINs
improperly, that company should be
penalized on a case-by-case basis, taking
into account whether the error was truly
a mistake made in good faith.
EPA disagrees with commenters’
belief that RIN generators should have
unlimited access to these flexibilities.
EPA believes that the flexibility should
be limited to a set number (namely, five)
of improperly generated batches per
year and is finalizing regulations to that
effect in 80.1431(c)(6). By limiting the
number of times a RIN generator may
utilize the flexibility to retire equivalent
RINs, the regulations will encourage
RIN generators to implement robust
measures and controls to prevent errors
from occurring, knowing that the
flexibility is only available to them for
five batches each compliance year.
Additionally, limiting the number of
batches to which this flexibility can be
applied restricts the ability of RIN
generators that might otherwise
intentionally generate invalid RINs to
take advantage of short term RIN price
spikes.
Finally, EPA is finalizing a provision
informing the regulated community that
EPA intends to publicly post
information concerning RIN generators
utilizing this flexibility in
80.1431(c)(7)(B). By posting this
information, EPA is assisting obligated
and other regulated parties in their due
diligence to ensure compliance with all
RFS2 regulations. EPA believes that
posting information concerning the use
of this flexibility will incentivize proper
RIN generation in the future.
Further, EPA may remove improperly
generated RINs from EMTS if the RIN
generator has failed to properly meet the
remedial action requirements stated in
the regulations, as specified in
80.1431(d). EPA believes this will
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1345
prevent invalid RINs that do not meet
the requirements in 80.1431(c) from
propagating through the market and
being used for compliance purposes,
thus preventing additional violations.
While EPA is aware that the proposal
did not include the ability to remove
improperly generated RINs, EPA
believes this ability is a logical
outgrowth from the comments that EPA
should spend more time investigating
egregious violations. This provision will
allow EPA to quickly remove from the
market those RINs reported by the RIN
generator to be invalid due to reasons in
80.1431(c)(2), thus affording EPA more
time to spend investigating egregious
violations.
Finally, a number of commenters
noted that good faith purchasers and the
ultimate users of the RINs, the obligated
parties, should not be subject to a
violation for unwittingly buying and/or
retiring invalid RINs for compliance.
EPA disagrees, and believes that the
‘‘buyer beware’’ aspect of the RIN
trading program is one of the
cornerstones of the program. It provides
an important incentive for the regulated
community to comply with the
regulations and mandates due diligence
on the part of all RIN buyers. It
encourages self-policing on the part of
RIN generators, owners and users in
order to keep the program functioning
smoothly. EPA is not making any
changes to the liability sections of RFS2
as a result of these comments and
although today’s rule will allow
obligated parties to use some invalid
RINs for compliance, the obligated
parties and any intermediary party are
still liable for buying and/or transferring
invalid RINs.
3. Production Outlook Reports
Submission Deadline
In the final RFS2 regulations, in
§ 80.1449(a), EPA set the annual
deadline for submitting Production
Outlook Reports as March 31 of each
year. However, EPA has determined
that, in order for the information
contained in the Production Outlook
Reports to be most useful when setting
the RFS2 volume requirements and
associated percentage standards for the
following calendar year, the reports
should contain the most accurate
projections possible. Since the accuracy
of projections tends to increase the
closer those projections are made to the
following calendar year, we proposed
that the March 31 deadline should be
moved to June 1. This revised deadline
would still allow the information
contained in the Production Outlook
Reports to be used in the development
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1346
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Additionally, in the final RFS2
regulations, EPA required in § 80.1464
that auditors of RIN generation reports
verify that product transfer documents
(PTDs) include the required
information. EPA believes it would be
beneficial for auditors to verify the
required information is present on PTDs
for RIN transactions for all parties,
including obligated parties, renewable
fuel producers and importers and RIN
owners. Thus, we proposed
amendments to § 80.1464(a)(2), (b)(2)
and (c)(1) to require auditors to verify
that the PTDs for a representative
sample of RINs sold and purchased
contains the information required in
§ 80.1453.
We received one comment that stated
that the attestation procedures should
be comparable for all reporting activities
of all regulated parties. EPA believes,
however, that the proposed regulatory
changes to the attest engagement
procedures apply consistently to all
regulated parties in that all parties are
responsible for ensuring that RINs that
they separate, purchase or use for
compliance have been properly
separated and that they have associated
PTDs with all of the required
information. Another commenter states
that obligated parties should not be
required to audit RIN separation
activities in addition to RIN purchases.
Again, EPA feels this additional check
on RIN separation activities will ensure
that the RINs are properly separated and
that renewable fuel is actually being
blended for use as transportation fuel,
heating oil or jet fuel. Therefore, EPA is
finalizing the amendments to the attest
engagement procedures as proposed.
4. Attest Procedures
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
of the final rulemaking setting the
standards for the following year.
We received one comment on the
proposed Production Outlook Reports
deadline of June 1 that suggested August
31, or as late as possible that still
ensures the information is useful in the
development of the final RFS standards
for the following year. EPA believes,
however, that if the deadline is set later
in the year, there would be insufficient
opportunity for EPA to quality check the
incoming data prior to incorporating it
into the analysis for developing the
RFS2 volume requirements and
associate percentage standards for the
following calendar year. EPA strives to
make the most accurate projections
possible, so without time to check the
data quality, there could be inaccuracies
in the volume requirements that lead to
market disruption.
Another commenter suggested that
having the Production Outlook Reports
deadline immediately after the May 31
attest engagement deadline would place
a significant burden on regulated parties
at that time, and suggests a deadline of
June 30 for the Production Outlook
Reports. EPA believes that it is not a
significant burden for regulated parties
to submit the Production Outlook
Report at the same time as the attest
engagement report, especially
considering the attest audit and report
are typically conducted by independent
third-party auditors, rather than the
regulated parties themselves.
For the reasons stated above, EPA
believes that the proposed June 1
deadline for Production Outlook
Reports is reasonable and should not be
moved to later in the year. Therefore,
EPA is finalizing the June 1 deadline for
Production Outlook Reports.
1. Construction Discontinuance &
Completion Documentation
The registration requirements in
§ 80.1450(b)(1)(vi) state that for facilities
claiming the exemption described in
§ 80.1403(c) or (d), evidence must be
submitted demonstrating the date that
construction commenced. However, the
registration requirements do not
explicitly require the submission of
evidence demonstrating that they meet
the other requirements described in
§ 80.1403(c)(1) and (2) or (d)(1), (2) and
(3).
In order to verify that facilities which
claim to qualify for an exemption under
§ 80.1403(c) or (d) in fact meet all of the
qualification requirements for such an
exemption, we proposed to amend
§ 80.1450(b)(1)(vi) to include
requirements that the owner or operator
of facilities claiming exemption under
In the final RFS2 regulations, EPA
required in § 80.1464(c)(1)(i) and
(c)(2)(ii) that RIN owners conduct attest
procedures for RIN transaction and RIN
activity reports that involve RIN
separations. This requirement was
intended to be included in the attest
procedures for obligated parties and
exporters as well as for renewable fuel
producers and RIN-generating
importers, in order to confirm that RINs
are being properly separated by all
parties participating in the RIN market.
Thus, we proposed amendments to
§ 80.1464(a)(2)(i) and (a)(3)(ii) for
obligated parties and exporters as well
as to § 80.1464(b)(2)(i) and (3)(ii) for
renewable fuel producers and RINgenerating importers to include attest
procedures concerning verification of
RIN separation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
E. Technical Amendments Related to
Registration & Recordkeeping
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 80.1403(c) submit evidence
demonstrating that construction was not
discontinued for a period of 18 months
after construction began, and that
construction was completed by
December 19, 2010. Similarly, we
proposed that for facilities claiming the
exemption under § 80.1403(d), evidence
be submitted demonstrating that
construction was not discontinued for a
period of 18 months after construction
began and that construction was
completed within 36 months of the
commenced construction date.
We received comments that EPA
should not adopt these proposed
amendments because the requirements
would be overly burdensome and
unnecessary due to the fact that the
majority of all facilities that have
claimed the exemption under § 80.1403
have already been registered and
therefore these amended requirements
would have no effect on these facility’s
registration. Secondly, the commenter
stated that the proposed requirement to
submit evidence that construction was
not discontinued for a period of 18
months is unreasonable because it is
unclear how a facility could prove a
lack of construction activity. Thirdly,
the commenter stated that the proposed
amendment to submit evidence that
construction was timely completed was
unnecessary because a facility’s
operation activity such as production of
fuel was enough to serve as evidence
that construction was completed. The
commenter suggested that EPA only
request evidence to demonstrate that
these requirements are met from
facilities that EPA believes did not
rightly claim the exemption under
§ 80.1403.
In order to fully assess the concerns
raised by the commenters, EPA has
decided to investigate this issue in more
detail and analyze some additional
options. Therefore, at this time, EPA is
not taking final action with respect to
this proposed amendment.
2. Third-Party Engineering Reviews
The regulations stipulate that
producers of renewable fuels and
foreign ethanol producers are required
to update their registration information,
and submit an updated independent
third-party engineering review, every 3
years after their initial registration in
accordance with § 80.1450(d)(3). We
have received many inquiries regarding
the start date that EPA uses to determine
the 3 year period after which the
producer must submit an updated
independent third party engineering
review (such as the registration
acceptance date, the third-party
professional engineer’s signature date
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
on the engineering review report, or the
due date for engineering reviews.
Given the lack of clarity in the current
regulations, we proposed amendments
to specify the time frame for submission
of updated independent third-party
engineering reviews which included a
simplified method that would group
producers according to the calendar
year they were or will be registered, and
set a fixed time frame for registration
updates for each group. We proposed to
amend § 80.1450(d)(3) to stipulate that
for all producers of renewable fuel and
foreign ethanol producers for which
registration was accepted by EPA in
calendar year 2010, that the updated
registration information and
independent third-party engineering
review would be submitted to EPA
within the three months prior to January
1, 2014, and within three months prior
to January 1 of every third calendar year
thereafter. For all producers of
renewable fuel and foreign ethanol
producers registered in any calendar
year after 2010, the updated registration
information and independent thirdparty engineering review would be
submitted to EPA within three months
prior to January 1 of every third
calendar year after the first year the
producer’s registration was accepted by
EPA. For example, a producer registered
in 2011 would be required to submit an
updated independent third-party
engineering review by January 1, 2015,
and by January 1 every three calendar
years thereafter.
We received comments that supported
the adoption of the proposed
amendments for a simplified method of
grouping producers according to the
calendar year that they were or will be
registered to determine the due date for
submission of the updated registration
information and independent thirdparty engineering review. The
commenter suggested that we provide a
clear method to determine the due date
for individual facilities to further help
with the compliance of this
requirement. We agree with the
commenter that providing more clarity
and guidance would help facilities
comply with this requirement.
Therefore, in the near future and well
before the due date for any updated
engineering reviews, we plan to compile
and publish a guidance document that
will provide the date in which each
facility’s registration was accepted, the
calendar year in which each facility will
be grouped, and the corresponding
triennial due dates for the updated
engineering review for each calendar
year group. This guidance document
will be published on the RFS public
Web site. Parties must also comply with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
all other applicable requirements in 40
CFR Part 80, Subpart M. This guidance
does not, in any way, alter the
requirements of the renewable fuel
program regulations, and does not
establish or change legal rights or
obligations.
In addition, we are removing from the
final rule the proposed 3 months
allowance period prior to triennial due
date. The reason we included a 3
months allowance was to ensure that
the updated engineering reviews were
not submitted so early as to not provide
appropriately updated information as of
the three-year submission deadline. We
believed at the time of the proposal that
the inclusion of the 3 month window
would ensure that facilities conduct
their engineering review closer to the
end of the 3 year period, which we
assumed would provide the most up-todate information. However, now we
believe that the inclusion of this 3
month period is unnecessary since the
owners or operators of a facility can
determine for themselves when it is
appropriate to coordinate and conduct
the engineering review for their facility
and that the regulatory requirement for
‘‘updated’’ engineering reviews provide
sufficient clarity that the information
submitted to EPA must reflect the up-todate information.
Therefore, we are finalizing in this
rulemaking the proposed simplified
method to group facilities based on the
calendar year in which their facility’s
registration was accepted by EPA with
the due date for the updated registration
and independent third party
engineering review to be submitted to
EPA by January 31st of every 3 calendar
years, starting from the acceptance date
of the facility’s initial registration. We
are allowing the engineering reviews to
be submitted at the end of January due
to possible scheduling concerns during
the holiday season.
3. Foreign Ethanol Producers
We proposed that the amendments to
the registration requirements in
§ 80.1450 also apply to foreign ethanol
producers. As defined in § 80.1401,
foreign ethanol producers are foreign
producers that produce ethanol for use
in transportation fuel, heating oil or jet
fuel but who do not add denaturant to
their product. Therefore, foreign ethanol
producers do not technically produce
‘‘renewable fuel’’ as defined in our
regulations. As discussed in the
preamble to the Direct Final Rule
published on May 1, 2010 (see 75 FR
26032), the result of the amendments
made in the Direct Final Rule is to
require foreign ethanol facilities that
produce ethanol that ultimately
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1347
becomes part of a renewable fuel for
which RINs are generated to provide
EPA the same registration information
as foreign renewable fuel facilities that
export their product to the United
States. In both cases the required
registration information is important for
enforcement purposes, including
verifying the use of renewable biomass
as feedstock and the assignment of
appropriate D codes. Therefore, we
believe amendments to the registration
requirements that we make in this final
rule should also be applicable to foreign
ethanol producers for the same reasons.
We did not receive comments on this
proposed change, so we are finalizing
the amendment as proposed.
