# Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: Standards for 2023-2025 and Other Changes > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2023-13462 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Rule - **Published:** July 12, 2023 - **Citation:** 88 FR 44468 ## Text ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 80 and 1090 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0427; FRL-8514-02-OAR] RIN 2060-AV14 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: Standards for 2023-2025 and Other Changes AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to determine the applicable volume requirements for the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) for years after those specified in the statute. This action establishes the applicable volumes and percentage standards for 2023 through 2025 for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. This action also establishes the second supplemental standard addressing the judicial remand of the 2016 standard-setting rulemaking. Finally, this action makes several regulatory changes to the RFS program, including changes related to the treatment of biogas and other modifications to improve the program's implementation. At this time EPA is not finalizing proposed provisions related to the generation of RINs from qualifying renewable electricity. DATES: This rule is effective on September 11, 2023, except for amendatory instruction 30, which is effective on February 1, 2024, and amendatory instructions 41 and 42, which are effective on April 1, 2024. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this regulation is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 12, 2023. The incorporation by reference of ASTM D1250, ASTM D4442, ASTM D4444, ASTM D6866, and ASTM E870 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 1, 2022. The incorporation by reference of ASTM D4057, ASTM D4177, ASTM D5842, and ASTM D5854 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of April 28, 2014. The incorporation by reference of ASTM E711 was approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 1, 2010. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0427. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material is not available on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dallas Burkholder, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Assessment and Standards Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734-214-4766; email address: RFS-Rulemakings@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Entities potentially affected by this final rule are those involved with the production, distribution, and sale of transportation fuels ( e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel), renewable fuels ( e.g., ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, and biogas). Potentially affected categories include: Category NAICS a codes Examples of potentially affected entities Industry 112111 Cattle farming or ranching. Industry 112210 Swine, hog, and pig farming. Industry 221210 Manufactured gas production and distribution, and distribution of renewable natural gas (RNG). Industry 324110 Petroleum refineries. Industry 325120 Biogases, industrial ( i.e., compressed, liquefied, solid), manufacturing. Industry 325193 Ethyl alcohol manufacturing. Industry 325199 Other basic organic chemical manufacturing. Industry 424690 Chemical and allied products merchant wholesalers. Industry 424710 Petroleum bulk stations and terminals. Industry 424720 Petroleum and petroleum products merchant wholesalers. Industry 454319 Other fuel dealers. Industry 562212 Landfills. a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities potentially affected by this final action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be affected by this final action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your entity would be affected 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 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary A. Summary of the Key Provisions of This Regulatory Action B. Environmental Justice C. Impacts of This Rule D. Policy Considerations E. Endangered Species Act II. Statutory Requirements and Conditions A. Requirement To Set Volumes for Years After 2022 B. Factors That Must Be Analyzed C. Statutory Conditions on Volume Requirements D. Authority To Establish Volumes and Percentage Standards for Multiple Future Years E. Considerations for Late Rulemaking F. Impact on Other Waiver Authorities G. Severability III. Candidate Volumes and Baselines A. Scope of Analysis B. Production and Import of Renewable Fuel C. Candidate Volumes for 2023-2025 D. Baselines E. Volume Changes Analyzed IV. Analysis of Candidate Volumes A. Climate Change B. Energy Security C. Costs D. Comparison of Impacts E. Assessment of Environmental Justice V. Response To Remand of 2016 Rulemaking A. Supplemental 2023 Standard B. Authority and Consideration of the Benefits and Burdens VI. Volume Requirements for 2023-2025 A. Cellulosic Biofuel B. Non-Cellulosic Advanced Biofuel C. Biomass-Based Diesel D. Conventional Renewable Fuel E. Summary of Final Volume Requirements VII. Percentage Standards for 2023-2025 A. Calculation of Percentage Standards B. Treatment of Small Refinery Volumes C. Percentage Standards VIII. Administrative Actions A. Assessment of the Domestic Aggregate Compliance Approach B. Assessment of the Canadian Aggregate Compliance Approach IX. Biogas Regulatory Reform A. Background B. Biogas Under a Closed Distribution System C. RNG Producer as the RIN Generator D. Assignment, Separation, Retirement, and Expiration of RNG RINs E. Structure of the Regulations F. Implementation Date G. Definitions H. Registration, Reporting, Product Transfer Documents, and Recordkeeping I. Testing and Measurement Requirements J. RFS QAP Under Biogas Regulatory Reform K. Compliance and Enforcement Provisions and Attest Engagements L. RNG Used as a Feedstock M. RNG Imports and Exports N. Biogas/RNG Storage Prior to Registration O. Single Use for Biogas Production Facilities P. Requirements for Parties That Own and Transact RNG RINs X. Other Changes to Regulations A. RFS Third-Party Oversight Enhancement B. Deadline for Third-Party Engineering Reviews for Three-Year Updates C. RIN Apportionment in Anaerobic Digesters D. BBD Conversion Factor for Percentage Standard E. Flexibility for RIN Generation F. Changes to Tables in 40 CFR 80.1426 G. Prohibition on RIN Generation for Fuels Not Used in the Covered Location H. Separated Food Waste Recordkeeping Requirements I. Definition of Ocean-Going Vessels J. Bond Requirement for Foreign RIN-Generating Renewable Fuel Producers and Foreign RIN Owners K. Definition of Produced from Renewable Biomass L. Technical Amendments XI. 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 (PRA) C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 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 and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR Part 51 J. Executive Orders 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations, and Low-Income Populations) and 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All) K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) XII. Statutory Authority A red-line version of the regulatory language that incorporates the changes in this action is available in the docket for this action. I. Executive Summary The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program began in 2006 pursuant to the requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), which were codified in Clean Air Act (CAA) section 211(o). The statutory requirements were subsequently amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). The statute sets forth annual, nationally applicable volume targets for each of the four categories of renewable fuel for the years shown below. Table I-1—Years for Which the Statute Provides Volume Targets Category Years Cellulosic biofuel 2010-2022 Biomass-based diesel 2009-2012 Advanced biofuel 2009-2022 Renewable fuel 2006-2022 For calendar years after those for which the statute provides volume targets, the statute directs EPA to determine the applicable volume targets in coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Agriculture, based on a review of the implementation of the program for prior years and an analysis of specified factors: • The impact of the production and use of renewable fuels on the environment, including on air quality, climate change, conversion of wetlands, ecosystems, wildlife habitat, water quality, and water supply; 1 1 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I). • The impact of renewable fuels on the energy security of the U.S.; 2 2 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(II). • The expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuels, including advanced biofuels in each category (cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based diesel); 3 3 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(III). • The impact of renewable fuels on the infrastructure of the U.S., including deliverability of materials, goods, and products other than renewable fuel, and the sufficiency of infrastructure to deliver and use renewable fuel; 4 4 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(IV). • The impact of the use of renewable fuels on the cost to consumers of transportation fuel and on the cost to transport goods; 5 and 5 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(V). • The impact of the use of renewable fuels on other factors, including job creation, the price and supply of agricultural commodities, rural economic development, and food prices. 6 6 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(VI). While this statutory requirement does not apply to cellulosic biofuel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel until compliance year 2023, it applied to biomass-based diesel (BBD) beginning in compliance year 2013. Thus, EPA established applicable volume requirements for BBD volumes for 2013-2022 in prior rulemakings. 7 This action establishes the volume targets and applicable percentage standards for cellulosic biofuel, BBD, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel for 2023-2025. We are also promulgating a number of regulatory changes intended to improve the operation of the RFS program. This action describes our rationale for the final volume targets and regulatory changes. Responses to comments received from stakeholders on the proposed rule can be found in the associated Response to Comments (RTC) document. 7 See, e.g., 87 FR 39600 (July 1, 2022), establishing the 2022 BBD volume requirement. Low-carbon fuels are an important part of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the transportation sector, and the RFS program is a key federal policy that supports the development, production, and use of low-carbon, domestically produced renewable fuels. This “Set rule” marks a new phase for the program, one which takes place following the period for which the Clean Air Act enumerates specific volume targets. We recognize the important role that the RFS program can play in providing ongoing support for increasing production and use of renewable fuels, particularly advanced and cellulosic biofuels. For a number of years, RFS stakeholders have provided input on what policy direction this action should take, and the Agency greatly appreciates the sustained and constructive input we have received from stakeholders. We appreciate the many comments we received, not only on the volumes that we proposed on December 30, 2022, but also on the analyses we conducted and the proposed regulatory changes. EPA looks forward to continued engagement with stakeholders on the RFS program. A. Summary of the Key Provisions of This Regulatory Action 1. Volume Requirements for 2023-2025 Based on our analysis of the factors required in the statute, and in coordination with the Departments of Agriculture and Energy, we are establishing the volume targets for three years, 2023 to 2025, as shown below. We proposed setting standards for three years to strike an appropriate balance between improving the program by providing increased certainty over a multiple number of years and recognizing the inherent uncertainty in longer-term projections. After reviewing stakeholder comments and considering the statutory deadlines for establishing RFS volume obligations we have determined that this three-year timeframe remains appropriate. In addition to the volume targets for 2023-2025, we are also completing our response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' remand of the 2016 RFS annual rule in Americans for Clean Energy v. EPA, 864 F.3d 691 (2017) (“ ACE” ) by establishing a supplemental volume requirement of 250 million gallons of renewable fuel for 2023. This “supplemental standard” follows the implementation of a 250-million-gallon supplement for 2022 in a previous action. 