Jim Lane
Proposed
consent decree offers timelines for ethanol, advanced fuels
through 2016, biobased diesel through 2017.
In Washington, the EPA released a proposed consent decree in litigation brought against EPA by, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), that would establish the following schedule for issuing Renewable Fuel Standards for 2014 and 2015:
In Washington, the EPA released a proposed consent decree in litigation brought against EPA by, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), that would establish the following schedule for issuing Renewable Fuel Standards for 2014 and 2015:
•By June 1, the agency will propose
volume requirements for 2015;
•By November 30, EPA will finalize
volume requirements for 2014 and 2015 and resolve a pending waiver
petition for 2014.
Outside the scope of the consent decree, EPA also commits to:
•Propose the RFS volume requirements
for 2016 by June 1, and finalize them by November 30;
•Propose and finalize the RFS
biomass-based diesel volume requirement for 2017 on the same
schedule; and
•Re-propose volume requirements for
2014, by June 1, that reflect the volumes of renewable fuel that
were actually used in 2014.
EPA intends to issue a Federal Register Notice allowing the
public an opportunity to comment on the proposed consent decree.
Reaction from stakeholders
Tom Buis, CEO, Growth Energy
“I am pleased to hear that the EPA has finally put a process in
place to establish some certainty for biofuel producers with the
recent announcement of the timeline for the proposed 2015 RVO rule
by June 1st as well as the final 2014 and 2015 volume obligations
by November 30, 2015. “Our producers have faced ambiguity for too long and today is
welcome news that they are establishing a level of certainty with
this announcement. However, far more important than timing is that
that the EPA establishes a final rule that moves our industry
forward, and reflects the bipartisan vision Congress intended for
the RFS.
“Additionally, while not part of the consent decree, we are
pleased to see that the EPA has committed to finalizing the 2016
RFS RVO numbers this year as well. By taking this action, they are
ensuring that the RFS is back on a path to certainty for the
biofuels industry, providing the necessary guidance for the
industry to continue to thrive and advance alternative fuel
options for American consumers.”
Brooke Coleman, executive director, Advanced Ethanol
Council
“The scheduling agreement between the oil industry and EPA is
actually a good signal for the advanced biofuels industry because
it lays out a time frame and a reasonable market expectation for
resolving the regulatory uncertainty around the RFS. Now that we
have a better idea of when it will happen, we look forward to
working with EPA to make sure that the new RFS proposal supports
the commercial deployment of advanced biofuels as called for by
Congress. We were encouraged by EPA’s decision late last year to
pull a problematic 2014 proposal, and we are optimistic that EPA
will make the necessary adjustments and put the RFS back on track
going forward.”
Brent Erickson, executive vice president, BIO’s
Industrial & Environmental Section
“To continue making visible progress in commercializing advanced
biofuels, our member companies need stable policy. The changes EPA
proposed in 2013 to the Renewable Fuel Standard program and the
delay in taking final action on the rule have chilled investment
in advanced biofuels, even as the first companies began to
successfully prove this technology at commercial scale. “Today, EPA has set out a timeline to get this program back on
track. The agency must take strong action to reverse the damaging
proposal to change the methodology of the program in order to
comply with the requirements of the RFS.”
The Bottom Line
Good news, indeed, some degree of policy certainty on 2014
volumes, which will be finalized on the basis of produced volumes,
and in terms of timelines for 2015, 2016 and even parts of 2017. As BIO points out, there’s not much in the agreement as proposed
that addresses how the methodology problems will be resolved that
caused the EPA’s delay in the first place.
And a comment period is shortly underway, and if reaction to the
2013 EPA proposal on 2014 volumes is any indidation, large numbers
of comments can be expected and, to the extent that those comments
derailed the 2014 proposals, may be expected to be given great
weight.
The complete proposed consent degree can
be viewed here.
http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2015/04/epa_agrees_to_timeline_for_ethanol_and_adva nced_biofuel_targets_through_2016.html
No comments:
Post a Comment