F. Additional Amendments and
Clarifications
1. Third-Party Engineering Review
Addendum
We have received many inquires as to
whether an addendum to the existing
independent third-party engineering
review is sufficient to meet the
requirement that all producers of
renewable fuel and foreign ethanol
producers submit an updated
independent third-party engineering
review if they make changes to their
facility that will qualify the renewable
fuel that is produced for a renewable
fuel category or D code that is not
already reflected in the producer’s
registration information. In some
circumstances the majority of the
information verified in the existing
independent third-party engineering
review would remain the same, and
duplicating the entire effort does not
appear necessary. We believe the
concept of allowing the submission of
an addendum in lieu of a updated
independent third-party engineering
review is reasonable and therefore we
are finalizing to amend the requirements
in § 80.1450(d)(1) to state that a
producer of renewable fuel or foreign
ethanol producer may submit an
addendum to the existing independent
third-party engineering review on file
with EPA provided the addendum
meets all the requirements in
§ 80.1450(b)(2) and verifies for EPA the
most up-to-date information at the
producer’s existing facility. The updated
independent third-party engineering
review or addendum shall be submitted
at least 60 days prior to producing the
new type of renewable fuel and must
meet all the same requirements
stipulated in § 80.1450(b)(2) for the
independent third-party engineering
review, including a new site visit
conducted by the third party to verify
any changes to the facility that allows it
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1348
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
to produce a different renewable fuel
that is not currently reflected in their
registration on file with EPA.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2. RIN Generation for Fuel Imported
From a Registered Foreign Producer
In RFS2, EPA finalized provisions
allowing importers to generate RINs for
renewable fuel imported from a foreign
producer only under certain
circumstances. The importer may only
generate RINs for fuel imported from a
foreign renewable fuel producer or
foreign ethanol producer if that
producer is registered with EPA and has
received EPA company and facility
identification numbers pursuant to
§ 80.1450. Pursuant to § 80.1426(c)(4),
the importer is prohibited from
generating RINs for fuel imported from
a foreign producer that is not registered
with EPA. In the proposed rulemaking,
EPA proposed to clarify that when an
importer is generating RINs for fuel
imported from a registered foreign
renewable fuel producer or foreign
ethanol producer, the importer must
submit to EPA via EMTS the importer’s
company identification number, the
facility identification number of the
import facility where the batch was
imported, and the facility identification
number for the foreign renewable fuel or
ethanol producer that produced the
batch of fuel for which the importer is
generating RINs. EPA did not receive
comments on these clarifications, and is
therefore finalizing them as proposed in
§ 80.1452(b)(4) and (5).
3. Bond Posting
We proposed to amend paragraphs
(e)(1), (e)(2) and (g)(2) of § 80.1467 to
make them consistent with
§ 80.1467(g)(1). These proposed
amendments were intended to clarify
that the amount of the posted bond must
cover the number of gallon RINs that are
sold and/or transferred, and also those
RINs held and/or obtained by the
foreign entity, including those held and/
or obtained to comply with a foreign
importer’s RVO requirements. We also
proposed to amend §§ 80.1465–80.1467
by striking §§ 80.1465(h)(2)(iii),
80.1466(h)(2)(iii) and 80.1467(e)(2)(iii),
which allowed entities to make
alternative commitments in lieu of
posting bonds. EPA believes that this
method is vague, unnecessary, and
unenforceable.
One commenter at the hearing is
against the removal of the regulation
allowing foreign producers to make
alternative commitments as it may
discourage foreign renewable fuel
producers from entering the U.S.
market. EPA disagrees as no foreign
producer has used an alternative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
commitment to date, and most foreign
renewable fuel producers do not post
bonds and instead rely on the renewable
fuel importers to generate RINs for
renewable fuel that is imported. For
those reasons and the reasons described
above, we are finalizing the proposed
changes to the bond posting regulations
as proposed.
4. Prohibition Against Repeat
Generation of RINs
We are finalizing our proposal to add
a new paragraph (b)(6) to the prohibited
acts of § 80.1460 to specify in this
section of the regulations that RINs may
not be generated for any fuel for which
RINs have previously been generated.
Pursuant to § 80.1401, a RIN is a unique
number generated to represent a volume
of renewable fuel. If more than one RIN
is generated for a particular volume, the
RIN will no longer be unique, and is
therefore improperly generated and
cannot be used to demonstrate
compliance with the renewable volume
obligations. While generating RINs for a
particular volume of fuel for which RINs
have already been generated is already
prohibited, we are amending the
regulations to include this prohibition
in § 80.1460 for clarity.
5. Acceptance of Separated Yard Waste
and Food Waste Separation Plans
We proposed to amend
§ 80.1426(f)(5)(ii)(A) to remove the
requirement that the separated yard
waste plan and separated food waste
plan must be approved by EPA, and
instead only require that these two
plans be submitted and accepted by
EPA under the registration procedures
specified in § 80.1450(b)(1)(vii). The
details and information required to be
submitted in the separated yard waste
plan and separated food waste plan are
not overly burdensome or complex, and
therefore we believe it does not warrant
a specific EPA approval, but that EPA
acceptance of these plans through the
registration procedures is sufficient.
We received comments that supported
the adoption of this amendment for
separated food waste plan and separated
yard waste plan. We also received
comments suggesting that we also adopt
this amendment for the separated MSW
plan. The commenter stated that
although the separated MSW plan
requires somewhat more information
than the separated yard and food waste
plans, the same logic applies in that the
separated MSW plan will also be subject
to EPA review as part of the producer’s
registration process and therefore
requiring a separate duplicate approval
for the separated MSW plan is not
necessary.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
First, we would like to clarify that
there is not a duplicate approval process
for the separated MSW plan that serves
as a separate additional requirement for
the producer’s registration. Similar to
the proposed acceptance process for the
producer’s separated yard and food
waste plan, the approval process for the
producer’s separated MSW plan will
equally serve as verification of
compliance as part of the producer’s
registration. Secondly, we disagree with
the commenter that the separated MSW
plan only requires somewhat more
information than the separated yard and
food waste plans, and that the same
logic applies in terms of the review
process. For the separated MSW plan,
producers are required to provide
ongoing verification that there is
separation of recyclable paper,
cardboard, plastics, rubber, textiles,
metals, and glass wastes to the extent
reasonably practicable, including: The
extent and nature of the recycling that
occurred prior to receipt of the waste
material, identification of available
recycling technology and practices that
are appropriate for removing recycling
materials from the waste stream, and
identification of the technology or
practices selected for implementation,
including an explanation for such
selection, and reasons why other
technologies or practices were not
implemented. In addition, producers are
also required to provide contracts
relevant to materials recycled from
municipal waste streams and
certification that recycling is conducted
in a manner consistent with goals and
requirements of applicable State and
local laws relating to recycling and
waste management as part of their
registration process. For the separated
yard and food waste plan, the producers
are only required to provide ongoing
verification that the separated yard
waste or food waste was kept separate
since generation from other waste
materials, and for food waste, contain
only incidental amounts of other
components. We believe the information
submitted in the separated MSW plan
will be considerably more complex than
information submitted in the separated
yard and food waste plans, and
therefore, will require EPA conduct a
much more comprehensive review and
also consider many additional factors to
ensure that the producer has met the all
the requirements stipulated. Based on
the factors discussed, we believe that it
is not reasonable to apply the same
proposed acceptance process for
separated yard and food waste plan to
the separated MSW plan.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Therefore, we are finalizing in this
rulemaking only for separated yard
waste plan and separated food waste
plan to amend the requirement that the
plans must be approved by EPA, and
instead only require that the plans will
be accepted by EPA under the
registration procedures specified in
§ 80.1450(b)(1)(vii).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
6. Transferred Blendstocks in Early
Benzene Credit Generation Calculations
Today’s rule also finalizes one minor
correction to the gasoline benzene
regulations which would clarify how
refiners should account for transferred
blendstocks in their early benzene credit
generation calculations. Under current
rules, refineries which generated early
benzene credits are required to reduce
gasoline benzene during an early credit
generation period by at least 10%
compared to the refinery’s benzene
baseline, and are also required to make
specific operational changes and/or
improvements in benzene control
technology to reduce gasoline benzene
levels.41 Refineries which reduce their
gasoline benzene by at least 10%, in
part by transferring reformate to another
refinery, could also generate early
benzene credits, provided the transferee
refinery treated the reformate in specific
benzene-reduction processing units.42
See 72 FR 8486–87 (Feb. 26, 2007).
However, the gasoline benzene
regulations also contain an additional
provision that requires all blendstock
streams transferred to, from or between
refineries to be excluded from a
refinery’s early credit generation
calculations (except for reformate as
described previously). This led to an
inconsistent comparison of a refinery’s
benzene during an early credit
generation period with a refinery’s
benzene baseline (which included
blendstocks transferred to the refinery),
which was not EPA’s intent.
As described in the preamble of the
gasoline benzene final rule, EPA
intended that refineries not be allowed
to generate early benzene credits
exclusively through blendstock trading,
without making any other qualifying
reductions (see 72 FR 8487), but that
refineries could generate early benzene
credits in part through qualifying
reductions and ‘‘in part’’ through other
means such as blendstock transfers (see
41 Early credit generation periods were July 1,
2007 through December 31, 2007, and calendar
years 2008, 2009 and 2010.
42 Refineries produce gasoline by combining
several different blendstocks produced by various
refinery processing units. Reformate is a blendstock
which contains approximately 80% of all benzene
found in gasoline, per the MSAT2 regulatory impact
analysis.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
72 FR 8496–97). However, the current
regulations do not allow this approach,
and this inconsistency has caused
confusion among refiners about how to
calculate the amount of early credits
generated. Refiners have generally
followed the approach set out in the
preamble (as EPA in fact intended), and
included all blendstocks transferred to a
refinery in the refinery’s early credit
generation calculations. Refiners
typically keep records on transferred
blendstocks for 1–2 years, and thus do
not have sufficient data to exclude
transferred blendstocks from their early
credit generation calculations.
EPA recently became aware of this
inconsistency and is amending the
regulations to make them consistent
with EPA’s intent as described in the
preamble. This rule amends the gasoline
benzene regulations at 40 CFR
80.1275(d)(3) by deleting that provision.
This will allow a refinery to include
blendstocks transferred to the refinery
in the refinery’s early benzene credit
generation calculations (all other
conditions, including treatment which
removes benzene in transferred
reformate streams still applying, of
course). Consistent with EPA’s original
intent, today’s rule also allows a
refinery to include transferred
blendstocks in past early credit
generation calculations, provided the
refinery met all of the other
requirements for generating early
benzene credits. EPA is finalizing this
change to include transferred
blendstocks in past early credit
generation calculation not only because
this was EPA’s intent at the time of the
benzene gasoline rulemaking, but
because some refiners have reasonably
relied upon that stated intent in
devising their compliance strategies.
All of the comments received on this
change to the regulations were in
support of this change. Commenters
generally noted that the change was
needed in order to align the language in
the regulations with the intent stated in
the preamble.
V. Annual Administrative
Announcements
In the RFS2 final rule, we stated our
intent to make two announcements each
year:
• Set the price for cellulosic biofuel
waiver credits that will be made
available to obligated parties in the
event that we reduce the volume of
cellulosic biofuel below the applicable
volume specified in the Clean Air Act
(CAA), and
• Announce the results of our annual
assessment of the aggregate compliance
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1349
approach for U.S. planted crops and
crop residue.
The biofuel waiver credit price being
announced today was calculated in
accordance with the specifications in
§ 80.1456(d). Since the manner in which
EPA calculates the waiver credit price is
precisely set forth in EPA regulations
(which were issued through a noticeand-comment process), and since some
of the variables necessary to compute
the price have only recently become
available, EPA did not propose a waiver
credit price for comment. Similarly,
because EPA’s assessment of the
aggregate compliance approach
announced today was conducted using
data sources, methodology, and criteria
that were identified and explained in
the preamble to the RFS2 final rule, it
was not necessary to present a
preliminary annual assessment for
comment in the NPRM.
A. 2011 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel
Waiver Credits
Section 211(o)(7)(D) of the CAA
requires that whenever EPA sets the
applicable volume of cellulosic biofuel
at a level lower than that specified in
the Act, EPA is to provide a number of
cellulosic credits for sale that is no more
than the EPA-determined applicable
volume. Congress also specified the
formula for calculating the price for
such waiver credits: Adjusted for
inflation, the credits must be offered at
the price of the higher of 25 cents per
gallon or the amount by which $3.00 per
gallon exceeds the average wholesale
price of a gallon of gasoline in the
United States.43 The inflation
adjustment is for years after 2008. EPA
regulations provide that the inflation
adjustment is calculated by comparing
the most recent Consumer Price Index
for All Urban Consumers (CPI–U) for the
‘‘All Items’’ expenditure category as
provided by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics that is available at the time
EPA sets the cellulosic biofuel standard
to the comparable value that was
reported soonest after December 31,
2008.44
In contrast to its directions to EPA for
setting the price of a cellulosic biofuel
waiver credit, Congress afforded the
Agency considerable flexibility in
designing regulations specifying the
permissible uses of the credits. The
CAA states that EPA regulations ‘‘shall
43 More information on wholesale gasoline prices
can be found on the Department of Energy’s (DOE),
Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Web site
at: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.
ashx?n=PET&s=EMA_EPM0_PBR_NUS_DPG&f=M.
44 See U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS), Consumer Price Index Web site at:
https://www.bls.gov/cpi/.
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1350
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
include such provisions, including
limiting the credits’ uses and useful life,
as the Administrator deems appropriate
to assist market liquidity and
transparency, to provide appropriate
certainty for regulated entities and
renewable fuel producers, and to limit
any potential misuse of cellulosic
biofuel credits to reduce the use of other
renewable fuels, and for such other
purposes as the Administrator
determines will help achieve the goals
of this subsection.’’ The final RFS2
regulations provide a detailed
discussion of how we designed the
provisions for cellulosic biofuel waiver
credits in keeping with the statutory
language. In short, 2012 cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits (or ’’waiver
credits’’) are only available for the 2012
compliance year. Waiver credits will
only be made available to obligated
parties, and they are nontransferable
and nonrefundable. Further, obligated
parties may only purchase waiver
credits up to the level of their cellulosic
biofuel RVO less the number of
cellulosic biofuel RINs that they own. A
company owning cellulosic biofuel RINs
and cellulosic waiver credits may use
both types of credits if desired to meet
their RVOs, but unlike RINs, waiver
credits may not be carried over for use
in the next calendar year. Obligated
parties may not use waiver credits to
meet a prior year deficit obligation.