8 8 See 87 FR 39600, 39628-29 (July 1, 2022) (discussing approaches for responding to the ACE remand). Table I.A.1-1—Final Volume Targets [Billion RINs] a 2023 2024 2025 Cellulosic biofuel 0.84 1.09 1.38 Biomass-based diesel b 2.82 3.04 3.35 Advanced biofuel 5.94 6.54 7.33 Renewable fuel 20.94 21.54 22.33 Supplemental standard 0.25 n/a n/a a One RIN is equivalent to one ethanol-equivalent gallon of renewable fuel. Throughout this preamble, RINs are generally used to describe total volumes in each of the four categories shown above, while gallons are generally used to describe volumes for individual types of biofuel such as ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, etc. Exceptions include BBD (which is always given in physical volumes) and biogas (which are always given in RINs). b The BBD volumes are in physical gallons (rather than RINs). As discussed above, the statute requires that we analyze a specified set of factors in making our determination of the appropriate volume requirements. Many of those factors, particularly those related to economic and environmental impacts, are difficult to analyze in the abstract. As a result, we needed to identify a set of renewable fuel volumes to analyze prior to determining the volume requirements that would be appropriate to establish under the statute. To this end, we began by using a subset of the statutory factors that are most closely related to production and consumption of renewable fuel, and other relevant factors, to identify “candidate volumes.” We then analyzed the impacts of the candidate volumes on the other economic and environmental factors that the statute lists. The derivation of these candidate volumes is discussed in Section III. Section IV discusses the analysis of those candidate volumes for the other economic and environmental factors. Finally, Section VI discusses our conclusions regarding the appropriate volume requirements to establish in light of all of the analyses that we conducted and all of the comments we received from stakeholders at the public hearing on January 10 and 11, 2023, written comments, letters, and other meetings and input provided to us. The cellulosic biofuel volumes we are finalizing in this rule for 2024 and 2025 are lower than the proposed volumes as they do not include cellulosic biofuel from eRINs (all eRIN volumes projected in the proposal have been zeroed out in this final rule). The decreases in the cellulosic biofuel volumes for 2024 and 2025 are partially offset by increases in the projected volumes of non-eRIN cellulosic biofuel ( i.e., CNG/LNG derived from biogas and ethanol from corn kernel fiber) for all three years. The advanced and total biofuel volumes reflect both these changes in cellulosic biofuel, and our new, higher projections of the availability of BBD relative to the proposed rule. The final volumes also reflect our decision to maintain a 15.0 billion gallon implied conventional biofuel requirement for all three years (plus an additional 250 million gallon supplemental volume requirement for 2023 to complete EPA's response to the ACE remand), consistent with the statutory level from 2015 through 2022, rather than increasing this volume to 15.25 billion gallons in 2024 and 2025 as we originally proposed. The volume targets that we are establishing in this action have similar status as those in the statute for the years shown in Table I-1. Specifically, they are the basis for the calculation of percentage standards applicable to producers and importers of gasoline and diesel unless they are waived in a future action using one or more of the available waiver authorities in CAA section 211(o)(7). 2. Applicable Percentage Standards for 2023-2025 For years after 2022, 9 the CAA gives EPA authority to establish percentage standards for several years simultaneously and at the same time that it establishes the volume targets for those years. Consistent with the proposed rule, we are finalizing the percentage standards for 2023, 2024, and 2025. The percentage standards corresponding to the volume requirements from Table I.A.1-1 are shown below. 9 Although the statute requires EPA to establish applicable percentage standards annually by November 30 of the previous year, as discussed in Section II, this requirement does not apply to years after 2022. CAA section 211(o)(3). Table I.A.2-1—Percentage Standards 2023 (%) 2024 (%) 2025 (%) Cellulosic biofuel 0.48 0.63 0.81 Biomass-based diesel 2.58 2.82 3.15 Advanced biofuel 3.39 3.79 4.31 Renewable fuel 11.96 12.50 13.13 Supplemental standard 0.14 n/a n/a The formulas used to calculate the percentage standards in 40 CFR 80.1405(c) require that EPA specify the projected volume of exempt gasoline and diesel associated with exemptions for small refineries granted because of disproportionate economic hardship resulting from compliance with their obligations under the program under CAA section 211(o)(9). For this rulemaking, we have projected that there are not likely to be small refinery exemptions (SREs) for 2023-2025 based on the information available at the present time. This issue is discussed further in Section VII along with the total nationwide projected gasoline and diesel consumption volumes used in the calculation of the percentage standards. As in previous annual standard-setting rulemakings, the applicable percentage standards for 2023-2025 are added to the regulations at 40 CFR 80.1405(a). 3. Carryover RINs and Gasoline and Diesel Projections EPA assesses the availability of carryover RINs in determining the volumes under our set authority. Carryover RINs provide important benefits to the RFS program, including compliance flexibility to individual obligated parties, liquidity to the RIN market, and mitigation against market impacts that could occur if RIN generation in any year exceeds or falls short of the required volume of renewable fuel. In establishing RFS volume requirements for 2020 and 2021 that were equal to the number of RINs generated in those years, EPA intended that compliance with the renewable volume obligations would not impact the total number of available carryover RINs. Since that time, obligated parties have submitted compliance reports for the 2020 and 2021 compliance years. These reports revealed that there exist significant differences between the volume of obligated fuel reported by obligated parties, on the one hand, and the volumes of gasoline and diesel from EIA that EPA used to calculate the percentage standards for 2020 and 2021 on the other. Higher-than-expected volumes of obligated fuel in 2020 and 2021 meant that the number of RINs that must be retired for these compliance years was higher than EPA anticipated. As discussed in greater detail in Section III.C.4 and RIA Chapter 1.10, compliance with these obligations has required the use of significant quantities of carryover RINs, resulting in effectively no available carryover RINs for several renewable fuel categories going into the 2022 compliance year. In an effort to better project the volume of obligated fuel in future years, we are adjusting how we project the obligated volume of gasoline and diesel in 2023-2025. These changes are discussed further in Section VII.A and RIA Chapter 1.11. 4. Regulatory Provisions for eRINs The 2023-2025 proposed rule included a comprehensive program governing the generation of RINs from renewable electricity produced from biogas that is used in electric vehicles. The proposed “eRIN” regulations laid out a comprehensive approach to eRIN generation and program implementation, and included details on multiple design elements, including the entities that would be eligible to generate eRINs, approaches to ensure the prevention of double-counting of such RINs, and data requirements for valid eRIN generation. In addition to the proposed eRIN program, the December 2022 proposal also described several alternative approaches to how such a program could be established and implemented. In response to the proposal, we received a wide variety of comments on all aspects of the proposed eRIN program. Stakeholder positions on the proposed eRIN provisions varied greatly, with some stakeholders strongly supportive of EPA finalizing the proposed provisions, some who sought significant modifications to the program while remaining broadly supportive of eRINs conceptually, and others who opposed, for a variety of reasons, EPA moving forward to finalize a new eRIN framework. In light of the significant number of comments provided by stakeholders on EPA's proposed eRIN approach, and the complexity of many of the topics raised in those comments, and the consent decree deadline on other portions of the rule, we are not finalizing the proposed revisions to the eRIN program at this time. We have adjusted the final volume requirements for this rulemaking to reflect this decision. The large number of comments EPA received on our proposed eRIN language, representing a range of perspectives, is a clear signal that stakeholders care a great deal about a potential eRIN program. As discussed in the proposed rule, EPA's policy goal in developing an eRIN program would be to support one of the objectives of the RFS program, which is to increase the use of renewable transportation fuels, in particular cellulosic biofuels, over time, consistent with the statute's focus on growth in this category. Moreover, an eRIN program would support Congress' goals of reducing GHGs and increasing energy security, 10 both of which can be affected by the design of that program. We anticipate that an eRIN program may also have the ancillary effect of incentivizing increased electrification of the vehicle fleet. 10 Congress stated that the purposes of EISA, in which the RFS2 program was enacted, included “[t]o move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, building, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes.” Public Law 110-140 (2007). See also, CAA 211(o)(1) (definitions of qualifying biofuel include requirement that they reduce greenhouse gas emissions by specified amounts relative to a petroleum baseline). Given strong stakeholder interest in the proposed eRIN program and the range of potential benefits that the program could provide, EPA will continue to work on potential paths forward for the eRIN program. To that end, EPA will continue to assess the comments received on the proposal. EPA will also seek additional input from stakeholders to inform potential next steps. 5. Other Regulatory Changes We also proposed regulatory changes in several areas to strengthen EPA's implementation of the RFS program. Stakeholders provided valuable comment on these proposed modifications, and EPA is finalizing many of the proposed changes with modifications based on that stakeholder input. The regulatory changes we are finalizing in this rulemaking include: • Modification of the regulatory provisions for biogas-derived renewable fuels to ensure that biogas is produced from renewable biomass and used as a transportation fuel and to allow for the use of biogas as a biointermediate. • Enhancements to the third-party oversight provisions including engineering reviews, the RFS quality assurance program, and annual attest engagements. • Establishing a deadline for third-party engineering reviews for three-year registration updates. • Updating procedures for the apportionment of RINs when feedstocks qualifying for multiple D-codes ( e.g., D3 and D5) are converted to biogas simultaneously in an anaerobic digester. • Revising the conversion factor in the formula for calculating the percentage standard for BBD to reflect increasing production volumes of renewable diesel. • Flexibility for RIN generation. • Reiterating the prohibition on generating RINs for fuels not used in the covered location. • Flexibilities for the generation and maintenance of records for waste feedstocks. • Clarifying the definition of fuel used in ocean-going vessels. • Modifications to the bonding requirements for foreign parties that participate in the RFS program. • Other minor changes and technical corrections. Each of these regulatory changes is discussed in greater detail in Section X. We proposed but are not finalizing at this time the following regulatory changes: • A definition of produced from renewable biomass (discussed more in Section X.K). • The proposed changes to the requirements for the separation of RINs. 11 11 See 87 FR 80707 (December 30, 2022). We need more time to consider the public comments received on these proposed changes. B. Environmental Justice In considering environmental justice in this action, we have sought to identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on communities with environmental justice concerns in the United States. This rule is projected to reduce GHG emissions, which would benefit communities with environmental justice concerns who are disproportionately impacted by climate change due to a greater reliance on climate sensitive resources such as localized food and water supplies which may be adversely impacted by climate change, as well as having less access to information resources that would enable them to adjust to such impacts. 12 13 The manner in which the market responds to the provisions in this rule could also have non-GHG impacts. For instance, replacing petroleum fuels with renewable fuels will also have potential impacts on water and air exposure for communities living near biofuel and petroleum facilities given the potential for biofuel facilities to have increased emissions of certain criteria pollutants in local communities, resulting in a potential corresponding decrease in exposure for local communities surrounding petroleum facilities with less petroleum production. Replacing petroleum fuels with renewable fuels is also projected to increase food and fuel prices, the effects of which will be disproportionately borne by the lowest income individuals. We received extensive comment, primarily on the proposed eRIN provisions, from community-based and environmental justice stakeholders expressing concern over the use of biogas, particularly from landfills and concentrated animal feeding operations, in the RFS. While EPA is not finalizing eRIN provisions as part of this rule, we will continue to engage with stakeholders on impacts of the RFS program related to biogas use and expansion. Our assessment of potential economic impacts on communities with environmental justice concerns is provided in Section IV.E.3. 12 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 1515 pp. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018. 13 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment. Crimmins, A., J. Balbus, J.L. Gamble, C.B. Beard, J.E. Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen, N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L. Jantarasami, D.M. Mills, S. Saha, M.C. Sarofim, J. Trtanj, and L. Ziska, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, 312 pp. http://dx.doi.org/10.7930/J0R49NQX. C. Impacts of This Rule CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) requires EPA to assess a number of factors when determining volume targets for calendar years after those shown in Table I-1. These factors are described in the introduction to this Executive Summary, and each factor is discussed in detail in the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) accompanying this rule. Congress provided EPA flexibility by enumerating factors to consider without rigidly mandating the specific steps of analysis that EPA should take or how EPA should weigh the various factors. For two of these statutory factors—costs and energy security—we provide monetized impacts for the purpose of comparing costs and benefits. For the other statutory factors, we are either unable to quantify impacts, or we provide quantitative estimated impacts that nevertheless cannot be easily monetized. Thus, we are unable to quantitatively compare all of the evaluated impacts of this rulemaking. Regardless of whether we monetized a factor or not, however, EPA did consider all statutory factors in this rulemaking, and we find that the final volumes are appropriate under the set authority when we balance all the relevant factors. Table ES-1 in the RIA provides a list of all of the impacts that we assessed, both quantitative and qualitative. Our assessments of each factor, including the impacts on costs, energy security, climate, and other environmental and economic factors, are summarized in Section IV of this document. Additional detail for each of the assessed factors is provided in RIA Chapters 4 through 10. Monetized impacts on cost and energy security are summarized in Table I.C-1 below using two discount rates (3 percent and 7 percent) following federal guidance on regulatory impact analyses. 14 Summarized impacts are calculated in comparison to a No RFS baseline as discussed in Section III.D and are summed across all three years of standards. 14 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-4. Sept. 17, 2003. Table I.C-1—Cumulative Monetized Fuel Costs and Energy Security Benefits of 2023-2025 Standards With Respect to the No RFS Baseline [2022$, millions] Discount rate 3% 7% Excluding Supplemental Standard: Fuel Costs $23,218 $22,366 Energy Security Benefits 524 505 Including 2023 Supplemental Standard: Fuel Costs 23,846 22,994 Energy Security Benefits 536 517 D. Policy Considerations This rule comes at a time when substantial policy developments and global events are affecting the transportation energy and environmental landscape in unprecedented ways. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) makes historic investments in a range of areas, including in clean vehicle and alternative fuel technologies, that will help decarbonize the transportation sector and bolster a variety of clean technologies. Provisions in the IRA will accelerate many of the pollution-reducing shifts that are already occurring as part of a broad energy transition in the transportation, power generation, and industrial sectors. Major new incentives in legislation for cleaner vehicles, carbon capture and sequestration, biofuels infrastructure, clean hydrogen production, and other areas have effectively shifted the policy ground—and it is on this new ground that EPA must develop forward-looking policies and implement existing regulatory programs, including the RFS program. Even as the IRA bolsters future investments in clean transportation technologies, EPA recognizes that maintaining and strengthening energy security in the near term remains an important policy consideration. The war in Ukraine has significantly destabilized multiple global commodity markets, including petroleum markets, and continues to have impacts in these areas. In addition, global reductions in refining capacity, which accelerated during the pandemic, have further tightened the market for transportation fuels like gasoline and diesel. Programs like the RFS program help boost energy security by supporting domestic production of fuels and diversifying the fuel supply, and it has played an important role in incentivizing the production of low-carbon alternatives. At the same time, EPA recognizes that the transition to such alternatives will take time, and that during this transition maintaining stable fuel supplies and refining assets will continue to be important to achieving our nation's energy and economic goals as well as providing consistent investments in a skilled and growing workforce. It is against this backdrop that EPA is establishing RFS volume requirements for the next three years in this action. The volumes that EPA is finalizing continue to support ongoing growth in renewable fuels, recognizing their benefits, and based on EPA's consideration of the multiple factors identified in the statute. Beyond providing continued support for fuels like ethanol and biodiesel, this action provides a strong market signal for the continued growth of low carbon advanced biofuels, including “drop-in” renewable diesel, and cellulosic biofuels. Renewable fuels are a key policy tool identified by Congress for decarbonizing the transportation sector, and this rulemaking sets the stage for further growth and development of low-carbon biofuels in the coming years. In the proposed rule EPA requested comment on multiple volume scenarios, including limiting the implied volume of conventional renewable fuel to 15.0 billion gallons in 2024 and 2025, and establishing RFS volumes with an implied volume of conventional renewable fuel at or below the E10 blendwall. The volumes we are finalizing in this rule reflect the scenario on which we requested comment wherein we are limiting the implied volume of conventional renewable fuel to 15.0 billion gallons in 2024 and 2025. We have also included an analysis of the projected impact of the other alternative scenarios in RIA Chapter 10.6. In the proposal EPA also sought public comment on not only the elements of the proposed rule, but also asked for responses to questions on various topics that intersect with the larger energy transition and energy security issues discussed above. For example, several commenters provided responses on the topic of whether and how EPA should consider incorporating some measure of carbon intensity into the RFS program. Many of the commenters who weighed in on this topic pointed to various non-federal “clean fuel programs” that are being implemented in different states and jurisdictions and urged EPA to consider changes that would make the RFS program more closely resemble those programs. Other commenters suggested that the RFS program does not lend itself well to such changes and that an entirely new framework would be preferable if EPA were to pursue such carbon intensity-related changes. Many different stakeholders provided suggestions and perspectives on lifecycle analysis tools and approaches, and these comments helped inform the discussion and analysis in this rulemaking package related to the assessment of environmental impacts of renewable fuels. Multiple commenters also provided input on what RFS-related policies EPA could pursue to incorporate new pathways and technologies into the program. For example, some commenters urged EPA to take steps to integrate carbon capture and storage (CCS) opportunities related to the production of biofuels into the RFS program, while other commenters cited various reasons why EPA should refrain from taking such steps. Similarly, EPA received comment from different stakeholders that took various positions on whether and how hydrogen should be integrated into the RFS program. Many stakeholders also shared their perspectives on how the RFS program can and should be used to further support the development of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF). EPA appreciates commenters' input on these other policy topics raised in the proposal. We will continue to engage stakeholders on the topics we raised in the December 2022 proposal and welcome continued input on RFS policy options and opportunities. These comments will be used to inform future rulemaking decisions. EPA also recognizes the concerns that diverse stakeholders have shared about the potential impacts from implementation of the RFS program. Stakeholders have also shared concerns about RIN market dynamics, including RIN price volatility. EPA understands that maintaining and strengthening energy security in the near term remains a policy imperative. The war in Ukraine continues to affect multiple global commodity markets and reductions in global refining capacity, which accelerated during the pandemic, have further tightened the market for transportation fuels like gasoline and diesel. Programs like the RFS program help boost energy security by supporting domestic production of fuels and diversifying the fuel supply, and the RFS has played an important role in incentivizing the production of low-carbon alternatives. At the same time, EPA recognizes that maintaining stable fuel supplies and refining assets continues to be important to achieving our nation's energy and economic goals and retaining a skilled and necessary workforce. Given these factors, and because we are starting a new phase of the RFS program where Congress has not prescribed volumes and with prospective standards covering three years, careful administration of the RFS program and monitoring of its impacts is critical. EPA intends to use all available data and tools to monitor the implementation of the RFS program and its impacts. EPA is committed to successful implementation of the program, and the Clean Air Act provides EPA the tools to adjust course if appropriate. EPA will monitor a set of indicators that will help us assess the impact from implementation of the final Set rule volumes to determine whether EPA should consider adjusting those volumes or taking other action. These indicators could include, but are not limited to, the following: • The prices of biofuels relative to the petroleum-based fuels they displace; • The cost to consumers of transportation fuel; • The prices of biofuel feedstocks and their impacts on food prices to consumers; • Changes in domestic energy supply that affect domestic energy security; • Changes in domestic energy demand that negatively impact the energy security of a State, region, or the U.S.; • The stability of fuel supplies and domestic refining assets; • The potential for RIN deficits and noncompliance by obligated parties; • Signs of market manipulation in RIN markets; • RIN prices, generally, as an indicator of how the RFS program is functioning, including significant increases in RIN prices; • Various other impacts of the RFS standards, as appropriate. In addition to these indicators, EPA will also monitor the volatility in D6 (“conventional”) RIN prices. Specifically, as part of our oversight of program implementation, EPA intends to consider whether the following volatility measure is met: • A 50% deviation in the monthly average D6 RIN price, relative to the 6-month rolling average D6 RIN price, evaluated at the end of the calendar month and based on EPA data or third-party data, as EPA determines appropriate. EPA would also consider whether changes in RFS standards, other related EPA actions, or court decisions have occurred which affect the relevance of this measure at a particular time. Based on EPA's assessment of these indicators, the Administrator may then consider using the statutory authorities available under the Clean Air Act to adjust the volume standards or make other programmatic changes. For example, EPA has authority to reconsider its volumes and standards, and has shown its willingness to do so when extreme and unforeseen events require it, such as revising the 2020 and 2021 volumes to account for changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For years after 2022, CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) establishes the processes, criteria, and standards for setting the applicable annual renewable fuel volumes. That provision provides that the Administrator shall, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Agriculture and after public notice and opportunity for comment, determine the applicable volumes of each biofuel category specified based on a review of implementation of the program during the calendar years specified in the tables in CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(i) and an analysis of the multiple factors, as described in Section II.B of this action. 15 Those factors include, for example, the impact of the use of renewable fuels on the cost to consumers of transportation, and the impact of the use of renewable fuel on other factors, including job creation, the price and supply of agricultural commodities, rural economic development, and food prices. As EPA has stated in previous actions, we generally do not think it is appropriate to reconsider and revise previously finalized RFS standards. Revising standards has the potential to decrease market certainty and create unnecessary market disruption (which could in turn exacerbate some of the indicators listed above). At the same time, given the new phase of the program, we want to reiterate our commitment to monitoring various measures to ensure successful program implementation and consider adjusting course if appropriate. 15 EPA may consider using an expedited process if EPA determines such process is appropriate and consistent with statutory authority. Apart from EPA's authority to reconsider our RFS standards, CAA section 211(o)(7)(A) provides the Administrator the discretion to waive the national quantity of renewable fuel required under the RFS program, upon petition by one or more States, or by any party subject to the requirements of the RFS program. The Administrator may also waive the volume requirements on his own motion. The Administrator may do so only after consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Energy and after public notice and opportunity for comment. 