Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on EPA’s proposal to partially waive the 2024 cellulosic biofuel volume requirement under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). Growth Energy is the nation’s largest association of biofuel producers, representing 97 U.S. bioethanol plants that each year produce more than 9.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel, and 123 businesses throughout the value chain.

The RFS continues to be one of our nation’s most successful domestic climate and energy policies. As we have seen in recent years, biofuels remain the single best tool available to shield motorists from volatile global oil prices and rapidly decarbonize the transportation sector. EPA has often implemented RFS regulations to advance these goals. In 2023, for example, EPA finalized the RFS Set rule for 2023, 2024, and 2025 with implied conventional biofuel volumes at 15 billion gallons, advanced volumes that, at the time, reflected growth and innovation in the industry, and with ambitious targets for cellulosic biofuel volumes. EPA has also taken actions to end the abuse of small refinery exemptions and restore integrity to the program. Most relevant here, EPA also appropriately denied a request from oil companies to retroactively waive 2023 cellulosic volume requirements.

EPA’s proposal to partially waive 2024 cellulosic volume requirements is inconsistent with EPA’s denial of the request to partially waive 2023 cellulosic volumes, its recent RFS policies, and with the RFS itself. While 2024 cellulosic volumes may not have achieved RVO targets, many biorefiners have nevertheless been making headway in cellulosic biofuel production, and more cellulosic registrations are being approved by the agency.

In addition, the cellulosic waiver provision is expressly written to allow reduction only in advance of setting the standards, not afterwards, and thus it is not available to EPA under this proposed rule. The RFS statute states that the cellulosic waiver must be applied by “not later than November 30 of the preceding calendar year,” not, as proposed here, in the following year (emphasis added).

Regardless of any claimed authority EPA exercises to partially reduce the 2024 cellulosic volume requirements, EPA must take the amounts and availability of all cellulosic carry forward and carryover RINs into consideration when calculating any reductions, and it should not reduce the requirements below those amounts. In addition, if determining whether to reduce cellulosic volumes pursuant to its general waiver authority, EPA should continue to require a “high degree of confidence” that RFS compliance causes severe harm to the economy as a whole, and not merely to a specific sector. And in accordance with its established policy, EPA should not “credit RIN costs as economic harm to obligated parties” when determining whether to issue a waiver of the 2024 cellulosic volume requirements.

Any waiver of 2024 cellulosic volume requirements should not provide precedent for the future of the RFS program or suppress RFS program goals, which are to drive production and innovation of biofuels, including cellulosic biofuels, and not to passively track a biofuels marketplace without them. Furthermore, delaying the compliance deadline injects unnecessary uncertainty into the process for bioethanol producers and the entire fuel supply chain.
EPA faces other pressing matters related to the RFS program. EPA is already late on its next iteration of volumes under the RFS “Set” rule, in particular 2026 volumes, which EPA was required to have already set by November 1 of last year. Additionally, several other outstanding RFS issues await resolution, including updating lifecycle emissions modeling, clearing the backlog of approvals for renewable fuel pathways, including those for advanced biofuels produced from corn oil at bioethanol wet mills, bioethanol produced using carbon capture technologies, as well as pending registrations for cellulosic biofuels from kernel fiber.

Finally, while not directly related to the RFS and this proposal, EPA must continue its work to broaden the sale of E15, including finalizing its proposal on the use of existing retail infrastructure and simplification of E15 labeling.6
Rather than retroactively reducing cellulosic volumes, EPA should instead propose rulemakings that will tap the full potential of the RFS. America’s biofuel producers and our farm partners are ready to lead the charge on climate and energy solutions, and a firm commitment to growth will offer regulatory certainty and predictability in the years ahead. Thank you for your consideration.

The post Growth Energy Comment on EPA Proposal to Waive 2024 Cellulosic Biofuel Requirements appeared first on Growth Energy.

On behalf of the undersigned organizations representing American manufacturers, farmers and agribusinesses, wholesalers, retailers, restaurants, importers, exporters, distributors, transportation and logistics providers, and other supply chain stakeholders, we are writing to urge both the International Longshoremen’s Association and the United States Maritime Alliance to return to the bargaining table with the goal of reaching a new labor contract before the new Jan. 15 contract expiration date. It is imperative for the parties to resume negotiations and remain at the table until a new contract is reached.

We know significant issues remain between the parties. However, we continue to believe the only way to resolve these issues and come to an agreement is to actually stay at the negotiating table. The continuing start and stop of the negotiations leads to further uncertainty in the supply chain, which continues to cause challenges. The three-day strike in October had a significant impact on supply chain stakeholders that rely on the East Coast and Gulf Coast ports. The additional costs from mitigation efforts as well as post-strike resumption are still being felt. Companies have continued to implement mitigation strategies because of the ongoing threat of another strike in mid-January if a new contract is not achieved.

We understand that automation and technology continues to be the biggest issue of disagreement between the parties. We continue to believe there is a path forward for the parties to address this issue. It is critical that our ports and terminals have the ability to modernize their systems and processes in order to remain globally competitive and be able to handle the continuing rise of trade volumes, both imports and exports, through our ports. Modernization can only happen through true partnership between labor and management, as well as the other supply chain stakeholders that rely on these ports. Modernization efforts will benefit all parties and are essential to address current and future throughput issues.

We firmly believe the remaining issues can only be resolved by returning to the negotiating table and remaining until a final deal is complete.

Sincerely,

The post Growth Energy Joins Trade Letter Urging Port Labor Negotiations appeared first on Growth Energy.