Finally, unlike cellulosic biofuel RINs
which may also be used to meet an
obligated party’s advanced and total
renewable fuel obligations, waiver
credits may only be used to meet a
cellulosic biofuel RVO. An obligated
party will still need to additionally and
separately acquire RINs to meet their
advanced biofuel and total renewable
fuel obligations.
For the 2012 compliance period, since
the applicable volume of cellulosic
biofuel used to set the annual cellulosic
biofuel standard is lower than the
volume for 2012 specified in the CAA,
we are making cellulosic waiver credits
available to obligated parties for end-ofyear compliance should they need them
at a price of $0.78 per credit. To
calculate this price, EPA first
determined the average wholesale
(refinery gate) price of gasoline using
the most recent 12 months of data
available from the EIA Web site on
September 30, 2011. Based on this data,
we calculated an average price of
gasoline for the period July 2010 to June
2011 of $2.44. In accordance with the
Act, we then calculated the difference of
the inflation-adjusted value of $3.00, or
$3.22, and $2.44, which yielded $0.78.
Next, we compared the value of $0.78 to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
the inflation-adjusted value of $0.25, or
$0.27. The Act requires EPA to use the
greater of these two values as the price
for cellulosic biofuel waiver credits.
The derivation of this value is more
fully explained in a memorandum
submitted to the docket for this
rulemaking,45 and a more complete
description of the statutory
requirements and their application can
be found in the RFS2 final rule.46 The
price for the 2013 compliance period, if
necessary, will be set when we
announce the 2013 cellulosic biofuel
standard.
B. Assessment of the Domestic
Aggregate Compliance Approach
The RFS2 regulations contain a
provision for renewable fuel producers
who use planted crops and crop residue
from U.S. agricultural land that relieves
them of the individual recordkeeping
and reporting requirements concerning
the specific land from which their
feedstocks were harvested. To enable
this approach, EPA established a
baseline number of acres for U.S.
agricultural land in 2007 (the year of
EISA enactment) and determined that as
long as this baseline number of acres
was not exceeded, it was unlikely that
new land outside of the 2007 baseline
would be devoted to crop production
based on historical trends and economic
considerations. We therefore provided
that renewable fuel producers using
planted crops or crop residue from the
U.S. as feedstock in renewable fuel
production need not comply with the
individual recordkeeping and reporting
requirements related to documenting
that their feedstocks are renewable
biomass, unless EPA determines
through one of its annual evaluations
that the 2007 baseline acreage of
agricultural land has been exceeded.
In the final RFS2 regulations, EPA
committed to make an annual finding
concerning whether the 2007 baseline
amount of U.S. agricultural land has
been exceeded in a given year and
publish this finding in the Federal
Register by November 30 of the same
year. If the baseline is found to have
been exceeded, then producers using
U.S. planted crops and crop residue as
feedstocks for renewable fuel
production would be required to
comply with individual recordkeeping
and reporting requirements to verify
that their feedstocks are renewable
biomass.
45 See memo to docket number EPA–HQ–OAR–
2010–0133 from Scott Christian, on the subject of
‘‘Calculating the price for cellulosic biofuel waiver
credits,’’ dated September 30, 2011.
46 75 FR 14726–14728.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Based on data provided by the USDA
Farm Service Agency (FSA) and Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS),
we have estimated that U.S. agricultural
land reached approximately 392 million
acres in 2011, and thus did not exceed
the 2007 baseline acreage. This acreage
estimate is based on the same
methodology used to set the 2007
baseline acreage for U.S. agricultural
land in the RFS2 final rulemaking.
Specifically, we started with FSA crop
history data for 2011, from which we
derived a total estimated acreage of 392
million acres. We then subtracted the
amount of land estimated to be
participating in the Grasslands Reserve
Program (GRP) and Wetlands Reserve
Program (WRP) by the end of Fiscal
Year 2011, 275,000 acres, to yield an
estimate of approximately 392 million
acres of U.S. agricultural land in 2011.
The USDA data used to make this
calculation can be found in the docket
to this rule.
C. Assessment of the Canadian
Aggregate Compliance Approach
On March 15, 2011, EPA issued a
notice of receipt of and solicited public
comment on a petition for EPA to
authorize the use of an aggregate
approach for compliance with the
Renewable Fuel Standard renewable
biomass requirements, submitted by the
Government of Canada. The petition
requested that EPA determine that an
aggregate compliance approach will
provide reasonable assurance that
planted crops and crop residue from
Canada meet the definition of renewable
biomass. After through consideration of
the petition, all supporting
documentation provided and the public
comments received, EPA determined
that the criteria for approval of the
petition were satisfied and approved the
use of an aggregate compliance
approach to renewable biomass
verification for planted crops and crop
residue grown in Canada.
The Government of Canada utilized
several types of land use data to
demonstrate that the land included in
their 124 million acre baseline is
cropland, pastureland or land
equivalent to U.S. Conservation Reserve
Program land that was cleared or
cultivated prior to December 19, 2007,
and was actively managed or fallow and
nonforested on that date (and is
therefore RFS2 qualifying land). The
total agricultural land in Canada in 2011
is estimated at 121 million acres. This
total agricultural land area includes 95.6
million acres of cropland and summer
fallow, 15.6 million acres of pastureland
and 9.8 million acres of agricultural
land under conservation practices. This
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
acreage estimate is based on the same
methodology used to set the 2007
baseline acreage for Canadian
agricultural land in the RFS2 response
to petition. The data used to make this
calculation can be found in the docket
to this rule.
VI. Comments Outside the Scope of
This Rulemaking
In their comments responding to the
NPRM, a number of parties used the
opportunity to raise concerns that were
not directly related to the issues and
provisions we were addressing in the
NPRM, such as the proposed standards
for 2012, the applicable volume of
biomass-based diesel for 2013, and the
various proposed changes to the
regulations designed to clarify intent
and streamline implementation. Neither
did these comments address setting the
price for cellulosic biofuel credits or
EPA’s annual evaluation of the U.S.
aggregate compliance approach for
renewable biomass. In some cases,
commenters requested EPA action in
some other area, such as the following:
• Request for EPA to implement a
more robust biofuel quality assurance
program
• Request for EPA to mandate that
50% of all vehicles be E100 capable by
2017
• Request for EPA to encourage
legislation that allows corn ethanol to be
categorized as advanced biofuel
• Request for EPA to pursue changes
to the statute that would make valid
renewable fuels feedstock-neutral.
In other cases, commenters raised
issues related to other areas not
addressed in our NPRM, such as the
following:
• Other state and federal fuel
regulations
• Retail dispensing requirements and
misfueling of E15 in non-flexible fueled
vehicles
• Need for continuing federal
incentives for biofuels, such as tax
subsidies
• Relative energy security
implications of imported petroleum
versus imported biofuels
• Delayed RINs
• Definition of heating oil.
While we are taking these comments
under consideration as we continue to
implement the RFS2 program, these
comments are outside the scope of
today’s action. In some cases, they are
also outside our authority. Thus, we are
not providing substantive responses to
them at this time.
We also received comments in a
number of other areas that, while
outside the scope of this rulemaking, we
believe would benefit from a response to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
clarify our position and/or intentions.
These issues are addressed below.
One commenter provided a copy of a
copyrighted report, ‘‘Energy Life-Cycle
Assessment Of Soybean Biodiesel
Revisited’’. Similarly, both Monsanto
and RFA provided comments on the
lifecycle GHG impacts of corn ethanol,
indicating that it should be a higher
GHG reduction than what was
calculated by EPA as part of the RFS2
final rule and that we should reevaluate
corn ethanol lifecycle emissions based
on new studies that are available.
Another commenter requested that we
investigate the GHG impacts of the
oleochemical industry increasing the
use of palm oil as a feedstock as animal
fats are increasingly diverted to the
production of biofuels. We will consider
the information and analyses provided
as part of any future updates to our
lifecycle evaluations of these biofuels.
Another commenter urged EPA to
quickly certify additional feedstocks for
cellulosic biofuels under the RFS. We
are moving forward responding to a
series of petitions requesting EPA
approval of other pathways, including
both feedstock-specific pathways (e.g.,
palm oil and sorghum) and company- or
process-specific pathways. A discussion
of the process involved and a list of the
current pathways we are currently
evaluating can be found at: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/compliancehelp/rfs2lca-pathways.htm.
We appreciate that multiple
stakeholders are highly interested in the
timeline on which EPA is conducting
these analyses. We note that the analysis
required for the RFS fuel pathway
determinations as required under CAA
211(o) are comprehensive in nature, and
EPA is committed to ensuring they are
conducted in an appropriately rigorous
fashion.
Some commenters noted that
regulated parties are having difficulty
complying with the requirement that the
RIN transfer date in EMTS and on
product transfer documents (PTDs) be
the actual title transfer date. Some of
these commenters requested EPA
enforcement discretion to allow biofuel
producers and first purchasers to update
their electronic systems in order to be in
compliance with the title transfer date
regulatory requirement. Two
commenters specified that this
enforcement discretion should be issued
for six months in order to provide these
companies with sufficient time to
update their systems. EPA believes that
the proposed enforcement discretion
would likely introduce confusion for
anyone who attempts to review and
match transactions with records.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1351
In contrast, several commenters
requested that EPA reconsider its
position that the RIN transfer date
reported to EMTS and identified on
PTDs must be the actual title transfer
date. One commenter requested that
EPA allow invoice dates to be used in
lieu of title transfer dates as title transfer
does not usually coincide with customer
payments and ultimately place a burden
on the selling company’s cash flow.
While we understand that some parties
would prefer to use a date other than the
true title transfer date for purposes of
EMTS reporting and PTDs, we believe
this would violate the clear language
and intent of the regulations.
One commenter requested that EPA
provide adjustment mechanisms to
allow corrections in EMTS after noting
that EMTS is a ‘‘forward looking’’
system, meaning that EMTS transactions
cannot be modified once submitted.
EPA is looking at several ways and has
updated the RFS2 remedial action Web
page since the comment period closed.
EPA will continually update its
guidance for regulated parties to correct
violations that true mistakes on the
following Web page: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
renewablefuels/compliancehelp/
rfs2remedialactions.htm.
Additionally, in this rule, EPA is
finalizing a regulation amendment
giving EPA discretion to allow invalidly
generated RINs to be used for
compliance purposes on a case-by-case
basis (see Section IV).
Several commenters requested that
EPA edit Q&As 7.8 and 10.6 as they
conflict with the regulations. EPA will
review and make edits to the RFS2
Q&As in order to ensure agreement with
the regulations as appropriate at a later
date.
VII. Public Participation
Many interested parties participated
in the rulemaking process that
culminates with this final rule. This
process provided opportunity for
submitting written public comments
following the proposal that we
published on July 1, 2011 (76 FR
38844), and we considered these
comments in developing the final rule.
Public comments and EPA responses are
discussed throughout this preamble.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1352
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because
it raises novel legal or policy issues.
Accordingly, EPA submitted this action
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review under Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011) and any changes made
in response to OMB recommendations
have been documented in the docket for
this action.
The economic impacts of the RFS2
program on regulated parties, including
the impacts of the required volumes of
renewable fuel, were already addressed
in the RFS2 final rule promulgated on
March 26, 2010 (75 FR 14670). This
action finalizes the percentage standards
applicable in 2012 based on the
volumes that were analyzed in the RFS2
final rule. This action is also finalizing
technical amendments to the RFS2
regulations that have been determined
to have no adverse economic impact on
regulated parties since they generally
clarify existing requirements.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden. While
there are three regulatory amendments
in today’s rule that affect the
recordkeeping and reporting burdens for
regulated parties, we believe that the
information collections already
approved for the RFS2 program’s
general recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, or the information
collection already under review, would
also cover the these technical
amendments.
The regulatory changes are listed in
Table VIII.B–1.
TABLE VIII.B–1—TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS AFFECTING RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
Section
Description
80.1449(a) ................................................................................................
Amended Production Outlook Report due date; added allowance for
unregistered renewable fuel producers and importers to submit Production Outlook Reports.
Amended to require submission of additional evidence as part of registration to verify eligibility for exemptions in § 80.1403(c) or (d).
Amended to add more specificity on when updates, addenda, or resubmittals are required for engineering reviews and to include references to foreign ethanol producers.
80.1450(b)(1)(vi) .......................................................................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
80.1450(d)(1)–(d)(3) .................................................................................
With regard to Production Outlook
Reports, the change in due date is not
expected to have any impact on the
reporting burden. In addition, EPA
recently prepared an Information
Collection Request (ICR) document to
permit the submission of voluntary
Production Outlook Reports by
domestic and foreign renewable fuels
producers. The parties affected by the
ICR are not regulated parties under the
RFS2 program. The ICR has been
submitted for approval to OMB under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. and may be identified by
EPA ICR number 2409.01. Documents
related to the ICR have been placed in
docket number EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–
0161, which is accessible at https://
www.regulations.gov.
On October 14, 2010, EPA published
a notice in the Federal Register
announcing our intent to submit the
proposed ICR for voluntary Production
Outlook Reports to OMB for approval.
(See 75 FR 63173). The 60-day comment
period closed on December 14, 2010. No
comments were received. On February
8, 2011, EPA published a Federal
Register notice announcing submission
of the ICR to OMB. Additional
comments were solicited via an
additional comment period through
March 10, 2011.47
47 See ‘‘Agency Information Collection Activities;
Submission to OMB for Review and Approval;
Comment Request; Production Outlook Reports for
Un-Registered Renewable Fuel Producers (New
Collection),’’ 76 FR 6781 (February 8, 2011). The
document identification number for this notice is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has previously approved the
information collection requirements
contained in the existing regulations at
40 CFR Part 80, Subpart M under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This would
include the following approved
information collections (with OMB
control numbers and expiration dates
listed in parenthesis): ‘‘Renewable Fuels
Standard Program: Petition and
Registration’’ (OMB Control Number
2060–0367, expires March 31, 2013);
‘‘Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS2)’’
(OMB Control Number 2060–0640,
expires July 31, 2013); ‘‘Regulations of
Fuels and Fuel Additives: 2011
Renewable Fuels Standard—Petition for
International Aggregate Compliance
Approach’’ OMB Control Number 2060–
0655, expires February 28, 2014).