16 A waiver may be issued if the Administrator determines that implementation of the RFS volume requirements would severely harm the economy or environment of a State, region, or the United States, or that there is an inadequate domestic supply. EPA has previously interpreted this waiver authority in prior responses to requests for a waiver of the RFS volume requirements 17 and in annual rulemakings. 18 EPA will monitor as appropriate the criteria we have laid out previously in order to determine whether we should adjust volume requirements using existing waiver authority under the statute. These criteria, for example, include whether, under the severe economic harm waiver authority, the harm is occurring with a high degree of certainty, the harm is severe, and whether the harm is to an entire state, region, or the United States. 16 EPA may consider using an expedited process if EPA determines such process is appropriate and consistent with the statutory waiver authority. 17 See 73 FR 47168 (August 13, 2008) and 77 FR 70752 (November 27, 2012). 18 See, e.g., Renewable Fuel Standard Program—Standards for 2020 and Biomass-Based Diesel Volume for 2021 and Other Changes: Response to Comments, EPA-420-R-19-018; see also American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers v. EPA, 937 F.3d 559, 580 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (upholding EPA's interpretation of the severe economic harm waiver authority in the 2018 RFS rulemaking). In addition to monitoring the program's implementation for the potential need to adjust the standards, EPA will also strengthen existing efforts, and work to develop new tools, to help us monitor and oversee the RIN market. EPA welcomes ideas from stakeholders impacted by the RFS program on how to improve market oversight capabilities, including ideas on how EPA's compliance regulations could be enhanced. EPA closely monitors the RIN market, and we take seriously claims of RIN market manipulation. In March 2016, EPA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). 19 This MOU allows EPA to share RIN transaction data with CFTC to advise EPA on the techniques used to minimize market manipulation, to increase CFTC's understanding of the RIN market, and to conduct oversight for this market. Under the MOU, EPA has met with CFTC to discuss RIN market data and to evaluate strategies to identify and reduce the potential for manipulation in the RFS program. 19 See “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on the Sharing of Information Available to EPA Related to the Functioning of Renewable Fuel and Related Markets” (2016), available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/epa-cftc-mou-2016-03-16.pdf. In June 2019, EPA modified certain elements of the RFS compliance system, in order to improve functioning of the RIN market and prevent any potential manipulation in the RFS compliance market. 20 The 2019 rulemaking requires reporting of RIN holdings above a threshold to help ensure no single party can manipulate the price of RINs through the sheer size of their holdings. 21 Underpinning that reform was the observation that increased transparency would help deter market participants from amassing an excess of separated RINs, which due to the concentration in ownership could result in undue influence or market power. Since EPA implemented these provisions, no company has had RIN holdings which have exceeded the thresholds set in the rule. 20 See 84 FR 27013-27019. 21 See 40 CFR 80.1435. The 2019 rulemaking also required reporting of RIN transaction prices to EPA. 22 EPA has utilized the new reported price data to supplement third-party RIN price assessment data. EPA has also increased transparency by aggregating the reporting price data and making it publicly available on our website. 23 We believe that publishing as much data and information on the RIN market as possible, while still protecting confidential business information, improves market transparency and helps obligated parties and other market participants make informed decisions. Since the June 2019 rule, we have not seen data-based evidence of RIN market manipulation. The potential for such behavior, however, remains a concern. 22 See 40 CFR 80.1451(c)(2). 23 See “RIN Trades and Price Information,” available at https://www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-compliance-help/rin-trades-and-price-information. We have recently further expanded our oversight and enforcement capabilities by entering into an MOU with California Air Resources Board (CARB). 24 This MOU expands our oversight capabilities and supports our enforcement activities by leveraging information collected under California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard to help identify non-compliance and potential market manipulation in the renewable fuels and RIN markets. EPA and CARB compliance staff meet regularly to analyze market forces and participant behavior to ensure that our program meets the CAA requirements. 24 See “Confidentiality Agreement Between the United States Environmental Protection Agency Offices of Transportation and Air Quality and Civil Enforcement and the California Air Resources Board for the Sharing of Information.” August 17, 2021 (on file with EPA). As we begin to implement the Set Rule volumes, EPA will work with partners in federal and state governments to assess what new improvements and modifications could reasonably be made that would further strengthen market oversight and program implementation. Furthermore, within 45 days of publication of the final 2023-2025 rule, EPA will meet with CFTC to review our MOU with CFTC and the sufficiency of the existing RIN data collection to address potential market manipulation. EPA will also discuss with CFTC whether the existing MOU should be revised to allow for the monitoring of daily trades and whether the existing MOU should be revised to include additional market oversight experts, such as the Federal Trade Commission. E. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), requires that federal agencies such as EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (collectively “the Services”), ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the action agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for such species. Under ESA implementing regulations, the action agency is required to formally consult with the Services for actions that “may affect” listed species or designated critical habitat, unless the Services concur in writing that the action is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed species or critical habitat. 50 CFR 402.14. Consultation is not required where the action has no effect on such species or habitat. For several prior RFS annual standard-setting rules, EPA did not consult with the Services under ESA section 7(a)(2). Consistent with ESA section 7(a)(2) and relevant ESA implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 402, for approximately two years, EPA engaged in technical assistance and informal consultation discussions with the Services regarding this rule. On January 30, 2023, EPA submitted its initial biological evaluation to the Services, and following continued informal consultation—including regular meetings and telephone and email communications between EPA and the Services—on May 20, 2023, EPA submitted to the Services its May 19, 2023 biological evaluation. On May 31, 2023, EPA provided an addendum to the May 19, 2023 biological evaluation in response to a request from NMFS. 25 EPA has determined that this action is not likely to adversely affect listed species and critical habitat. The Services have confirmed that EPA's biological evaluation with the May 31, 2023 addendum is sufficient and USFWS and NMFS intend to proceed with informal consultation. EPA has prepared an ESA section 7(d) determination memorandum that discusses our decision to finalize this action before the informal consultation process is complete, which is also available in the docket for this action. 25 “Biological Evaluation of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Set Rule,” May 19, 2023, and email from T. Phillips, EPA, to D. Baldwin, NOAA (May 31, 2023) are both available in the docket for this action. II. Statutory Requirements and Conditions A. Requirement to Set Volumes for Years After 2022 The CAA provides EPA with the authority to establish the applicable renewable fuel volume targets for calendar years after those specified in the Act in Section 211(o)(2). 26 For total renewable fuel, cellulosic biofuel, and total advanced biofuel, the CAA provides volume targets through 2022, after which EPA must establish or “set” the volume targets via rulemaking. For BBD, the CAA only provides volume targets through 2012; EPA has been setting the biomass-based diesel volume requirements in annual rulemakings since 2013. 26 We refer to CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) as the “set authority.” This section discusses EPA's statutory authority and additional factors we have considered due to the lateness of this rulemaking, as well as the severability of the various portions of this rule. B. Factors That Must Be Analyzed CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) establishes the processes, criteria, and standards for setting the applicable annual renewable fuel volumes. That provision provides that the Administrator shall, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Agriculture, 27 determine the applicable volumes of each biofuel category specified based on a review of implementation of the program during the calendar years specified in the tables in CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(i) and an analysis of the following factors: 27 In furtherance of this requirement, we have had periodic discussions with DOE and USDA on this action. These have occurred with agency staff throughout the proposal and final rule process, as well as through the OMB interagency process. An additional memorandum documenting discussions with the Administrator and Secretaries is also available in the docket for this action. • The impact of the production and use of renewable fuels on the environment; 28 28 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I). • The impact of renewable fuels on the energy security of the U.S.; 29 29 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(II). • The expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuels; 30 30 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(III). • The impact of renewable fuels on the infrastructure of the U.S.; 31 31 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(IV). • The impact of the use of renewable fuels on the cost to consumers of transportation fuel and on the cost to transport goods; 32 and 32 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(V). • The impact of the use of renewable fuel on other factors, including job creation, the price and supply of agricultural commodities, rural economic development, and food prices. 33 33 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(VI). Congress provided EPA flexibility by enumerating factors to consider without rigidly mandating the specific steps of analysis that EPA should take or how EPA should weigh the various factors. Additionally, we are not aware of anything in the legislative history of EISA that is authoritative on these issues. Thus, as the Clean Air Act “does not state what weight should be accorded to the relevant factors,” it “give[s] EPA considerable discretion to weigh and balance the various factors required by statute.” 34 These factors were analyzed in the context of the 2020-2022 standard-setting rule that modified volumes under CAA section 211(o)(7)(F), 35 which requires EPA to comply with the processes, criteria, and standards in CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). Consistent with our past practice in evaluating the factors, 36 we have again determined that a holistic balancing of the factors is appropriate. 37 34 See Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. EPA, 286 F.3d 554, 570 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (analyzing factors within the Clean Water Act); accord Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 358 F.3d 174, 195 (2d Cir. 2004) (same); BP Exploration & Oil, Inc. v. EPA, 66 F.3d 784, 802 (6th Cir. 1995) (same); see also Brown v. Watt, 668 F.3d 1290, 1317 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (“A balancing of factors is not the same as treating all factors equally. The obligation instead is to look at all factors and then balance the results. The Act does not mandate any particular balance, but vests the Secretary with discretion to weigh the elements . . . .”) (addressing factors articulated in the Out Continental Shelf Lands Act). 35 See 87 FR 39600 (July 1, 2022). 36 See 87 FR 39600, 39607-08 (July 1, 2022). 37 RFS Annual Rules Response to Comments Document at 10. In addition to those factors listed in the statute, the statute also directs EPA to consider “the impact of the use of renewable fuels on other factors.” 38 Moreover, many other factors affect the statutory factors themselves. Accordingly, consistent with the statute, we have considered several other factors, including: 38 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(VI). • The interaction between volume requirements for years 2023-2025, including the nested nature of those volume requirements and the availability of carryover RINs. 39 39 This also informs our analysis of the statutory factor “review of the implementation of the program.” CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). • The ability of the market to respond given the timing of this rulemaking. 40 40 This also informs our analysis of the statutory factor “the expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuels.” CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(III). • Our obligation to respond to the ACE remand (Section V). • The supply of qualifying renewable fuels to U.S. consumers (Section III.A.5). 41 41 This is based on our analysis of the statutory factor the expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuel as well as of downstream constraints on biofuel use, including the statutory factors relating to infrastructure and costs. • Soil quality (RIA Chapter 3.4). 42 42 Soil quality is closely tied to water quality and is also relevant to the impact of renewable fuels on the environment more generally, such that this analysis also informs our analysis of the statutory factor “the impact of the production and use of renewable fuels on the environment.” CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I). • Environmental justice (Section IV.E and RIA Chapter 8). 43 43 Addressing environmental justice involves assessing the potential for the use of renewable fuels to have a disproportionate and adverse health or environmental effect on minority populations, low-income populations, tribes, and/or indigenous peoples. • A comparison of costs and benefits (Section IV.D). 44 44 The comparison of costs and benefits compares our quantitative analysis of various statutory factors, including costs and energy security. C. Statutory Conditions on Volume Requirements As indicated above, the CAA affords EPA flexibility to consider each of the enumerated factors and the weight to give those factors. However, the CAA does contain three conditions that affect our determination of the applicable volume requirements: • A constraint in setting the applicable volume of total renewable fuel as compared to advanced biofuel, with implications for the implied volume requirement for conventional renewable fuel. • Direction in setting the cellulosic biofuel applicable volume regarding potential future waivers. • A floor on the applicable volume of BBD. 1. Advanced Biofuel as a Percentage of Total Renewable Fuel While the statute provides broad discretion in setting the applicable volume requirements for advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel, it also establishes a constraint on the relationship between these two volume requirements, and this constraint has implications for the implied volume requirement for conventional renewable fuel. The CAA provides that the applicable advanced biofuel requirement must “be at least the same percentage of the applicable volume of renewable fuel as in calendar year 2022,” 45 meaning that EPA must, at a minimum, maintain the ratio of advanced biofuel to total renewable fuel that was established for 2022 for the years in which EPA sets the applicable volume requirements. In effect, this limits the implied volume of conventional renewable fuel within the total renewable fuel volume for years after 2022. 45 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(iii). The applicable advanced biofuel volume requirement is 5.63 billion gallons for 2022. 46 The total renewable fuel volume requirement for 2022 is 20.63 billion gallons, resulting in an implied conventional volume requirement of 15 billion gallons. For 2022, then, advanced biofuel would represent 27.3 percent of total renewable fuel. The volume requirements we are finalizing in this action for 2023-2025, shown in Table I.A.1-1, all exceed this 27.3 percent minimum, and thus the applicable volume requirements that we are finalizing satisfy this statutory criterion. 46 87 FR 39601. 2. Cellulosic Biofuel The statute requires that EPA set the applicable cellulosic biofuel requirement “based on the assumption that the Administrator will not need to issue a waiver . . . under [CAA section 211(o)](7)(D)” for the years in which EPA sets the applicable volume requirement. 47 We interpret this requirement to mean that we must establish the cellulosic volume requirement at a level that is achievable and not expected to require us in the future to lower the applicable cellulosic volume requirement using the cellulosic waiver authority under CAA section 211(o)(7)(D). 48 CAA section 211(o)(7)(D) provides that if “the projected volume of cellulosic biofuel production is less than the minimum applicable volume established under paragraph (2)(B),” EPA “shall reduce the applicable volume of cellulosic biofuel required under paragraph (2)(B) to the projected volume available during that calendar year.” Therefore, we are setting the volume requirements such that the mandatory waiver of the cellulosic volume is not anticipated to be triggered in those future years. Operating within this limitation, and in light of our consideration of the statutory factors explained in Section VI, we are setting the cellulosic volumes for 2023, 2024, and 2025 at the projected volume available in each year, respectively, consistent with our past actions in determining the cellulosic biofuel volume. 49 These projections, discussed further in Sections III.B.1 and VI.A, represent our best efforts to project the growth in the volume of these fuels that can be achieved in 2023-2025. 47 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(iv). 48 The cellulosic biofuel waiver applies when the projected volume of cellulosic biofuel production is less than the minimum applicable volume. CAA section 211(o)(7)(D). 49 See, e.g., 2020-2022 Rule, 87 FR 39600 (July 1, 2022). 3. Biomass-Based Diesel EPA has established the BBD requirement under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) since 2013 because the statute only provided BBD volume targets through 2012. The statute also requires that the BBD volume requirement be set at or greater than the 1.0 billion gallon volume requirement for 2012 in the statute, but does not provide any other numerical criteria that EPA is to consider. 50 EPA is setting the BBD volume requirement for 2023, 2024, and 2025 at 2.82, 3.04, and 3.35 billion gallons respectively. These volumes are significantly greater than 1.0 billion gallon minimum requirement for these years. 50 CAA Section 211(o)(2)(B)(iv). D. Authority To Establish Volumes and Percentage Standards for Multiple Future Years EPA is finalizing volume and percentage standards for 2023, 2024, and 2025 in this single action. In the proposed rule, we sought comment on volume requirements for 2026, and proposed volumes for 2023, 2024, and 2025. We also proposed corresponding percentage standards for 2023, 2024, and 2025. In the proposal, we discussed how the number of years for which we might establish standards, and thus the numbers of years for which we must analyze the impacts of those standards, represented a tension between providing certainty for stakeholders of future demand and being able to project renewable fuel supply with reasonable certainty. We discussed how we focused our assessment of renewable fuel supply on the three years immediately following the end of the statutory volume targets ( i.e., 2023-2025) as an attempt to find a balance between these opposing concerns. Additionally, we have considered the statutory deadlines from promulgating applicable volumes, two of which have already passed (October 31, 2021, for 2023 applicable volumes, and October 31, 2022, for 2024 applicable volumes). The statutory deadline for promulgating the 2025 applicable volumes is later this year on October 31, 2023. Establishing volume requirements for three years strikes an appropriate balance between these opposing concerns. We acknowledge that establishing volume targets and the associated percentage standards for a greater number of years would increase market certainty for obligated parties, biofuel producers, and other RIN market participants. However, the uncertainty inherent in making future projections increases for longer timeframes. Moreover, our experience with the RFS program since its inception is that unforeseen market circumstances involving not only renewable fuel supply but also relevant economics mean that fuels markets are continually evolving and changing in ways that cannot be predicted. These facts affect all supply-related elements of biofuel: projections of production capacity, availability of imports, rates of consumption, availability of qualifying feedstocks, and the gasoline and diesel demand projections that provide the basis for the calculation of percentage standards. Greater uncertainty in future projections means a higher likelihood that those future projections could turn out to be inaccurate, leading to the potential need to revise them after they are established through, for instance, one of the statutory waiver provisions. Such actions to revise applicable standards after they have been set could be expected to increase market uncertainty. Promulgating standards for three years in a single action also increases the likelihood that we can meet the statutory deadline to promulgate applicable volumes by 14 months prior to the beginning of the calendar year. In this action, we are promulgating the 2025 volumes ahead of the statutory deadline of October 2023. Given the extensive analysis required to support the volumes, and the associated length of time necessary for CAA rulemaking actions, promulgating standards for multiple years facilitates compliance with the statutory requirements. Many of the comments we received from stakeholders supported our proposal to establish standards for three years. While some stakeholders requested that standards be set for fewer than three years, others requested that we set standards for more than three years. Based on our desire to strengthen market certainty by establishing applicable standards for as many years as is practical, tempered by the knowledge that longer time periods increase uncertainty in projected volumes, increasing the potential that applicable standards might need to be waived at a later date, we continue to believe that three years represents an appropriate balance at this time. We are not making a determination in this action that three years is the appropriate number of years to establish standards under all circumstances and in all future actions. Indeed, it may be appropriate in future standard-setting actions to establish standards for more or less than three years at a time. The CAA requires EPA to promulgate regulations that, regardless of the date of promulgation, contain compliance provisions applicable to refineries, blenders, distributors and importers that ensure that the volumes in CAA section 211(o)(2)(B), which includes set volumes, are met. 51 As to setting percentage standards, for years after 2022, the CAA does not expressly direct EPA to continue to implement volume requirements through percentage standards established through annual rulemakings. Furthermore, in establishing volumes for years after 2022, EPA is directed to review “the implementation of the program” in years during which Congress provided statutory volumes. 52 Thus, Congress provided EPA discretion as to how to implement the volume requirements of the RFS program in years 2023 and beyond. 51 CAA section 211(o)(A)(i), (iii). 52 CAA Section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). CAA section 211(o)(3)(B)(i) provides that by “November 30 of each of calendar years 2005 through 2021, based on the estimate provided [by EIA], the Administrator . . . shall determine and publish in the Federal Register , with respect to the following calendar year, the renewable fuel obligation that ensures that the requirements of paragraph (2) are met.” 53 The next clause (ii) provides further requirements for the obligation described in clause (i). On its face, this language does not apply to rulemakings establishing obligations for years subsequent to 2022. Therefore, EPA is not bound by this language for those years. 53 CAA Section 211(o)(3)(b)(i). EPA could choose to continue to utilize the same procedures articulated in CAA section 211(o)(3)(B)(i) for establishing percentage standards for years beyond 2022. In that case, EPA would establish standards for 2023 in this rulemaking, and separately set standards for 2024 and 2025 in later actions. However, EPA has chosen to set percentage standards at one time for several future years ( i.e., for 2023, 2024, and 2025). Doing so increases certainty for obligated parties, renewable fuel producers, and RIN market participants, as both the applicable volume requirements and the associated percentage standards can be established in advance of the year in which they apply. This also provides certainty for obligated parties in determining compliance deadlines. The regulations at 40 CFR 80.1451(f)(1)(i)(A) provide that compliance will not be required for a given compliance year until after the percentage standards for the following year are established. Thus, establishing the percentage standards through this rulemaking process provides certainty as to the date of the compliance deadlines for 2022-2024. This action properly balances creating certainty for obligated parties, renewable fuel producers, and RIN market participants in establishing percentage standards and limiting the scope of uncertainty in projections of future gasoline and diesel consumption by setting percentage standards only for the next three compliance years. 