Detailed and searchable information
about these and other approved
collections may be viewed on the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
Paperwork Reduction Act Web site,
which is accessible at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
With regard to the technical
amendments in § 80.1450, we believe
that these information collections
already approved for the RFS2
program’s general recordkeeping and
reporting requirements would also cover
the amendments in today’s final rule.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0161–3221. The document
identification number for the supporting statement
is EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0161–3222.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of today’s rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s final rule on small
entities, we certify that this action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The impacts of the RFS2
program on small entities that are
directly regulated under the RFS2
program were already addressed in the
RFS2 final rule promulgated on March
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
26, 2010 (75 FR 14670). This rule
simply:
• Reduces the applicable volume of
cellulosic biofuels in 2012 based on our
projection of 2012 production levels.
• Establishes percentage standards for
2012 based either on this production
projection (for cellulosic biofuels) or
statutory levels (for advanced biofuels,
biomass-based diesel, and total
renewable fuel).
• Makes minor technical amendments
to the regulations.
Therefore, this action will not impose
any additional requirements on small
entities beyond those which have
already been evaluated.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more for State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or the private sector in any one year.
This rule simply:
• Reduces the applicable volume of
cellulosic biofuels in 2012 based on our
projection of 2012 production levels.
• Establishes percentage standards for
2012 based either on this production
projection (for cellulosic biofuels) or
statutory levels (for advanced biofuels,
biomass-based diesel, and total
renewable fuel).
• Makes minor technical amendments
to the regulations.
Thus, this action is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of
UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. This action only
applies to gasoline, diesel, and
renewable fuel producers, importers,
distributors and marketers and makes
relatively minor corrections and
modifications to the RFS2 regulations. A
summary of the concerns raised, and
EPA’s response to those concerns, is
provided in this preamble.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). This rule will be implemented at
the Federal level and impose
compliance costs only on transportation
fuel refiners, blenders, marketers,
distributors, importers, exporters, and
renewable fuel producers and importers.
Tribal governments would be affected
only to the extent they purchase and use
regulated fuels. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it does not establish
an environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks and
because it implements specific
standards established by Congress in
statutes.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)) because it is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
This action simply finalizes the annual
standards for cellulosic biofuels for
2012 and clarifying changes and minor
technical amendments to the
regulations.
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1353
This action does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. This action does not relax
the control measures on sources
regulated by the RFS2 regulations and
therefore will not cause emissions
increases from these sources.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Therefore,
this rule will be effective on the date of
publication.
IX. Statutory Authority
Statutory authority for the rule
finalized today can be found in section
211 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.
7545. Additional support for the
procedural and compliance related
aspects of today’s rule, including the
recordkeeping requirements, come from
sections 114, 208, and 301(a) of the
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
1354
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential
business information, Diesel fuel, Fuel
additives, Gasoline, Imports, Labeling,
Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties,
Petroleum, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 22, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 80 is amended as
follows:
PART 80—REGULATION OF FUELS
AND FUEL ADDITIVES
1. The authority citation for part 80
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7542, 7545, and
7601(a).
§ 80.1275
[Amended]
2. In § 80.1275, remove paragraph
(d)(3).
■ 3. Section 80.1401 is amended by
revising the definitions of ‘‘Annual
cover crop’’ and ‘‘Naphtha’’ to read as
follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
§ 80.1401
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Annual cover crop means an annual
crop, planted as a rotation between
primary planted crops, or between trees
and vines in orchards and vineyards,
typically to protect soil from erosion
and to improve the soil between periods
of regular crops. An annual cover crop
has no existing market to which it can
be sold except for its use as feedstock
for the production of renewable fuel.
*
*
*
*
*
Naphtha means a blendstock falling
within the boiling range of gasoline
which is composed of only
hydrocarbons, is commonly or
commercially known as naphtha, and is
used to produce gasoline.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Section 80.1405 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 80.1405 What are the Renewable Fuel
Standards?
(a) (1) Renewable Fuel Standards for
2010.
(i) The value of the cellulosic biofuel
standard for 2010 shall be 0.004 percent.
(ii) The value of the biomass-based
diesel standard for 2010 shall be 1.10
percent.
(iii) The value of the advanced biofuel
standard for 2010 shall be 0.61 percent.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
(iv) The value of the renewable fuel
standard for 2010 shall be 8.25 percent.
(2) Renewable Fuel Standards for
2011.
(i) The value of the cellulosic biofuel
standard for 2011 shall be 0.003 percent.
(ii) The value of the biomass-based
diesel standard for 2011 shall be 0.69
percent.
(iii) The value of the advanced biofuel
standard for 2011 shall be 0.78 percent.
(iv) The value of the renewable fuel
standard for 2011 shall be 8.01 percent.
(3) Renewable Fuel Standards for
2012.
(i) The value of the cellulosic biofuel
standard for 2012 shall be 0.006 percent.
(ii) The value of the biomass-based
diesel standard for 2012 shall be 0.91
percent.
(iii) The value of the advanced biofuel
standard for 2012 shall be 1.21 percent.
(iv) The value of the renewable fuel
standard for 2012 shall be 9.23 percent.
(b) EPA will calculate the value of the
annual standards and publish these
values in the Federal Register by
November 30 of the year preceding the
compliance period.
(c) EPA will calculate the annual
renewable fuel percentage standards
using the following equations:
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
ER09JA12.003
Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7542, and
7601(a).
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Where:
StdCB,i = The cellulosic biofuel standard for
year i, in percent.
StdBBD,i= The biomass-based diesel standard
for year i, in percent.
StdAB,i= The advanced biofuel standard for
year i, in percent.
StdRF,i= The renewable fuel standard for year
i, in percent.
RFVCB,i= Annual volume of cellulosic biofuel
required by 42 U.S.C. 7545(o)(2)(B) for
year i, or volume as adjusted pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 7545(o)(7)(D), in gallons.
RFVBBD,i= Annual volume of biomass-based
diesel required by 42 U.S.C. 7545
(o)(2)(B) for year i, in gallons.
RFVAB,i= Annual volume of advanced biofuel
required by 42 U.S.C. 7545(o)(2)(B) for
year i, in gallons.
RFVRF,i= Annual volume of renewable fuel
required by 42 U.S.C. 7545(o)(2)(B) for
year i, in gallons.
Gi= Amount of gasoline projected to be used
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
Di= Amount of diesel projected to be used in
the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii, in
year i, in gallons.
RGi= Amount of renewable fuel blended into
gasoline that is projected to be consumed
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
RDi= Amount of renewable fuel blended into
diesel that is projected to be consumed
in the 48 contiguous states and Hawaii,
in year i, in gallons.
GSi= Amount of gasoline projected to be used
in Alaska or a U.S. territory, in year i, if
the state or territory has opted-in or optsin, in gallons.
RGSi= Amount of renewable fuel blended
into gasoline that is projected to be
consumed in Alaska or a U.S. territory,
in year i, if the state or territory opts-in,
in gallons.
DSi= Amount of diesel projected to be used
in Alaska or a U.S. territory, in year i, if
the state or territory has opted-in or optsin, in gallons.
RDSi= Amount of renewable fuel blended
into diesel that is projected to be
consumed in Alaska or a U.S. territory,
in year i, if the state or territory opts-in,
in gallons.
GEi= The amount of gasoline projected to be
produced by exempt small refineries and
small refiners, in year i, in gallons in any
year they are exempt per §§ 80.1441 and
80.1442.
DEi= The amount of diesel fuel projected to
be produced by exempt small refineries
and small refiners in year i, in gallons,
in any year they are exempt per
§§ 80.1441 and 80.1442.
(d) (1) The 2010 price for cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits is $1.56 per
waiver credit.
(2) The 2011 price for cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits is $1.13 per
waiver credit.
(3) The 2012 price for cellulosic
biofuel waiver credits is $0.78 per
waiver credit.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
5. Section 80.1415 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as
follows:
■
§ 80.1415 How are equivalence values
assigned to renewable fuel?
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) The application for an equivalence
value shall include a technical
justification that includes all the
following:
(i) A calculation for the requested
equivalence value according to the
equation in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section, including supporting
documentation for the value of EC used
in the calculation such as a certificate of
analysis from a laboratory that verifies
the lower heating value in Btu per
gallon of the renewable fuel produced.
(ii) For each feedstock, component, or
additive that is used to make the
renewable fuel, provide a description,
the percent input, and identify whether
or not it is renewable biomass or is
derived from renewable biomass.
(iii) For each feedstock that also
qualifies as a renewable fuel, state
whether or not RINs have been
previously generated for such feedstock.
(iv) A description of the renewable
fuel and the production process,
including a block diagram that shows all
inputs and outputs at each step of the
production process with a sample
quantity of all inputs and outputs for
one batch of renewable fuel produced.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Section 80.1426 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By revising paragraph (f)(1).
■ b. By revising paragraph (f)(5)(ii).
§ 80.1426 How are RINs generated and
assigned to batches of renewable fuel by
renewable fuel producers or importers?
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) Applicable pathways. D codes
shall be used in RINs generated by
producers or importers of renewable
fuel according to the pathways listed in
Table 1 to this section, paragraph (f)(6)
of this section, or as approved by the
Administrator. In choosing an
appropriate D code, producers and
importers may disregard any incidental,
de minimis feedstock contaminants that
are impractical to remove and are
related to customary feedstock
production and transport. Tables 1 and
2 to this section do not apply to, and
impose no requirements with respect to,
volumes of fuel for which RINs are
generated pursuant to paragraph (f)(6) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1355
(ii) (A) A feedstock qualifies under
paragraph (f)(5)(i)(A) or (f)(5)(i)(B) of
this section only if it is collected
according to a plan submitted to and
accepted by U.S. EPA under the
registration procedures specified in
§ 80.1450(b)(1)(vii).
(B) A feedstock qualifies under
paragraph (f)(5)(i)(C) of this section only
if it is collected according to a plan
submitted to and approved by U.S. EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Section 80.1429 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(9)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 80.1429 Requirements for separating
RINs from volumes of renewable fuel.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(6) of this section, any party that
owns a volume of renewable fuel must
separate any RINs that have been
assigned to that volume once the
volume is blended with gasoline or
fossil-based diesel to produce a
transportation fuel, heating oil, or jet
fuel. A party may separate up to 2.5
RINs per gallon of blended renewable
fuel.
*
*
*
*
*
(9) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b)(2) through (b)(5) and (b)(8) of this
section, parties whose non-export
renewable volume obligations are solely
related to either the importation of
products listed in § 80.1407(c) or
§ 80.1407(e) or to the addition of
blendstocks into a volume of finished
gasoline, finished diesel fuel, RBOB, or
CBOB, can only separate RINs from
volumes of renewable fuel if the number
of gallon-RINs separated in a calendar
year is less than or equal to a limit set
as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Section 80.1431 is amended by
adding a new paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§ 80.1431
Treatment of invalid RINs.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of
this section, improperly generated RINs
may be used for compliance provided
that all of the following conditions and
requirements are satisfied and the
renewable fuel producer or importer
who improperly generated the RINs
demonstrates that the conditions and
requirements are satisfied through the
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements set forth below, that:
(1) The number of RINs generated for
a batch exceeds the number of RINs that
should have been properly generated.
(2) The RINs were improperly
generated as a result of a broken meter,
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1356
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
an inadvertent temperature correction
error, or an inadvertent administrative
error.
(3) The renewable fuel producer or
importer had in place at the time the
RINs were improperly generated a
quality assurance/quality control plan
designed to ensure that process
measuring equipment such as meters
and temperature probes are properly
maintained and to prevent inadvertent
administrative errors.
(4) The renewable fuel producer or
importer has taken any appropriate
additional steps to prevent similar
violations from occurring in the future.
(5) The improperly generated RINs
have been transferred to another party.
(6) The renewable fuel producer or
importer has not improperly generated
RINs for the reasons described in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section on more
than five batches during any calendar
year.
(7) All of the following remedial
actions have been implemented within
30 days of the EMTS submission date of
the improper RIN generation:
(i) The renewable fuel producer or
importer retires an equal number of
valid RINs with the same D Code and
RIN year as the properly generated RINs,
using an EMTS retire code of 110.
(ii) The renewable fuel producer or
importer reports all the following
information to EPA via EMTS, which
EPA may make publicly available:
(A) Company name.
(B) Company ID.
(C) Facility name.
(D) Facility ID.
(E) The date the renewable fuel was
produced.
(F) The date the RINs were originally
generated.
(G) The number of RINs generated.
(H) The number of RINs improperly
generated.
(I) RIN year.
(J) D codes of generated RINs.
(K) Batch numbers.
(L) EMTS Transaction ID of the
original generation.
(M) An explanation of how the
violation occurred, and why the
improperly generated RINs meet the
criteria in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(N) Steps taken to prevent similar
violations from occurring in the future.
(O) Information under paragraphs
(c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) of this section.
(P) Any additional information the
Administrator may require.
(8) The renewable fuel producer or
importer maintains all records relating
to the improper RIN generation and the
associated remedial actions taken,
including but not limited to any of the
following:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
(i) All information regarding the
generation of invalid RINs, including
information that is sufficient to
demonstrate that the improperly
generated RINs meet the criteria in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(ii) Documents demonstrating that the
renewable fuel producer or importer has
implemented the quality control/quality
assurance plan required in paragraph
(c)(3) of this section, and has taken all
appropriate additional steps to prevent
similar violations from occurring in the
future.
(iii) All correspondence with EPA.
(iv) All EMTS transactions
(Generation, Buy, Sell and Retire).
(v) All Product Transfer Documents
(PTDs).