54 54 See Growth Energy v. Env't Prot. Agency, 5 F.4th 1, 15 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (acknowledging deference to agency's predictive judgments). Several commenters supported EPA's proposal to establish volumes and associated percentage standards for 2023-2025. Other commenters suggested that EPA should only promulgate percentage standards for 2023 and 2024 because EPA could instead finalize the percentage standards for 2025 along with the 2026 volumes and percentage standards given the statutory deadline of October 31, 2024. We discuss responses to these comments in the RTC document. In this action, we are finalizing applicable volume requirements and the associated percentage standards for 2023-2025, as described further in Sections VI and VII. We believe that establishing both the volume requirements and percentage standards for the next three years strikes an appropriate balance between improving the program by providing increased certainty over a multiple number of years and recognizing the inherent uncertainty in longer-term projections. E. Considerations for Late Rulemaking In this rulemaking, we are finalizing applicable volume targets for the 2023 and 2024 compliance years that miss the statutory deadlines. 55 EPA has in the past also missed statutory deadlines for promulgating RFS standards, including the BBD Standards in 2014-2016, which were established under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii), the same provision under which we are establishing the 2023 and 2024 standards. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found that EPA retains authority to promulgate volumes and annual standards beyond the statutory deadlines, even those that apply retroactively, so long as EPA exercises this authority reasonably. 56 In doing so, EPA must balance the burden on obligated parties of a delayed rulemaking with the broader goal of the RFS program to increase renewable fuel use. 57 In upholding EPA's late and retroactive standards in ACE, the court considered several specific factors, including the availability of RINs for compliance, the amount of lead time and adequate notice for obligated parties, and the availability of compliance flexibilities. In addressing rulemakings that were late ( i.e., those issued after the statutory deadline) but not retroactive, the court emphasized the amount of lead time and adequate notice for obligated parties. 58 Most relevant here is EPA's action in 2015 that established the BBD volume requirements for 2014-2017. 59 There, EPA missed the statutory deadline, that EPA establish an applicable volume target for BBD no later than 14 months before the first year to which that volume requirement will apply, for all four years. 60 The court found that EPA properly balanced the relevant considerations and had provided sufficient notice to parties in establishing the applicable volume requirements for 2014-2017. 61 A commenter suggested that EPA is further limited on our promulgation of the 2023 and 2024 standards at no greater than the 2022 standards. We disagree for the reasons articulated in the RTC document. 55 See CAA Section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii), requiring EPA promulgate applicable volume requirements no later than 14 months prior to the first year in which they will apply. 56 Americans for Clean Energy v. EPA, 864 F.3d 691 (D.C. Cir. 2017) ( ACE ) (EPA may issue late applicable volumes under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)); Monroe Energy, LLC v. EPA, 750 F.3d 909 (D.C. Cir. 2014); NPRA v. EPA, 630 F.3d 145, 154-58 (D.C. Cir. 2010). 57 NPRA v. EPA, 630 F.3d 145, 164-65. 58 ACE, 864 F.3d at 721-22. 59 80 FR 77420, 77427-28, 77430-31 (Dec. 14, 2015). 60 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). 61 ACE, 864 F.3d at 721-23. In this rulemaking, we are exercising our authority to set the applicable renewable fuel volume requirements for 2023 and 2024 after the statutory deadline to promulgate volumes no later than 14 months before the first year to which those volume requirements apply. 62 This final rule will also be partly retroactive, as the 2023 standards are being finalized in the middle of the 2023 calendar year. Nevertheless, we believe that the 2023 standards being finalized in this action can be met and that the available RIN generation data from the first quarter of 2023 suggests the market is on track to supply the volumes we are finalizing for 2023 (see Section VI and RIA Chapter 6). We are finalizing the 2024 standards prior to the beginning of the 2024 calendar year and do not expect those standards to apply retroactively. Additionally, we have provided obligated parties notice as of December 1, 2022 of the proposed 2023 and 2024 standards, a month ahead of when the 2023 standards would apply, and over a year in advance of when the 2024 standards would apply. Additionally, obligated parties will have at least nine months from the time of promulgation of this final rule before they are required to submit associated compliance reports for 2023. 63 There will additionally be approximately 22 months between the promulgation of this rule and the compliance deadline for the 2024 standards. 64 Additionally, all obligated parties will continue to have available compliance flexibilities such as carry forward deficits, and carryover RINs to comply with the 2023 and 2024 standards. 62 CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). 63 EPA expects the 2023 compliance deadline to be March 31, 2024. See 40 CFR 80.1451(f)(1)(A). 64 The 2024 compliance deadline is March 31, 2025. 40 CFR 80.1451(f)(1)(A). In addition, in completing its response to the ACE remand of the 2016 annual rule, we are establishing a supplemental standard for 2023. 65 This supplemental standard is being promulgated after the statutory deadline for the 2016 standards (November 30, 2015). However, the supplemental standard would prospectively apply to gasoline and diesel produced or imported in 2023, therefore is only partly retroactive. We further discuss our response to the ACE remand in Section V. 65 We also established a supplemental standard for 2022 in a prior action. See, e.g., 87 FR 39600 (July 1, 2022). F. Impact on Other Waiver Authorities While we are establishing applicable volume requirements in this action for future years that are achievable and appropriate based on our consideration of the statutory factors, we retain our legal authority to waive volumes in the future under the waiver authorities should circumstances so warrant. 66 For example, the general waiver authority under CAA section 211(o)(7)(A) provides that EPA may waive the volume targets in “paragraph (2),” which provides both the statutory applicable volume tables and EPA's set authority (the authority to set applicable volumes for years not specified in the table). Therefore, similar to our exercise of the waiver authorities to modify the statutory volumes in past annual standard-setting rulemakings, EPA has the authority to modify the applicable volumes for 2023 and beyond in future actions through the use of our waiver authorities to modify the applicable volumes we are setting in this action. 66 See J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Intern., Inc., 534 U.S. 124, 143-44 (2001) (holding that when two statutes are capable of coexistence and there is not clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary, each should be regarded as effective). We note that, as described above, CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(iv) requires that EPA set the cellulosic biofuel volume requirements for 2023 and beyond based on the assumption that the Administrator will not need to waive those volume requirements under the cellulosic waiver authority. Because we are, in this action, establishing the applicable volume targets for 2023-2025 under the set authority, we do not believe we could also waive those requirements using the cellulosic waiver authority in this same action in a manner that would be consistent with CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(iv), since that waiver authority is only triggered when the projected production of cellulosic biofuel is less than the “applicable volume established under [211(o)(2)(B)].” In other words, it does not appear that EPA could use both the set authority and the cellulosic waiver authority to establish volumes at the same time in this action. Establishing the volume requirements for 2023-2025 using our set authority apart from the cellulosic waiver authority has important implications for the availability of cellulosic waiver credits (CWCs) in these years. When EPA reduces cellulosic volumes under the cellulosic waiver authority, EPA is also required to make CWCs available under CAA section 211(o)(7)(D)(ii). In this rule we are, for the first time, establishing a cellulosic biofuel standard without utilizing the cellulosic waiver authority. We interpret CAA section 211(o)(7)(D)(ii) such that CWCs are only made available in years in which EPA uses the cellulosic waiver authority to reduce the cellulosic biofuel volume. Because of this, cellulosic waiver credits would not be available as a compliance mechanism for obligated parties in these years absent a future action to exercise the cellulosic waiver authority. We recognized this likelihood in the recent rule establishing volume requirements for 2020-2022, where we stated that CWCs were unlikely to be available in 2023 as part of our rationale for not requiring the use of cellulosic carryover RINs in setting the cellulosic volume requirements for 2020-2022. 67 Some commenters suggested that we should make CWCs available even in the absence of exercising our cellulosic waiver authority to provide a price cap on cellulosic volume, or to provide additional flexibility for obligated parties. As we do not find authority to issue cellulosic waiver credits without use of the cellulosic waiver authority, we will not be issuing CWCs absent a future waiver of the cellulosic standard. Despite the absence of CWCs, we expect that obligated parties will be able to satisfy their cellulosic biofuel obligations for these years because we are proposing to establish the cellulosic biofuel volume requirement based on the quantity of cellulosic biofuel we project will be produced and imported in the U.S. each year. 67 87 FR 39616 (July 1, 2022). G. Severability As stated in the proposal, we intend for the volume requirements and percentage standards for each single year covered by this rule ( i.e., 2023, 2024, and 2025) to be severable from the volume requirements and percentage standards for the other years. Each year's volume requirements and percentage standards are supported by analyses for that year. Similarly, we intend for the 2023 supplemental standard and percentage standard to be severable from the annual volume requirements and percentage standards. We also intend for the other regulatory amendments to be severable from the volume requirements and percentage standard. The regulatory amendments are intended to improve the RFS program in general and are not part of EPA's analysis for the volume requirements and percentage standards for any specific year. Further, each of the regulatory amendments in Sections IX and X is severable from the other regulatory amendments because they all function independently of one another. If any of the portions of the rule identified in the preceding paragraph ( i.e., volume requirements and percentage standards for a single year, the 2023 supplemental standard, the individual regulatory amendments) is invalidated by a reviewing court, we intend the remainder of this action to remain effective as described in the preceding paragraph. To further illustrate, if a reviewing court were to invalidate the volume requirements and percentage standards and supplemental standard, we intend the other regulatory amendments to remain effective. Or, as another example, if a reviewing court invalidates the BBD conversion factor provisions, we intend the volume requirements and percentage standards as well as the supplemental standard and other regulatory amendments to remain effective. III. Candidate Volumes and Baselines The statute requires that we analyze a specified set of factors in making our determination of the appropriate volume requirements to establish for years after 2022, and further requires that we review implementation of the program in prior years. The statutory factors are listed in Section II.B. Because many of those factors, particularly those related to economic and environmental impacts, are difficult to analyze in the abstract, we have therefore opted to analyze those factors based on specific “candidate volumes” for each category of renewable fuel. To accomplish this, we first derived a set of renewable fuel volumes from the statutory factors most closely related to renewable fuel supply and other relevant factors. The development of these candidate volumes helps further our consideration of the statutory factor to analyze the expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuels and provide us with renewable fuel volumes with which to perform the remaining analyses required by the statute. We used these candidate volumes to conduct analyses of the other environmental and economic factors. Finally, we determined, based on the results of all of the analyses (those that went into developing the candidate volumes, described in this section, and the subsequent analyses performed using these candidate volumes, described in Sections IV and VI), the volume requirements that would be appropriate to establish. Our approach can be summarized as a three-step process: 1. Development of candidate volumes (described in this section). 2. Multifactor analysis based on those candidate volumes (described in Section IV). 3. Determination of applicable volume requirements based on a consideration of all factors analyzed (described in Section VI). We acknowledge that we are taking a different approach to developing candidate volumes in this rule than we did under the reset authority in the 2020-2022 rule. The primary difference is that in the 2020-2022 rule the candidate volumes for non-cellulosic advanced biofuel and conventional renewable fuel were generally in the implied statutory volumes for these fuel types in comparison to the statutory volumes. In this rule we are establishing volumes for 2023-2025, a time period for which there are no statutory targets. We therefore developed the candidate volumes for non-cellulosic biofuel and conventional biofuel based primarily on a consideration of supply-related factors, with a consideration of other relevant factors as noted in the following sections. This approach is generally consistent with the approach we took for developing the candidate cellulosic biofuel volumes in the 2020-2022 rule, as the statutory cellulosic biofuel volumes were far beyond the quantity of these fuels that could be supplied. For the first step in this process, we analyzed a subset of the statutory factors that are most closely related to supply of and demand for renewable fuel. These supply-and-demand-related factors (hereinafter “supply-related factors”) 68 include the production and use of renewable fuels (as a necessary prerequisite to analyzing their impacts under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(I), (II), (V), and (VI))), the expected annual rate of future commercial production of renewable fuels (CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(III)), and the sufficiency of infrastructure to deliver and use renewable fuel (CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii)(IV)). Consideration of these supply-related statutory factors necessarily included a consideration of imports and exports of renewable fuel, consumer demand for renewable fuel, the availability of qualifying feedstocks, and other relevant factors as discussed in the following sections. Since the statute also requires us to review the implementation of the program in prior years, an analysis of renewable fuel supply includes not just projections for the future but also an assessment of the historical supply of renewable fuel. While we focused on supply-related factors, as discussed further in the following sections we also considered other information such as trends in statutory volumes, GHG reduction implications, and market expectations resulting from our proposed rule. 68 We use this shorthand (“supply-related factors”) only for ease of explanation in the context of identifying candidate volumes for analysis under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii). We recognize that this shorthand (“supply-related factors”) utilizes the term “supply” in a manner that is incongruent with the D.C. Circuit's interpretation of the scope of the term “supply” in the general waiver authority provision in CAA section 211(o)(7)(A). ACE, 864 F.3d at 710. (holding that the term “inadequate domestic supply” under the general waiver authority excludes “demand-side factors”). References to “supply-related factors” in the context of our discussion of the candidate volumes for analysis under CAA section 211(o)(2)(B)(ii) have no bearing on our interpretation of the term “inadequate domestic supply” under the general waiver authority under CAA section 211(o)(7)(A). This section describes the derivation of “candidate volumes” based on a consideration of supply-related factors as the first step in our consideration of all factors that we are required to analyze under the statute. The candidate volumes represent those volumes that might be reasonable to require based on the supply-related factors, but which have not yet been evaluated in terms of the other economic and environmental factors. Basing the candidate volumes primarily on supply-related considerations is a reasonable first step because doing so narrows the scope for the multifactor analysis in a commonsense way. This step better enables our analysis of the remaining statutory factors. The candidate volumes we have identified in this final rule are similar to, but slightly higher than the candidate volumes in the proposed rule. Specifically, the candidate cellulosic biofuel volumes are higher for all three years (after accounting for the fact that we are not finalizing the proposed eRIN provisions in this rule). The candidate volumes for non-cellulosic advanced biofuels in this final rule are higher than the candidate volumes from the proposed rule for 2023-2025. Finally, the candidate volumes for conventional biofuel in this final rule are lower than the candidate volumes in the proposed rule for all three years, due to lower projected gasoline consumption. Section VI provides our rationale for the final volume requirements in light of all the analyses that we conducted. In this final rule we updated the candidate volumes after considering the comments we received on our proposed rule as well as additional data not available at the time the analyses for the proposed rule were completed. We received many comments on the supply-related factors that informed the candidate volumes, including comments related to renewable fuel production capacity, the availability of feedstocks to produce renewable fuel, the quantity of renewable fuel that can be consumed in the transportation sector, and the ability for the incentives provided by the RFS program to incentivize increased renewable fuel production and use. These comments, along with more recent data, led us to increase the candidate volumes for CNG/LNG derived from biogas, ethanol produced from corn kernel fiber, biomass-based diesel, and other advanced biofuels projected to be produced or imported in 2023-2025, and corresponding increases to the candidate volumes for these fuel types relative to the proposal. Our consideration of comments on the proposed rule and additional data also resulted in slight decreases to the candidate volumes of conventional renewable fuel for 2023-2025. Our updated projections of projected renewable fuel production and imports, including a brief discussion of the relevant comments and new data that informed these projections, can be found in Section III.B. Section III.C summarizes the candidate volumes we analyzed. Finally, Sections III.D and III.E describe, respectively, the No RFS baseline that we believe would be the most appropriate point of reference for the analysis of the other statutory factors, and the volume changes calculated in comparison to that baseline. A. Scope of Analysis In Section II.D we discuss our statutory authority to establish RFS volumes and percentage standards for multiple years in a single rule. As discussed in that section, in this final rule we are establishing volumes and percentage standards for three years, 2023-2025. Consistent with this decision, Sections III.B and III.C discuss our determination of the candidate volumes for each year covered by this rule. B. Production and Import of Renewable Fuel 1. Cellulosic Biofuel Cellulosic biofuel is defined as renewable fuel derived from any cellulose, hemi-cellulose, or lignin that has lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions that are at least 60 percent less than the baseline lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. 69 In the past several years, production of cellulosic biofuel has continued to increase. Cellulosic biofuel production reached record levels in 2022, driven by compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquified natural gas (LNG) derived from biogas. This section describes our assessment of the rate of production of qualifying cellulosic biofuel from 2023 to 2025, and some of the uncertainties associated with these volumes. Further detail on our projections of the rate of cellulosic biofuel production and import can be found in RIA Chapter 6.1. 69 40 CFR 80.1401. ER12JY23.000 a. CNG/LNG Derived From Biogas To be eligible to generate RINs for CNG/LNG derived from biogas, biogas from qualifying sources first must be collected and upgraded to enable its use in CNG/LNG vehicles. This upgrading process involves removing undesirable components and contaminants from biogas. Biogas that has been upgraded and distributed via a closed, private distribution system is called “treated biogas” while biogas that has been upgraded and distributed via the natural gas commercial pipeline system is referred to as renewable natural gas (RNG). RNG is essentially indistinguishable from fossil-based natural gas and can be used interchangeably and transported through the same pipelines. While treated biogas is typically used to fuel CNG/LNG vehicles at the site where it is produced, RNG is injected into the natural gas commercial pipeline system. Once injected into the natural gas commercial pipeline system, RNG can be used in a variety of applications, including to fuel CNG/LNG vehicles, for generating electricity, for residential heating, and for other industrial or commercial purposes. In the proposed rule we projected the use of CNG/LNG produced from RNG 70 in 2023-2025 using an industry-wide projection of the rate of growth calculated from RIN generation over the previous 24 months. While some commenters argued that EPA should project future production of CNG/LNG from RNG based on a facility-by-facility assessment, many supported the proposed methodology of using an industry-wide rate of growth to project production in future years. Many of the commenters who generally supported the rate of growth approach, however, requested that EPA use a higher rate of growth that considered data beyond just the most recent 24 months. These comments are discussed briefly at the end of this section, and in greater detail in the RTC document. In this final rule we are using an industry-wide rate of growth based on RIN generation data from 2015-2022 to project the production and use of RNG as CNG/LNG. As discussed later in this section, we believe the growth rate calculated using data from 2015-2022 better reflects the potential production and use of RNG as CNG/LNG through 2025. This results in a significantly higher rate of grow in the final rule (25.0%) relative to the proposed rule (13.1%), and higher projected volumes of RNG use as CNG/LNG for each year from 2023-2025. 70 We note that as described in the biogas regulatory reform provisions in Section IX, we define RNG to mean biogas that has been upgraded to commercial pipeline quality and placed onto the natural gas commercial pipeline system. We also define the term “treated biogas” to refer to biogas that has undergone treatment for use as transportation fuel but that is not placed onto the natural gas commercial pipeline system ( i.e., it is distributed via a closed, private distribution system). For purposes of this section of the preamble, we use the term RNG to refer collectively to treated biogas and RNG. In projecting the production and use of RNG used as CNG/LNG in 2023-2025 we primarily considered two potential limiting factors. The first factor considered was the quantity of RNG we project will be produced from qualifying biogas in 2023-2025. Because biogas must be upgraded to enable its use in CNG/LNG vehicles, the quantity of RNG that we project will be produced sets a maximum for the quantity of biogas that can be used in vehicles as CNG/LNG. The second major factor we consider is the quantity of RNG that is capable of being used as transportation fuel in CNG/LNG vehicles. As discussed above, RNG can be used in many different applications and a variety of factors, including limitations related to the demand for CNG/LNG from vehicles, fueling infrastructure, and demand for RNG from other sectors can all impact the quantity of CNG/LNG used in vehicles. Our projection of the quantity of RNG used as CNG/LNG that will be produced and used in 2023-2025 is described briefly in this section, and in greater detail in RIA Chapter 6.1.3. To project qualifying RNG production for this final rule we used an industry wide projection approach that is similar, though not identical, to the approach used to project the production of RNG used as CNG/LNG in previous RFS rules as well as in the proposed rule. While the approach we are using to project the production of CNG/LNG is similar to the approach used in previous years and the proposal, we are now using a broader range of data to calculate the growth rate used to project future projection. This reflects our consideration of an appropriate growth rate following engagement with stakeholders and review of both new data and commenter submissions on the proposal. More detail on our consideration of the appropriate rate of growth is provided later in this section. We have successfully used an industry wide projection methodology in previous years and continue to believe it better reflects the projected growth of the industry in light of potential limiting factors (which are more likely to be market based than technology based) than a projection based on an assessment of each potential RNG producer. To project the production of qualifying RNG we calculated a year-over-year growth rate and applied this growth rate to the total production of RNG used as CNG/LNG in 2022 (the most recent year for which complete data are available). To calculate the year-over-year growth rate we considered RIN generation data for RNG used as CNG/LNG from 2015-2022 instead of just the most recent 24 months for the proposal. We believe a rate of growth based on this larger set of data better reflects the potential for RNG production in 2023-2025. We also note that this rate of growth is within the range of the growth rates suggested by RNG producers in the public comment period (generally 20-30%) and closer to, though still less than, estimated RNG production from the Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas based on their analysis of new RNG facilities under construction and in development. 71 The data used to calculate the projected rate of growth for RNG and the resulting projections of RNG production in 2023-2025 are shown in Table III.B.1.a-1 and Table III.B.1.a-2. 