(d) If EPA determines that a
renewable fuel producer improperly
generated RINs but did not meet the
requirements set forth in paragraph (c)
of this section, then the requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section apply from
the moment that the invalid RINs were
generated in EMTS. Once the RIN
generator has identified improperly
generated RINs to EPA, then EPA may
remove these improperly generated
RINs from EMTS.
■ 9. Section 80.1449 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) introductory text
to read as follows:
§ 80.1449 What are the Production Outlook
Report requirements?
(a) By June 1 of each year (September
1 for the report due in 2010), a
registered renewable fuel producer or
importer must submit and an
unregistered renewable fuel producer
may submit all of the following
information for each of its facilities, as
applicable, to EPA:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Section 80.1450 is amended by
revising paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3)
to read as follows:
§ 80.1450 What are the registration
requirements under the RFS program?
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) Any producer of renewable fuel,
and any foreign ethanol producer who
makes changes to his facility that will
allow him to produce renewable fuel, as
defined in § 80.1401 that is not reflected
in the producer’s registration
information on file with EPA must
update his registration information and
submit a copy of an updated
independent third-party engineering
review on file with EPA at least 60 days
prior to producing the new type of
renewable fuel. The producer may also
submit an addendum to the
independent third-party engineering
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
review on file with EPA provided the
addendum meets all the requirements in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section and
verifies for EPA the most up-to-date
information at the producer’s existing
facility.
(2) Any producer of renewable fuel
and any foreign ethanol producer who
makes any other changes to a facility
that will affect the producer’s
registration information but will not
affect the renewable fuel category for
which the producer is registered per
paragraph (b) of this section must
update his registration information 7
days prior to the change.
(3) All producers of renewable fuel
and foreign ethanol producers must
update registration information and
submit an updated independent thirdparty engineering review according to
the schedule in paragraph (d)(3)(i) or
(d)(3)(ii) of this section, and including
the information specified in paragraph
(d)(3)(iii) of this section:
(i) For all producers of renewable fuel
and foreign ethanol producers registered
in calendar year 2010, the updated
registration information and
independent third-party engineering
review shall be submitted to EPA by
January 31, 2013, and by January 31 of
every third calendar year thereafter; or
(ii) For all producers of renewable
fuel and foreign ethanol producers
registered in any calendar year after
2010, the updated registration
information and independent thirdparty engineering review shall be
submitted to EPA by January 31 of every
third calendar year after the first year of
registration.
(iii) In addition to conducting the
engineering review and written report
and verification required by paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, the updated
independent third-party engineering
review shall include a detailed review
of the renewable fuel producer’s
calculations used to determine VRIN of
a representative sample of batches of
each type of renewable fuel produced
since the last registration. The
representative sample shall be selected
in accordance with the sample size
guidelines set forth at § 80.127.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. Section 80.1451 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(1)(xi) to read as
follows:
§ 80.1451 What are the reporting
requirements under the RFS program?
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(xi) A list of all RINs generated prior
to July 1, 2010 that were retired for
compliance in the reporting period.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
12. Section 80.1452 is amended
revising paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(4), and
(b)(5) to read as follows:
■
§ 80.1452 What are the requirements
related to the EPA Moderated Transaction
System (EMTS)?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) The EPA company registration
number of the renewable fuel producer
or foreign ethanol producer, as
applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) The EPA facility registration
number of the facility at which the
renewable fuel producer or foreign
ethanol producer produced the batch, as
applicable.
(5) The EPA facility registration
number of the importer that imported
the batch, if applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. Section 80.1460 is amended by
adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as
follows:
§ 80.1460 What acts are prohibited under
the RFS program?
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(6) Generate a RIN for fuel for which
RINs have previously been generated.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. Section 80.1464 is amended as
follows:
■ a. By revising paragraph (a)(2) heading
and paragraph (a)(2)(i).
■ b. By adding paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) and
(a)(2)(iv).
■ c. By revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii).
■ d. By revising paragraph (b)(2)
heading and paragraph (b)(2)(i).
■ e. By adding paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and
(b)(2)(iv).
■ f. By revising paragraph (b)(3)(ii).
■ g. By revising paragraph (c)(1)
heading.
■ h. By adding paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and
(c)(1)(iv).
§ 80.1464 What are the attest engagement
requirements under the RFS program?
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(2) RIN transaction reports and
product transfer documents.
(i) Obtain and read copies of a
representative sample, selected in
accordance with the guidelines in
§ 80.127, of each RIN transaction type
(RINs purchased, RINs sold, RINs
retired, RINs separated, RINs reinstated)
included in the RIN transaction reports
required under § 80.1451(a)(2) for the
compliance year.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Verify that the product transfer
documents for the representative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
samples under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this
section of RINs sold and the RINs
purchased contain the applicable
information required under § 80.1453
and report as a finding any product
transfer document that does not contain
the required information.
(iv) Verify the accuracy of the
information contained in the product
transfer documents reviewed pursuant
to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section
and report as a finding any exceptions.
(3) * * *
(ii) Obtain the database, spreadsheet,
or other documentation used to generate
the information in the RIN activity
reports; compare the RIN transaction
samples reviewed under paragraph
(a)(2) of this section with the
corresponding entries in the database or
spreadsheet and report as a finding any
discrepancies; compute the total
number of current-year and prior-year
RINs owned at the start and end of each
quarter, purchased, separated, sold,
retired and reinstated, and for parties
that reported RIN activity for RINs
assigned to a volume of renewable fuel,
the volume and type of renewable fuel
(as defined in § 80.1401) owned at the
end of each quarter; as represented in
these documents; and state whether this
information agrees with the party’s
reports to EPA.
(b) * * *
(2) RIN transaction reports and
product transfer documents.
(i) Obtain and read copies of a
representative sample, selected in
accordance with the guidelines in
§ 80.127, of each transaction type (RINs
purchased, RINs sold, RINs retired, RINs
separated, RINs reinstated) included in
the RIN transaction reports required
under § 80.1451(b)(2) for the compliance
year.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Verify that the product transfer
documents for the representative
samples under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section of RINs sold and the RINs
purchased contain the applicable
information required under § 80.1453
and report as a finding any product
transfer document that does not contain
the required information.
(iv) Verify the accuracy of the
information contained in the product
transfer documents reviewed pursuant
to paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section
and report as a finding any exceptions.
(3) * * *
(ii) Obtain the database, spreadsheet,
or other documentation used to generate
the information in the RIN activity
reports; compare the RIN transaction
samples reviewed under paragraph
(b)(2) of this section with the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1357
corresponding entries in the database or
spreadsheet and report as a finding any
discrepancies; report the total number of
each RIN generated during each quarter
and compute and report the total
number of current-year and prior-year
RINs owned at the start and end of each
quarter, purchased, separated, sold,
retired and reinstated, and for parties
that reported RIN activity for RINs
assigned to a volume of renewable fuel,
the volume of renewable fuel owned at
the end of each quarter, as represented
in these documents; and state whether
this information agrees with the party’s
reports to EPA.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) RIN transaction reports and
product transfer documents.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Verify that the product transfer
documents for the representative
samples under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this
section of RINs sold and RINs
purchased contain the applicable
information required under § 80.1453
and report as a finding any product
transfer document that does not contain
the required information.
(iv) Verify the accuracy of the
information contained in the product
transfer documents reviewed pursuant
to paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section
and report as a finding any exceptions.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Section 80.1465 is amended by
revising paragraph (h)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 80.1465 What are the additional
requirements under this subpart for foreign
small refiners, foreign small refineries, and
importers of RFS–FRFUEL?
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) Bonds shall be posted by any of
the following methods:
(i) Paying the amount of the bond to
the Treasurer of the United States.
(ii) Obtaining a bond in the proper
amount from a third party surety agent
that is payable to satisfy United States
administrative or judicial judgments
against the foreign refiner, provided
EPA agrees in advance as to the third
party and the nature of the surety
agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 16. Section 80.1466 is amended by
revising paragraph (h)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 80.1466 What are the additional
requirements under this subpart for RINgenerating foreign producers and importers
of renewable fuels for which RINs have
been generated by the foreign producer?
*
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
*
*
09JAR3
*
*
1358
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
(h) * * *
(2) Bonds shall be posted by any of
the following methods:
(i) Paying the amount of the bond to
the Treasurer of the United States.
(ii) Obtaining a bond in the proper
amount from a third party surety agent
that is payable to satisfy United States
administrative or judicial judgments
against the foreign producer, provided
EPA agrees in advance as to the third
party and the nature of the surety
agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 17. Section 80.1467 is amended by
revising paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and
(g)(2) to read as follows:
§ 80.1467 What are the additional
requirements under this subpart for a
foreign RIN owner?
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) The foreign entity shall post a
bond of the amount calculated using the
following equation:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Bond = G * $ 0.01
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:47 Jan 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
Where:
Bond = Amount of the bond in U.S. dollars.
G = The total of the number of gallon-RINs
the foreign entity expects to obtain, sell,
transfer or hold during the first calendar
year that the foreign entity is a RIN
owner, plus the number of gallon-RINs
the foreign entity expects to obtain, sell,
transfer or hold during the next four
calendar years. After the first calendar
year, the bond amount shall be based on
the actual number of gallon-RINs
obtained, sold, or transferred so far
during the current calendar year plus the
number of gallon-RINs obtained, sold, or
transferred during the four calendar
years immediately preceding the current
calendar year. For any year for which
there were fewer than four preceding
years in which the foreign entity
obtained, sold, or transferred RINs, the
bond shall be based on the total of the
number of gallon-RINs sold or
transferred so far during the current
calendar year plus the number of gallonRINs obtained, sold, or transferred
during any immediately preceding
calendar years in which the foreign
entity owned RINs, plus the number of
gallon-RINs the foreign entity expects to
obtain, sell or transfer during subsequent
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
calendar years, the total number of years
not to exceed four calendar years in
addition to the current calendar year.
(2) Bonds shall be posted by any of
the following methods:
(i) Paying the amount of the bond to
the Treasurer of the United States.
(ii) Obtaining a bond in the proper
amount from a third party surety agent
that is payable to satisfy United States
administrative or judicial judgments
against the foreign RIN owner, provided
EPA agrees in advance as to the third
party and the nature of the surety
agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(2) Any RIN that is obtained, sold,
transferred, or held that is in excess of
the number for which the bond
requirements of this section have been
satisfied is an invalid RIN under
§ 80.1431.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–33451 Filed 1–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\09JAR3.SGM
09JAR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1320-1358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33451]
[[Page 1319]]
Vol. 77
Monday,
No. 5
January 9, 2012
Part V
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 80
Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: 2012 Renewable Fuel Standards;
Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 1320]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 80
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133; FRL-9614-4]
RIN 2060-AQ76
Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: 2012 Renewable Fuel
Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act Section 211(o), the Environmental
Protection Agency is required to set the renewable fuel standards each
November for the following year. In general the standards are designed
to ensure that the applicable volumes of renewable fuel specified in
the statue are used. However, the statute specifies that EPA is to
project the volume of cellulosic biofuel production for the upcoming
year and must base the cellulosic biofuel standard on that projected
volume if it is less than the applicable volume set forth in the Act.
EPA is today finalizing a projected cellulosic biofuel volume for 2012
and annual percentage standards for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based
diesel, advanced biofuel, and renewable fuels that will apply to all
gasoline and diesel produced or imported for domestic use in year 2012.
In the NPRM we also proposed an applicable volume of 1.28 billion
gallons for biomass-based diesel for 2013. The statute specifies that
the minimum volume of biomass-based diesel for years 2013 and beyond
must be at least 1.0 billion gallons. We are continuing to evaluate the
many comments on the NPRM from stakeholders, and will issue a final
rule setting the applicable biomass-based diesel volume for calendar
year 2013 as expeditiously as practicable. This action also presents a
number of changes to the RFS2 regulations that are designed to clarify
existing provisions and to address several unique circumstances that
have come to light since the RFS2 program became effective on July 1,
2010. Finally, today's rule also makes a minor amendment to the
gasoline benzene regulations regarding inclusion of transferred
blendstocks in a refinery's early benzene credit generation
calculations.
DATES: This final rule is effective on January 9, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia MacAllister, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division,
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105; Telephone number: (734) 214-4131; Fax number: (734) 214-4816;
Email address: macallister.julia@epa.gov, or Assessment and Standards
Division Hotline; telephone number (734) 214-4636; Email address
OTAQPUBLICWEB@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this proposed rule are those
involved with the production, distribution, and sale of transportation
fuels, including gasoline and diesel fuel or renewable fuels such as
ethanol and biodiesel. Potentially regulated categories include:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS \1\ Examples of potentially regulated
Category Codes SIC \2\ Codes entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry................................... 324110 2911 Petroleum Refineries.
Industry................................... 325193 2869 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing.
Industry................................... 325199 2869 Other basic organic chemical
manufacturing.
Industry................................... 424690 5169 Chemical and allied products
merchant wholesalers.
Industry................................... 424710 5171 Petroleum bulk stations and
terminals.
Industry................................... 424720 5172 Petroleum and petroleum products
merchant wholesalers.
Industry................................... 454319 5989 Other fuel dealers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
\2\ Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
final action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this final action. Other types
of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To
determine whether your activities will be regulated by this final
action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40
CFR part 80. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of
this final action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in
the preceding section.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Executive Summary
A. Standards for 2012
1. Assessment of 2012 Cellulosic Biofuel Volume
2. Advanced Biofuel and Total Renewable Fuel in 2012
3. Percentage Standards for 2012
4. Historical Renewable Fuel Production
B. Regulatory Changes
C. 2012 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel Waiver Credits
D. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate Compliance Approach
E. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate Compliance Approach
II. Projection of Cellulosic Volume and Assessment of Biomass-Based
Diesel and Advanced Biofuel for 2012
A. Statutory Requirements
B. Cellulosic Biofuel Volume Assessment
1. Existing Cellulosic Biofuel Facilities
2. Potential New Facilities in 2012
3. Imports of Cellulosic Biofuel
4. Projections From the Energy Information Administration
5. Comments on the Proposed Rule
6. Summary of Volume Projections
C. Advanced Biofuel and Total Renewable Fuel in 2012
D. Biomass-Based Diesel in 2012
[[Page 1321]]
III. Final Percentage Standards for 2012
A. Background
B. Calculation of Standards
1. How are the standards calculated?
2. Small Refineries and Small Refiners
3. Final Percentage Standards
IV. Changes to RFS2 Regulations
A. Summary of Amendments
B. Technical Justification for Equivalence Value Application
C. Changes to Definitions of Terms
1. Definition of Annual Cover Crop
2. Definition of ``Naphtha''
D. Technical Amendments Related to RIN Generation and Separation
1. RIN Separation Limit for Obligated Parties
2. RIN Retirement Provision for Error Correction
3. Production Outlook Reports Submission Deadline
4. Attest Procedures
E. Technical Amendments Related to Registration & Recordkeeping
1. Construction Discontinuance & Completion Documentation
2. Third-Party Engineering Reviews
3. Foreign Ethanol Producers
F. Additional Amendments and Clarifications
1. Third-Party Engineering Review Addendum
2. RIN Generation for Fuel Imported From a Registered Foreign
Producer
3. Bond Posting
4. Prohibition Against Repeat Generation of RINs
5. Acceptance of Separated Yard Waste and Food Waste Separation
Plans
6. Transferred Blendstocks in Early Benzene Credit Generation
Calculations
V. Annual Administrative Announcements
A. 2011 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel Waiver Credits
B. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate Compliance Approach
C. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate Compliance Approach
VI. Comments Outside the Scope of This Rulemaking
VII. Public Participation
VIII. Statutory And Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
IX. Statutory Authority
I. Executive Summary
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program began in 2006 pursuant to
the requirements in Clean Air Act (CAA) section 211(o) which were added
through the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct). The statutory
requirements for the RFS program were subsequently modified through the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), resulting in the
promulgation of revised regulatory requirements on March 26, 2010.\1\
The transition from the RFS1 requirements of EPAct to the RFS2
requirements of EISA generally occurred on July 1, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 75 FR 14670.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under RFS2, EPA is required to determine and publish the applicable
annual percentage standards for each compliance year by November 30 of
the previous year. As part of this effort, EPA must determine the
projected volume of cellulosic biofuel production for the following
year. If the projected volume of cellulosic biofuel production is less
than the applicable volume specified in section 211(o)(2)(B)(i)(III) of
the statute, EPA must lower the applicable volume used to set the
annual cellulosic biofuel percentage standard to the projected volume
of production. When we lower the applicable volume of cellulosic
biofuel in this manner, we are also authorized to lower the applicable
volumes of advanced biofuel and/or total renewable fuel by the same or
a lesser amount. Since these evaluations are based on evolving
information about emerging segments of the biofuels industry, and may
result in the applicable volumes differing from those in the statute,
we believe that it is appropriate to establish the applicable volumes
through a notice-and-comment rulemaking process. Today's notice
provides our final evaluation of the projected production of cellulosic
biofuel for 2012, our evaluation of whether to lower the applicable
volumes of advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel, and the final
percentage standards for compliance year 2012. We are finalizing a
cellulosic biofuel requirement of 10.45 mill ethanol-equivalent gallons
for 2012, and are not reducing the advanced biofuel or total renewable
fuel requirements below the levels specified in the statute. For future
years, EPA will continue to evaluate whether it is appropriate to
adjust the volume of advanced and total renewable fuel, if EPA adjusts
the volume of cellulosic biofuel. In making such determinations, EPA
will consider all relevant factors. The evaluations that led to these
2012 volume requirements were based on our evaluation of individual
producers' production plans and progress, a consideration of comments
received in response to our notice of proposed rulemaking published on
July 1, 2011,\2\ the estimate of projected biofuel volumes that the
Energy Information Administration (EIA) is required to provide to EPA
by October 31, and other information that became available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 76 FR 38844.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's final rule does not include an assessment of the
environmental impacts of the percentage standards we are setting for
2012. All of the impacts of the RFS2 program were addressed in the RFS2
final rule published on March 26, 2010, including impacts of the
biofuel standards specified in the statute. Today's rulemaking simply
sets the standards for 2012 whose impacts were already analyzed
previously.
Today's notice also finalizes a number of changes to the RFS2
regulations. These changes are designed to reduce confusion among
regulated parties and streamline implementation by clarifying certain
terms and phrases and addressing unique circumstances that came to
light after the RFS2 program went into effect on July 1, 2010.
Additionally, this notice also makes a minor amendment to the gasoline
benzene regulations regarding inclusion of transferred blendstocks in a
refinery's early benzene credit generation calculations. Further
discussion of all of these changes can be found in Section IV.
Finally, in today's rulemaking we are announcing the price for
cellulosic biofuel waiver credits that will be available for compliance
with the 2012 cellulosic biofuel requirement, and are also announcing
the results of our annual assessment of the aggregate compliance
approach for U.S. crops and crop residue. These announcements are
provided in Section V.
EPA is required to determine the applicable volume of biomass-based
diesel (BBD) that will be required in 2013 and beyond based on
consideration of a variety of factors, and promulgate regulations
establishing the volumes. The statute specifies that the volume of
biomass-based diesel for years 2013 and beyond must be at least 1
billion gallons. In the NPRM we proposed an applicable volume of 1.28
bill gallons for BBD for 2013. We are continuing to evaluate the many
comments on the NPRM from stakeholders as well as fulfilling other
analytical requirements. In determining
[[Page 1322]]
the BBD applicable volume, the statute requires an analysis of the
impact of the BBD volume on a variety of factors such as the impact of
BBD on energy security, transportation fuel costs, job creation, water
quality, and other factors. EPA intends to gather additional
information to enhance our analysis of these factors including
consideration of costs and benefits consistent with the provisions of
E.O. 13563, to ensure an appropriately balanced decision. For these
reasons, we are not finalizing an applicable volume for 2013 BBD in
today's rulemaking. We recognize that the statute calls for EPA to
promulgate the applicable volume of BBD for 2013 no later than 14
months before that year. We do intend to issue a final determination
setting the applicable BBD volume for calendar year 2013 as
expeditiously as practicable.
A. Standards for 2012
1. Assessment of 2012 Cellulosic Biofuel Volume
To estimate the volume of cellulosic biofuel that can be made
available in the U.S. in 2012, we researched all potential production
sources by company and facility. This included sources that were still
in the planning stages, those that were under construction, and those
that are already producing some volume of cellulosic ethanol,
cellulosic diesel, or some other type of cellulosic biofuel. Facilities
primarily focused on research and development work with no intention of
marketing any fuel produced were not considered for this assessment.
From this universe of potential cellulosic biofuel sources we
identified the subset that had a possibility of producing some volume
of qualifying cellulosic biofuel for use as transportation fuel in
2012.
In today's final rule we specify the projected available volume for
2012 that forms the basis for the percentage standard for cellulosic
biofuel. To arrive at this final volume, we took into consideration
additional factors such as the current and expected state of funding,
the status of the technology, progress towards construction and
production goals, and other significant factors that could potentially
impact fuel production or the ability of the produced fuel to generate
cellulosic Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs). We also considered
projections of cellulosic biofuel provided by the EIA. Further
discussion of these factors can be found in Section II.B.
In our assessment we focused on domestic sources of cellulosic
biofuel. While imports of cellulosic biofuels are possible and could be
eligible to generate RINs, we believe this is unlikely due to local
demand for cellulosic biofuels in the countries in which they are
produced as well as the cost associated with transporting these fuels
to the U.S. Of the domestic sources, we estimated that six facilities
can make volumes of cellulosic biofuel available for transportation use
in the U.S. in 2012. These facilities are listed in Table I.A.1-1 along
with our estimate of the projected 2012 volume for each.
Table I.A.1-1--Projected Available Cellulosic Biofuel Plant Volumes for 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected
available volume
Company Location Fuel type (million ethanol-
equivalent
gallons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Process Inc................... Alpena, MI............... Ethanol.................. 0.5
Fiberight.............................. Blairstown, IA........... Ethanol.................. 2.0
INEOS Bio.............................. Vero Beach, FL........... Ethanol.................. 3.0
KiOR................................... Columbus, MS............. Gasoline, Diesel......... 4.8
KL Energy Corp......................... Upton, WY................ Ethanol.................. 0.1
ZeaChem................................ Boardman, OR............. Ethanol.................. 0.05
------------------
Total.............................. ......................... ......................... 10.45
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each of the facilities listed in the Table I.A.1-1 are at different
points in their progress towards the production of commercial volumes
of cellulosic biofuel. KL Energy Corp. is the only facility in the
United States currently generating cellulosic biofuel RINs. American
Process Inc., Fiberight, and ZeaChem all anticipate completing
construction on their production facilities in late 2011 or early 2012
and plan to begin producing biofuel soon after their facilities are
complete. INEOS Bio and KiOR are targeting April 2012 and mid 2012 for
the start-up of their respective cellulosic biofuel production
facilities. The variation in these expected start-up times, along with
the facility production capacities, company production plans, and a
variety of other factors have all been taken into account in projecting
the available volume of cellulosic biofuel from each these facilities.
2. Advanced Biofuel and Total Renewable Fuel in 2012
The statute indicates that we may reduce the applicable volume of
advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel if we determine that the
projected volume of cellulosic biofuel production for 2012 falls short
of the statutory volume of 500 million gallons. As shown in Table
I.A.1-1, we have determined that this is the case. Therefore, we also
must evaluate the need to lower the applicable volumes for advanced
biofuel and total renewable fuel.
To address the need to lower the advanced biofuel standard, we
first consider whether it appears likely that the biomass-based diesel
volume of 1.0 billion gallons specified in the statute can be met in
2012. As discussed in Section II.E, we believe that the 1.0 billion
gallon standard can indeed be met. Since biodiesel has an Equivalence
Value of 1.5, 1.0 billion physical gallons of biodiesel would provide
1.5 billion ethanol-equivalent gallons that can be counted towards the
advanced biofuel standard of 2.0 billion gallons. Of the remaining 0.5
bill gallons, 10.45 mill gallons will be met with cellulosic biofuel.
Based on our analysis as described in Section II.C, we believe that
there will be sufficient volumes of other advanced biofuels, such as
imported sugarcane ethanol, additional biodiesel, or renewable diesel,
such that the applicable volume for advanced biofuel can remain at the
statutory level of 2.0 billion gallons. In addition, as discussed in
Section II.C, we believe there will be sufficient volumes to satisfy
the 15.2 billion gallon applicable
[[Page 1323]]
volume of total renewable fuel specified in the Act, so the 2012 total
renewable fuel percentage standard is based on that volume.
3. Percentage Standards for 2012
The renewable fuel standards are expressed as a volume percentage,
and are used by each refiner, blender or importer to determine their
renewable fuel volume obligations. The applicable percentages are set
so that if each regulated party meets the percentages, and if EIA
projections of gasoline and diesel use are accurate, then the amount of
renewable fuel, cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel, and advanced
biofuel used will meet the volumes required on a nationwide basis.
To calculate the percentage standard for cellulosic biofuel for
2012, we have used the projected annual volume of 10.45 million
ethanol-equivalent gallons (representing 8.65 million physical
gallons). The applicable volumes for biomass-based diesel, advanced
biofuel, and total renewable fuel for 2012 will be those specified in
the statute. These volumes are shown in Table I.A.3-1.
Table I.A.3-1--Final Volumes for 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual volume Ethanol equivalent volume \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel.................... 8.65 mill gal............ 10.45 mill gal.
Biomass-based diesel.................. 1.0 bill gal............. 1.5 bill gal.
Advanced biofuel...................... 1.3-1.5 \b\ bill gal..... 2.0 bill gal.
Renewable fuel........................ 14.5-14.7 \b\ bill gal... 15.2 bill gal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Biodiesel and cellulosic diesel have equivalence values of 1.5 and 1.7 ethanol equivalent gallons
respectively. As a result, ethanol-equivalent volumes are larger than actual volumes for cellulosic biofuel
and biomass-based diesel.
\b\ Range depends on the equivalence values of advanced biofuels other than cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based
diesel.
Four separate standards are required under the RFS2 program,
corresponding to the four separate volume requirements shown in Table
I.A.3-1. The specific formulas we use to calculate the renewable fuel
percentage standards are contained in the regulations at Sec. 80.1405
and repeated in Section III.B.1. The percentage standards represent the
ratio of renewable fuel volume to projected non-renewable gasoline and
diesel volume. The projected volume of transportation gasoline and
diesel used to calculate the standards in today's final rule was
provided by EIA.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Letter from Howard K. Gruenspecht, Acting Administrator,
Energy Information Administration, to Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator, EPA. October 19, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In March 2011, DOE evaluated the impacts of the RFS program on
small entities and concluded that some small refineries would suffer a
disproportionate economic hardship if required to participate in the
program.\4\ As a result, we are required to exempt these few refineries
from being obligated parties for a minimum of two years (2011 and
2012), and must also exempt their gasoline and diesel volumes from the
calculation of the annual percentage standards. In addition, EPA has
approved a number of individual small refinery petitions submitted
pursuant to 40 CFR Sec. 80.1441(e)(2) since publication of the
proposed rule, and has also adjusted the final 2012 percentage
standards to reflect the exemption of these small refineries from being
RFS obligated parties in 2012. The final standards for 2012 are shown
in Table I.A.3-2 and include the adjustment for exempt small refineries
(which constitute about 3.6% of the gasoline pool and 4.5% of the
diesel pool). Detailed calculations can be found in Section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Small Refinery Exemption Study: An Investigation into
Disproportionate Economic Hardship,'' U.S. Department of Energy,
March 2011.
Table I.A.3-2--Final Percentage Standards for 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel........................................... 0.006%
Biomass-based diesel......................................... 0.91
Advanced biofuel............................................. 1.21
Renewable fuel............................................... 9.23
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Historical Renewable Fuel Production
To provide a comparison to the 2012 volume requirements shown in
Table I.A.3-1, we determined the actual annual production volumes for
the four RFS categories of renewable fuel. Since data on 2011
production is currently incomplete, we have shown the production
volumes for the full year beginning in July 2010 and ending in June
2011. July 2010 also marks the start of the RFS2 program when data
collection began with the EPA-Moderated Transaction System (EMTS) on
production of renewable fuel and generation of RINs.
Table I.A.4-1--Production of Renewable Fuel From July 2010-June 2011 \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual volume Ethanol equivalent volume \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel.................... 0 mill gal............... 0 mill gal.
Biomass-based diesel.................. 0.43 \b\ bill gal........ 0.64 \b\ bill gal.
Advanced biofuel...................... 0.47 bill gal............ 0.70 bill gal.
Renewable fuel........................ 14.05 bill gal........... 14.29 bill gal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Except for biomass-based diesel, data derived from the EPA-Moderated Transaction System (EMTS) at https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/rfsdata/index.htm.
\b\ Due to ongoing investigations of biodiesel RIN generation, these values have been derived from Census Bureau
data on fats and oils at https://www.census.gov/manufacturing/cir/historical_data/m311k/.
[[Page 1324]]
B. Regulatory Changes
In today's action we are also finalizing a number of changes to the
RFS2 regulations. These changes are intended to:
Clarify certain provisions because we have learned that
there is some confusion among some regulated parties
Clarify the application of certain provisions to unique
circumstances
Provide greater specificity in the definition of certain
terms
Correct regulatory language that inadvertently
misrepresented our intent
Today's rule also makes a minor amendment to the gasoline benzene
regulations regarding inclusion of transferred blendstocks in a
refinery's early benzene credit generation calculations. A detailed
discussion of these regulatory changes is provided in Section IV.
C. 2012 Price for Cellulosic Biofuel Waiver Credits
Since we are reducing the required volume of cellulosic biofuel for
2012 below the applicable volume specified in the statute, EPA is
required to offer biofuel waiver credits to obligated parties that can
be purchased in lieu of acquiring cellulosic biofuel RINs.\5\ These
waiver credits are not allowed to be traded or banked for future use,
are only allowed to be used to meet the 2012 cellulosic biofuel
standard, and cannot be applied to deficits carried over from 2011.
Moreover, unlike cellulosic biofuel RINs, waiver credits may not be
used to meet either the advanced biofuel standard or the total
renewable fuel standard. For the 2012 compliance period, we are making
cellulosic biofuel waiver credits available to obligated parties for
end-of-year compliance should they need them at a price of $0.78 per
credit. Further discussion is provided in Section VI.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ One waiver credit would apply to one gallon of an obligated
party's cellulosic biofuel Renewable Volume Obligation (RVO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate Compliance Approach
As part of the RFS2 regulations, EPA established an aggregate
compliance approach for renewable fuel producers who use planted crops
and crop residue from U.S. agricultural land. This compliance approach
relieved such producers (and importers of such fuel) of the individual
recordkeeping and reporting requirements otherwise required of
producers and importers to verify that feedstocks used in the
production of RIN-qualifying renewable fuel meet the definition of
renewable biomass. EPA determined that 402 million acres of U.S.
agricultural land was available in 2007 (the year of EISA enactment)
for production of crops and crop residue that would meet the definition
of renewable biomass, and determined that as long as this total number
of acres is not exceeded, it is unlikely that new land has been devoted
to crop production based on historical trends and economic
considerations. We indicated that we would conduct an annual evaluation
of total U.S. acreage that is cropland, pastureland, or conservation
reserve program land, and that if the value exceed 402 million acres,
producers using domestically-grown crops or crop residue to produce
renewable fuel would be subject to individual recordkeeping and
reporting to verify that their feedstocks meet the definition of
renewable biomass.
The RFS2 regulations provide that EPA will make a finding
concerning whether the 2007 baseline amount of U.S. agricultural land
has been exceeded in a given year and will publish this finding in the
Federal Register by November 30 of the same year. Based on data
provided by the USDA, we have estimated that U.S. agricultural land
reached 392 million acres in 2011, and thus did not exceed the 2007
baseline acreage.
We also stated in the preamble to the final RFS2 rule that if, at
any point, EPA finds that the total agricultural land is greater than
397 million acres, EPA will conduct further investigations to evaluate
validity of the domestic aggregate compliance approach. The total
acreage estimate of 392 million acres does not exceed the trigger point
for further investigation; therefore EPA does not plan to conduct
further investigations into this matter. Additional discussion on this
matter can be found in Section V.B of this preamble.
E. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate Compliance Approach
On September 29, 2011, EPA approved the use of an aggregate
compliance approach to renewable biomass verification for planted crops
and crop residue grown in Canada. On March 15, 2011, EPA issued a
notice of receipt of and solicited public comment on a petition for EPA
to authorize the use of an aggregate approach for compliance with the
Renewable Fuel Standard renewable biomass requirements, submitted by
the Government of Canada. The petition requested that EPA determine
that an aggregate compliance approach will provide reasonable assurance
that planted crops and crop residue from Canada meet the definition of
renewable biomass.
The Government of Canada utilized several types of land use data to
demonstrate that the land included in their 124 million acre baseline
is cropland, pastureland or land equivalent to U.S. Conservation
Reserve Program land that was cleared or cultivated prior to December
19, 2007, and was actively managed or fallow and nonforested on that
date (and is therefore RFS2 qualifying land). The total agricultural
land in Canada in 2011 is estimated at 121 million acres. This data was
presented to EPA in a report titled: Changes to the Renewable Fuel
Standard Program Aggregate Compliance for Canadian Crops and Crop
Residues: Data Analysis and Justification Report 2011. This report has
been docketed at EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0133. The total acreage estimate of
121 million acres does not exceed the trigger point for further
investigation; therefore EPA does not plan to conduct further
investigations into this matter. Additional discussion on this matter
can be found in Section V.B of this preamble.
II. Projection of Cellulosic Volume and Assessment of Biomass-Based
Diesel and Advanced Biofuel for 2012
In order to project production volume of cellulosic biofuel in 2012
for use in setting the percentage standard, we collected information on
individual facilities that have the potential to produce qualifying
volumes for consumption as transportation fuel, heating oil, or jet
fuel in the U.S. in 2012. This section describes the projected
available volume of cellulosic biofuel in 2012 as well as some of the
uncertainties associated with those volumes. Section III describes the
derivation of the percentage standards that will apply to obligated
parties in 2012.
The 2012 volume projections in today's final rule were based on
several sources of information:
An estimate from EIA of the volumes of transportation
fuel, biomass-based diesel, and cellulosic biofuel that they project
will be sold or introduced into commerce in the U.S. in 2012.
Progress that the cellulosic biofuel industry is making in
2011
Our own assessment of the cellulosic biofuel industry's
projected volumes for 2012
Comments in response to the NPRM
In addition to the sources of information listed above EPA had also
intended to consider the Production Outlook Reports that are required
under Sec. 80.1449 for all registered renewable
[[Page 1325]]
fuel producers and importers. These Production Outlook Reports were not
as useful as EPA had hoped in helping to provide information on the
intentions of cellulosic biofuel producers in 2012 as very few had
registered under the RFS program and they were thus not required to
submit a report. EPA expects that in future years as more cellulosic
biofuel producers register under the RFS program these reports will
become of greater value in helping to determine the appropriate
projected available volume of cellulosic biofuel.
In directing EPA to project cellulosic biofuel production for
purposes of setting the annual cellulosic biofuel standard, Congress
did not specify what degree of certainty should be reflected in the
projections. However, in response to the NPRM, some commenters cited
Executive Order 13563 which states that regulations must in general
``promote predictability and reduce uncertainty.'' We agree that this
must be a goal in the process of determining the appropriate cellulosic
biofuel requirement for 2012. The greatest certainty is achieved when
the level of the standard is firmly established before it becomes
applicable, and all regulated parties can have confidence regarding
that standard. Doing this ensures that obligated parties know what
their obligations will be so that they can begin efforts to meet those
obligations, and biofuel producers know what baseline demand for their
product will be so that they can secure financing and ramp up
production with confidence.
In contrast to statements made by several obligated parties,
meeting the dual goals of predictability and reducing uncertainty does
not require EPA to specify an applicable volume for cellulosic biofuel
that is as low as possible, or based only on demonstrated (as opposed
to reasonably anticipated) production. Due to the availability of
cellulosic waiver credits, obligated parties always have the means to
comply with the cellulosic biofuel standard that we set,\6\ and at a
cost that is predictable. There is, therefore, no uncertainty with
regard to the level of their obligations or the means available to
achieve it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ So long as the required volume is below the volume specified
in the statute, such that cellulosic biofuel waiver credits are
available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, Executive Order 13563 also states that regulations must
in general promote ``economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and
job creation,'' while ``taking into account benefits and costs, both
quantitative and qualitative.'' While the cellulosic biofuel standard
that we set should be within the range of what can be attained based on
projected domestic production and import potential, the standard that
we set helps drive the production of volumes that will be made
available. This is consistent with comments submitted by the
Biotechnology Industry Organization and the Renewable Fuels
Association. Thus while any standard we set for cellulosic biofuel
standard for 2012 will have some uncertainty in terms of actual
attainment, our intention is to balance such uncertainty with the
objective of promoting growth in the industry. Our final projected
available volume of 8.65 million gallons of cellulosic biofuel (10.45
million ethanol-equivalent gallons) for 2012 reflects these
considerations.
A. Statutory Requirements
The volumes of renewable fuel to be used under the RFS2 program
each year (absent an adjustment or waiver by EPA) are specified in CAA
211(o)(2). These volumes for 2012 are shown in Table II.A-1.
Table II.A-1--Required Volumes in the Clean Air Act for 2012
[Bill gal]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethanol equivalent
Actual volume volume
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cellulosic biofuel.......... \a\ 0.5 0.5
Biomass-based diesel........ 1.0 1.5
Advanced biofuel............ \a\ 2.0 2.0
Renewable fuel.............. \a\ 15.2 15.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ These values assume that the biofuels would be ethanol. If any
portion of the biofuels used to meet these applicable volumes has a
volumetric energy content greater than that for ethanol, these values
will be lower.
By November 30 of each year, the EPA is required under CAA 211(o)
to determine and publish in the Federal Register the renewable fuel
percentage standards for the following year. These standards are to be
based in part on transportation fuel volumes estimated by the EIA for
the following year. The calculation of the percentage standards is
based on the formulas in Sec. 80.1405(c) which express the required
volumes of renewable fuel as a volume percentage of gasoline and diesel
sold or introduced into commerce in the 48 contiguous states plus
Hawaii.
The statute requires that if EPA determines that the projected
volume of cellulosic biofuel production for the following year is less
than the applicable volume shown in Table II.A-1, then EPA is to reduce
the applicable volume of cellulosic biofuel to the projected volume
available during that calendar year. In addition, if EPA reduces the
required volume of cellulosic biofuel below the level specified in the
statute, the Act also indicates that we may reduce the applicable
volume of advanced biofuels and total renewable fuel by the same or a
lesser volume.
B. Cellulosic Biofuel Volume Assessment
In order to project cellulosic biofuel production for 2012, EPA has
tracked the progress of over 100 biofuel production facilities. From
this list of facilities we used publically available information, as
well as information provided by DOE and USDA, to make a preliminary
determination of which facilities are the most likely candidates to
produce cellulosic biofuel and make it commercially available in 2012.
Each of these companies was investigated further in order to determine
the current status of their facilities and their likely cellulosic
biofuel production volumes for the coming years. Information such as
the funding status of these facilities, announced construction and
production ramp up periods, and annual fuel production targets were
taken into account. We also considered each company's history of
meeting milestone targets and production goals where
[[Page 1326]]
applicable. Our projection of the volume of cellulosic biofuel
production in 2012 is based on this information as well as our own
assessment of the likelihood of these facilities successfully producing
cellulosic biofuel in the volumes indicated. A brief description of
each of the companies we believe can produce cellulosic biofuel and
make it commercially available in 2012 can be found below.
1. Existing Cellulosic Biofuel Facilities
The rule that established the required 2011 cellulosic biofuel
volume identified five production facilities that we projected would
produce cellulosic biofuel and make the fuel commercially available in
2011. Each of these production facilities are now structurally
complete, however they are in various stages of biofuel production. All
of these facilities have either produced some volume of cellulosic
biofuel in 2011, or are on schedule to do so later in the year. Only KL
Energy and Range Fuels, however, have completed registration of
cellulosic biofuel production facilities under the RFS2 program and as
such they are currently the only facilities of the five listed here
currently eligible to generate cellulosic biofuel RINs. For more
background information on each of these facilities see the 2011
standards rule.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 75 FR 76790, December 9, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol (DDCE) successfully started up
their small demonstration facility in Vonore, Tennessee in late 2010.
This facility has a maximum production capacity of 250,000 gallons of
ethanol per year and uses an enzymatic hydrolysis process to convert
corn cobs into ethanol. In conversations with EPA in July 2011 DDCE
indicated that this facility was currently producing ethanol at
approximately half the nameplate capacity, corresponding to a volume of
125,000 gallons per year. The focus of this facility, however, remains
gathering information to help successfully design and operate DDCE's
first commercial scale facility. All the cellulosic ethanol currently
produced at this facility is used for testing purposes or given away.
No RINs are currently generated for this ethanol and it is not
available for purchase by obligated parties. DDCE has indicated that
they have no plans to generate RINs or sell ethanol produced at their
facility in Vonore in 2012. No volume of cellulosic ethanol has
therefore been included in the projections of available cellulosic
biofuel for 2012.
Fiberight uses an enzymatic hydrolysis process to convert the
biogenic portion of separated municipal solid waste (MSW) into ethanol.
Construction on the first stage of Fiberight's Blairstown, Iowa
facility was completed in the summer of 2010. The production capacity
of the first stage of this project is 2 million gallons of ethanol per
year. Fiberight had planned to begin production of cellulosic biofuel
from this facility in late 2010 but poor economic conditions, due in
part to low cellulosic RIN values in 2010, caused them to postpone fuel
production. Fiberight had also planned to begin construction on an
expansion of this facility in late 2010 that would increase the
production potential to 6 million gallons of ethanol per year, but were
unable to secure funding to carry out the construction as planned. They
have since secured funding and began construction on the expansion of
their Blairstown facility in April 2011. Fiberight anticipates that
they will begin fuel production in early 2012 and will ramp up
production at this facility throughout 2012. EPA projects the
production of 2 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol from this
facility in 2012.
KiOR continues to produce a small volume of renewable crude from
agricultural residue at their demonstration facility in Houston, Texas
using a technology they call Biomass Catalytic Cracking (BCC). This
technology uses heat and a proprietary catalyst to convert biomass to a
renewable crude with a relatively low oxygen content. The renewable
crude is then upgraded to produce renewable gasoline and diesel, as
well as a small quantity of fuel oil. While KiOR plans to continue to
operate their Houston facility in 2012 its main purpose will be to
provide small quantities of fuel for testing purposes and to provide
data for the optimization of KiOR's first commercial facility. In
conversations with EPA KiOR has indicated that it is unlikely that any
significant volume of fuel from this facility will be sold
commercially. EPA has therefore not included any volume from KiOR's
Houston facility in our projected available volumes for 2012.
KL Energy has developed a process to convert cellulose and
hemicellulose into cellulosic sugars using a thermal-mechanical
pretreatment process followed by an enzymatic hydrolysis. It had
initially planned to used woody biomass as their feedstock for
cellulosic biofuel production; however its production process is
versatile enough to allow for a wide variety of cellulosic feedstocks
to be used. In August 2010 KL Energy announced a joint development
agreement with Petrobras America Inc. As part of the agreement
Petrobras has invested $11 million to modify KL Energy's facility in
Upton, Wyoming to allow it to process bagasse and other waste products.
If successful, Petrobras and KL Energy plan to work together to
integrate the technology into currently existing ethanol production
facilities in Brazil. The modifications to KL Energy's facility were
completed earlier this year. KL Energy is currently producing small
volumes of cellulosic ethanol and plans to continue to do so throughout
2012. In August 2011 KL Energy successfully registered its cellulosic
biofuel production facility under the RFS program making it eligible to
generate RINs for biofuel produced from this facility. KL Energy has
indicated to EPA its intent to generate RINs for the fuel it produces
and to sell it commercially in the United States. EPA projects that
100,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol will be available from this
facility in 2012.
Range Fuels began production of methanol at their Soperton, Georgia
facility in the third quarter of 2010. This facility uses a
thermochemical technology to produce syngas (consisting of mostly
hydrogen and carbon monoxide) from a woody biomass feedstock. The
syngas is then converted into fuel with the aid of a chemical catalyst
developed by Range. Range has developed the capability to produce both
methanol and ethanol, depending on the catalyst used. In January 2011,
after producing a small volume of ethanol from this facility and
proving this capability, Range Fuels shut down the Soperton facility in
order to work through technical difficulties they had been
experiencing. No timeline has been given for the restart of this
facility and fuel production from this facility in 2012 appears
unlikely. No cellulosic fuel production from Range Fuels has been
included in EPA's 2012 projected available volume.
2. Potential New Facilities in 2012
In the proposed rule EPA discussed five new cellulosic biofuel
production facilities that had plans to begin commercial production at
some point in 2012. These facilities were at various stages in the
construction process, and as such had various degrees of uncertainty
associated with any projected 2012 commercial production. Three of
these facilities, those being developed by INEOS Bio, KiOR, and
ZeaChem, have made significant progress towards completion and are
expected to produce and market cellulosic biofuel in 2012. Two of the
companies mentioned in the proposed rule, Fulcrum Bioenergy and
Terrabon,
[[Page 1327]]
are no longer on a schedule to produce cellulosic biofuel in 2012.
Finally, EPA has become aware of a sixth company, American Process
Inc., which is developing a cellulosic biofuel project that is likely
to produce and market some volume of cellulosic biofuel in 2012. The
following section provides updated information on each of the companies
discussed in the proposed rule, as well as a summary of the project
being developed by American Process Inc.
Fulcrum Bioenergy is planning to build a facility capable of
producing 10.5 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol and 16 megawatts
of renewable electricity per year. It has developed a thermochemical
technology to produce ethanol from separated MSW via syngas using a
chemical catalyst. In November 2010 Fulcrum announced that it had
received a term sheet for an $80 million loan guarantee from DOE and
was entering into the final phase of the loan guarantee program. Prior
to that Fulcrum had announced that it had signed long term feedstock
supply contracts for this facility as well as engineering, procurement,
and construction contracts. In January 2011 Fulcrum announced it had
closed on a $75 million Series C financing that would provide the
remaining necessary capital for the construction of its first
commercial production facility pending the closing of its DOE loan
guarantee. The loan guarantee, however, has yet to be finalized. As a
result the start of the construction of this facility, originally
planned for the second quarter of 2011, is now expected to begin in
late 2011. EPA has not included any volume of cellulosic biofuel from
Fulcrum Bioenergy's facility in our 2012 projected available volume
because of this delay.
INEOS Bio has developed a process for producing cellulosic ethanol
by first gasifying feedstock material into a syngas and then using
naturally occurring bacteria to ferment the syngas into ethanol. In
January 2011 USDA announced a $75 million loan guarantee for the
construction of INEOS Bio's first commercial facility to be built in
Vero Beach, Florida. This was in addition to the grant of up to $50
million INEOS Bio received from DOE in January 2010. This facility will
be capable of producing 8 million gallons of cellulosic biofuel as well
as 6 megawatts of renewable electricity from a variety of feedstocks
including yard, agricultural, and wood waste, as well as separated MSW.
On February 9, 2011 INEOS Bio broke ground on this facility. Since
February significant progress has been made and INEOS Bio remains on
target to complete construction on this facility in April 2012.
Commercial production of cellulosic ethanol is expected to begin soon
after construction is complete. Three million gallons of cellulosic
ethanol from this facility has been included in EPA's projected
available volume for 2012.
After successful operation of their demonstration plant in Houston,
Texas KiOR began construction on its first commercial scale facility in
May 2011. This facility, located in Columbus, Mississippi, will convert
biomass to a low oxygen biocrude using a process KiOR calls Biomass
Catalytic Cracking (BCC). BCC uses a catalyst developed by KiOR in a
process similar to Fluid Catalytic Cracking currently used in the
petroleum industry. KiOR's Columbus facility will also be capable of
upgrading this biocrude into finished gasoline and diesel as well as a
small quantity of fuel oil. KiOR plans to finish construction on this
facility in the first half of 2012 and begin commercial production
early in the third quarter of 2012. KiOR has also announced plans to
construct several more commercial scale biofuel production facilities
in Mississippi and across the southeastern United States. It is
unlikely any of these additional facilities will begin production of
biofuel in 2012. EPA has included 3 million gallons of cellulosic
biofuel (4.8 million ethanol equivalent gallons) from KiOR's Columbus
facility in our projected available volume for 2012.
Terrabon completed construction of a small demonstration scale
facility for the conversion of MSW and other waste materials into
gasoline in 2010 and are currently developing plans for their first
commercial scale facility. Terrabon utilizes a unique production
process that can be used to produce gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel.
Feedstock is first fermented into carboxylic acids by a variety of
micro organisms. These carboxylic acids are then neutralized to form
carboxylate salts that are dewatered, dried, and thermally converted to
ketones. Finally, the ketones are hydrogenated to form alcohols which
can then be refined into gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel. Terrabon had
hoped to begin producing cellulosic biofuel at their first commercial
scale facility some time in 2012, however difficulties in securing the
necessary funding have delayed the expected start up of their first
commercial scale facility to 2013. EPA has not included any volume of
cellulosic biofuel from Terrabon in our 2012 projected available
volume.
ZeaChem has begun construction on a small demonstration scale
facility in Boardman, Oregon capable of producing 250,000 gallons of
cellulosic ethanol per year. Its production process uses a combination
of biochemical and thermochemical technologies to produce ethanol and
other renewable chemicals from cellulosic materials. The feedstock is
first fractionated into two separate streams containing cellulosic
sugars and lignin. The cellulosic sugars are fermented into ethyl
acetate using a naturally occurring acetogen, which can then be
hydrogenated into ethanol. The hydrogen necessary for this process is
produced by gasifying the lignin stream from the cellulosic biomass.
ZeaChem's process is flexible and is capable of producing a wide range
of renewable chemical and fuel molecules in addition to ethanol.
ZeaChem received a grant of up to $25 million from DOE in January 2010
for the construction of their demonstration facility. Since then
ZeaChem has made significant progress on its demonstration facility and
currently plans to begin production of cellulosic ethanol from this
facility in early 2012. It has indicated to EPA, however, that it is
highly unlikely to achieve full production capacity at this facility in
its first year of production and has suggested that the production of
50,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol from this facility in 2012 is a
more realistic expectation. Despite this small volume, ZeaChem does
intend to generate RINs for the fuel that they produce and to market it
commercially. Based on this information EPA has included 0.05 million
gallons of cellulosic ethanol in our projected available volume for
2012.
American Process Inc. (API) is developing a project in Alpena,
Michigan capable of producing up to 900,000 gallons of cellulosic
ethanol per year from woody biomass. This facility will use a
technology developed by API called GreenPower+TM. This
technology extracts the hemicelluloses portion of woody biomass using
hot water and hydrolyzes it into cellulosic sugars. These cellulosic
sugars are then converted to ethanol or other alcohols, while the
remaining portion of the woody biomass, containing mostly cellulose and
lignin, is processed into wood paneling at a co-located facility. At
larger scale facilities API anticipates burning the residual biomass in
a boiler to produce renewable steam and electricity as well as
cellulosic biofuel. In January 2010 API received a grant from DOE for
up to $18 million for the construction of their demonstration facility.
Construction of the Alpena, Michigan facility began in March 2011 and
API anticipates beginning the production of cellulosic ethanol at this
site early in 2012. API was not
[[Page 1328]]
discussed as a potential producer of cellulosic biofuels in 2012 in our
proposed rule due to uncertainty about its ability to generate RINs
with the intended feedstock and production process. EPA anticipates
these issues will be resolved. Cellulosic biofuel produced at API's
facility will therefore likely be eligible for cellulosic RINs. For our
2012 projected available volume of cellulosic biofuels we have included
500,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol from this facility. This volume
represents the low end of API's production target for that year due to
the uncertainties associated with the start up of a new industrial
facility utilizing a technology unproven at industrial scale.
Another potential source of cellulosic biofuel in 2012 is the
application of a technology being developed by EdeniQ. EdeniQ is
developing a suite of enzymes capable of breaking down cellulose into
simple sugars that can then be fermented into ethanol. Rather than
build its own production facilities EdeniQ plans to license its enzymes
to existing corn ethanol facilities. Such licensing would be
accompanied by the Cellunator, an advanced milling device EdeniQ has
developed to reduce the particle size of corn kernels to enable greater
conversion of starch to ethanol as well as the conversion of cellulose
to simple sugars. EdeniQ claims that its technology would allow corn
ethanol facilities to increase ethanol production by 1-2% by converting
the cellulosic portion of the corn kernel into ethanol. EdeniQ is also
working to increase the effectiveness of its enzymes in order to enable
ethanol production increases of 3-4% from the cellulose in the corn
kernel in the future. EdeniQ plans to begin commercial trials of its
technology in the second half of 2011. This technology has the
potential to be implemented rapidly and produce significant amounts of
cellulosic ethanol in 2012 as it requires relatively small capital
additions to already existing corn ethanol facilities. While this
technology is promising, there is currently no pathway in the RFS2
regulations for the generation of cellulosic biofuel RINs using the
cellulosic portion of the corn kernel as a feedstock. Moreover, EdeniQ
has not announced any agreements with corn ethanol producers to install
this technology to enable the production of cellulosic ethanol. For
these reasons, EPA has not included any cellulosic ethanol production
from EdeniQ's technology in our 2012 projections.
In addition to the facilities mentioned above, EPA is also aware of
three companies planning to begin the production of cellulosic biofuels
in early 2013. Coskata, Enerkem, and Poet are planning on completing
construction on their first commercial scale cellulosic biofuel
facilities in late 2012 or early 2013 and producing commercial volumes
of biofuels in 2013. While all of these facilities continue to make
progress towards commercial production of cellulosic biofuel in 2013 it
is highly unlikely that any of these facilities will be capable of
producing cellulosic biofuels by the end of 2012. EPA has therefore not
included any volume of cellulosic biofuel from these facilities in our
projected available volume for 2012. These facilities, along with
several other commercial cellulosic biofuel facilities planning to
begin production in 2013, notably the first commercial scale facilities
from Abengoa and Mascoma, indicate that the potential exists for the
rapid expansion of production volumes in future years.
3. Imports of Cellulosic Biofuel
While domestically produced cellulosic biofuels are the most likely
source of cellulosic biofuel available in the United States, producers
and/or importers of cellulosic biofuel produced in other countries may
also generate RINs and participate in the RFS2 program. While the RFS2
program does provide a financial incentive for companies to import
cellulosic biofuels into the United States, the combination of local
demand, financial incentives from other governments, and transportation
costs for the cellulosic biofuel has resulted in no cellulosic biofuel
being imported to the United States thus far. EPA believes this
situation is likely to continue in the near future. Additionally, the
majority of internationally based cellulosic biofuel facilities that
currently exist or plan to complete construction by the end of 2012 are
small research and development or pilot facilities not designed for the
commercial production of fuel.
Two notable exceptions, both located in Canada, are Enerkem and
Iogen. Enerkem has a currently existing commercial production facility
in Westbury, Quebec and is expecting to complete construction on a
second facility in Edmonton, Alberta in late 2011. Iogen has a small
demonstration facility in Ottawa and is currently exploring the
possibility of building its first commercial facility near Prince
Albert, Saskatchewan. The large expected production volumes and
relatively small distance this fuel would have to be transported to
reach the United States make these facilities the most likely
candidates to import cellulosic biofuel into t