71 Further discussion of the growth rate used to project the production of CNG/LNG derived from biogas, and our reasons for considering data beyond the most recent 24 months, can be found in RTC Section 3.2.2. Table III.B.1. a -1—Generation of Cellulosic Biofuel RINs for RNG Used as CNG/LNG [Ethanol-equivalent gallons] 2015 RIN generation (million RINs) 2022 RIN generation (million RINs) Year-over-year increase (%) 139.9 666.1 25.0 Table III.B.1. a -2—Projected Generation of Qualifying RNG [Ethanol-equivalent gallons] Year Date type Growth rate (%) Volume (million RINs) 2022 Actual N/A 665 2023 Projection 25.0 831 2024 Projection 25.0 1,039 2025 Projection 25.0 1,299 We next considered how much of the qualifying RNG produced in 2023-2025 could be used as transportation fuel in the form of CNG/LNG. While the volumes of RNG use as CNG/LNG in Table III.B.1.a-2. appear to be approaching the upper limit (estimated to be 1.4-1.75 billion ethanol-equivalent gallons) of all CNG/LNG capable of being used as transportation fuel in 2023-2025 in CNG/LNG vehicles in the fleet, these 2023-2025 volumes are still below the total quantity of CNG/LNG projected to be used as transportation fuel in 2023-2025. 72 Thus, the entire quantity of qualifying RNG produced in 2023-2025 could still be used as transportation fuel and be able to generate RINs under the RFS program. We therefore used the volumes in Table III.B.1.a-2 as the candidate volumes for RNG use as CNG/LNG in 2023-2025. 72 See RIA Chapter 6.1.3 for a further discussion of our estimate of CNG/LNG used as transportation fuel in 2023-2025. We received many comments on our projected volume for RNG used as CNG/LNG in our proposed rule. While some commenters supported the proposed volumes, many stakeholders involved in the production, distribution, and use of RNG as CNG/LNG stated that the projected volumes were too low. In particular, they stated that the growth in RNG use as CNG/LNG in recent years was significantly impacted by the COVID pandemic and did not reflect projected growth in this industry through 2025. Some commenters also noted significant investment in expanding RNG production which they claimed supported a much higher growth rate in the projected volume of biogas used in CNG/LNG vehicles. 73 73 See RTC Section 3.2.2 for a summary of these comments and a more detailed response. In this final rule we used a growth rate based on a longer time-period (2015-2022) than in both our proposed rule and previous RFS rules. We believe the higher growth rate that results from using additional data better reflects the likely production of RNG use as CNG/LNG in 2023-2025 than using a growth rate based on the last 24 months of data. Using data from 2015-2022 strikes a balance between using the most recent data available and not focusing exclusively on data from the last 24 months, during which the industry may still have been recovering from the impacts of the COVID pandemic. As noted earlier, the growth rate that results from using this additional data is supported by the public comments (which generally requested that EPA use growth rates that ranged from 20 to 30 percent), as well as the data received during the public comment period on the large number of RNG production facilities that are currently under construction or in the project development phase. Finally, we note that the limited data available from early 2023 suggest that 25% growth is achievable in 2023. 74 74 Further discussion of the growth rate used to project the production of CNG/LNG derived from biogas, and our reasons for considering data beyond the most recent 24 months, can be found in RTC Section 3.2.2. b. Ethanol From Corn Kernel Fiber While there are several different technologies currently being developed to produce liquid fuels from cellulosic biomass, these technologies are by and large highly unlikely to produce significant quantities of cellulosic biofuel by 2025. One exception is the production of ethanol from corn kernel fiber (CKF), for which several different companies have developed processes. Many of these processes involve co-processing of both the starch and cellulosic components of the corn kernel making it difficult to quantify what portion of the ethanol they produce is from cellulosic biomass. In the proposed rule we noted the potential for the production of cellulosic ethanol from CKF in 2023-2025. We did not, however, project any production of ethanol from CKF in 2023-2025 beyond the few facilities that were currently registered as cellulosic biofuel producers. At the time of the proposal no facilities had yet requested to register as cellulosic biofuel producers using analytical methods consistent with recently published guidance. 75 Since the proposal, however, a number of facilities have approached EPA with registration requests. In this final rule we are now projecting that the production of ethanol from CKF will increase from 7 million gallons in 2023 to 77 million gallons in 2025. These projections, which are described further in the remainder of this section and in greater detail in RIA Chapter 6.1 are based on projections of the number of facilities we expect will register as cellulosic biofuel producers and the expected rate of cellulosic biofuel production at each facility. 75 Guidance on Qualifying an Analytical Method for Determining the Cellulosic Converted Fraction of Corn Kernel Fiber Co-Processed with Starch. Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. EPA. September 2022 (EPA-420-B-22-041). To be eligible to generate cellulosic RINs, facilities that are co-processing starch and cellulosic components of the corn kernel must be able to determine the amount of ethanol that is produced from the cellulosic portion of the corn kernel. This requires the ability to accurately and reliably calculate the amount of ethanol produced from the cellulosic portion as opposed to the starch portion of the corn kernel; EPA has to date had significant concerns with facilities' abilities to accurately perform this calculation. In September 2022 EPA published a document providing updated guidance on analytical methods that could be used to quantify the amount of ethanol produced when co-processing corn kernel fiber and corn starch. 76 This guidance highlighted several outstanding critical technical issues that need to be addressed. 76 Guidance on Qualifying an Analytical Method for Determining the Cellulosic Converted Fraction of Corn Kernel Fiber Co-Processed with Starch. Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. EPA. September 2022 (EPA-420-B-22-041). Since issuing the proposed rule EPA has continued to have substantive discussions with technology providers intending to use analytical methods consistent with the guidance document and owners of facilities intending to register as cellulosic biofuel producers using these analytical methods. The technology providers have indicated that using analytical methods consistent with those in the guidance document they can demonstrate that approximately 1.5% of the ethanol produced from existing corn ethanol facilities is produced from cellulosic biomass. Based on the information from the technology providers, we believe that 1.5% of cellulosic ethanol can generally be produced from corn kernel fiber at existing ethanol facilities with few, if any, additional processing units or process changes. We are aware that many ethanol facilities are working with the technology providers in order to register their facilities to produce cellulosic ethanol. We are therefore projecting volumes of ethanol from corn kernel fiber through 2025 that include production from facilities that have not yet registered as cellulosic biofuel producers, but are expected to do so during this time period. The projected production of cellulosic ethanol from CKF, shown in Table III.B.1.b-1, are based on projections of when facilities will register as cellulosic biofuel producers under the RFS program and begin producing fuel. The projection methodology for cellulosic ethanol production from CKF used in this final rule is discussed further in RIA Chapter 6.1.2. Table III.B.1. b -1—Projected Production of Ethanol From CKF [Ethanol-equivalent gallons] Year Volume (million RINs) 2023 7 2024 51 2025 77 c. Other For the 2023-2025 timeframe, we expect that commercial scale production of cellulosic biofuel in the U.S. beyond CNG/LNG derived from biogas and ethanol produced from CKF will be very limited. There are several cellulosic biofuel production facilities in various stages of development, construction, and commissioning that may be capable of producing commercial scale volumes of cellulosic biofuel by 2025. These facilities generally are focusing on producing cellulosic hydrocarbons that could be blended into gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel from feedstocks such as separated municipal solid waste (MSW) and slash, precommercial thinnings, and tree residue. In light of the fact that no parties have achieved consistent production of liquid cellulosic biofuel in the U.S. or consistently exported liquid cellulosic biofuel to the U.S., production and import of liquid cellulosic biofuel in 2023-2025 is highly uncertain and likely to be relatively small (see RIA Chapter 6.1.4 for more detail on the potential production of liquid cellulosic biofuel through 2025). For the candidate volumes we have projected no production of these fuels in 2023-2025. d. eRINs As noted in the Executive Summary, we are not finalizing the proposed revisions to the eRIN program in this rulemaking. We are therefore not including any volume from renewable electricty in our projections of the production and import of cellulosic biofuel. eRINs were projected to be a significant source of cellulosic biofuel in the proposed rule in 2024 and 2025 (representing 600 million and 1.2 billion RINs in 2024 and 2025 respectively). Because we no longer included projected volumes of eRINs, our projections of the production and imports of total cellulosic biofuel for 2024 and 2025 in this final rule are lower than the proposed rule, despite the higher projections for RNG used in vehicles as a renewable form of CNG/LNG and ethanol produced from CKF in this final rule. 2. Biomass-Based Diesel Since 2010, when the BBD volume requirement was added to the RFS program, production of BBD has generally increased year-on-year. The volume of BBD supplied in any given year is influenced by a number of factors, including: production capacity, feedstock availability and cost, available incentives including the RFS program, the availability of imported BBD, the demand for BBD in foreign markets, and several other economic factors. The vast majority of fuel that qualifies as BBD is biodiesel and renewable diesel. Both these fuels are produced from animal fat and vegetable oils and are replacements for diesel fuel, however they differ in their production processes and chemical composition. Biodiesel is an oxygenated fuel that is generally produced using a transesterification process. Renewable diesel is a hydrocarbon fuel that closely resembles petroleum diesel that is generally produced by hydrotreating renewable feedstocks. From 2010 through 2015 the vast majority of BBD supplied to the U.S. was biodiesel. While biodiesel is still the largest source of BBD supplied to the U.S., the supply of renewable diesel in 2022 was nearly as large as the supply of biodiesel, and the supply of renewable diesel is projected to exceed the supply of biodiesel in future years as renewable diesel production and imports continue to grow. ER12JY23.001 There are also very small volumes of renewable jet fuel and heating oil that qualify as BBD, and there are currently significant efforts underway to incentivize growth in renewable jet fuel in particular (often referred to as sustainable aviation fuel or SAF). 77 Jet fuel has qualified as a RIN-generating advanced biofuel under the RFS program since 2010, and must achieve at least a 50 percent reduction in GHGs in comparison to petroleum-based fuels. The technology and feedstocks that can be used to produce SAF today are often the same as those currently used to produce renewable diesel. For example, the same process that produces renewable diesel from waste fats, oils, and greases or plant oils generally produces hydrocarbons in the distillation range of jet fuel that can be separated and sold as SAF instead of being sold as renewable diesel. While relatively little SAF has been produced since 2010—less than 15 million gallons per year—opportunities for increasing this category of advanced biofuel exist. A new tax credit for SAF, which was included in the Inflation Reduction Act, may result in increasing volumes of SAF produced from existing renewable diesel production facilities. SAF production from existing renewable diesel facilities would increase the amount of renewable fuel available for a transportation sector that may be otherwise particularly difficult to reduce carbon intensity; however, it would likely result in a decrease in renewable diesel production, with little or no net change in their overall production of RIN-generating fuels. 78 In this rule we have not separately projected growth in SAF production, but we recognize that some of the projected growth in renewable diesel production may instead be SAF from the same production facilities. Other SAF production technologies and production facilities also being developed could enable the future production of SAF from new facilities and feedstocks that are not expected to impact renewable diesel production. 77 According to EMTS data renewable jet fuel supply has ranged from 0-15 million gallons per year from 2014-2022. Jet fuel is eligible to generate RINs per 40 CFR 80.1426(a)(1)(iv), provided all other regulatory requirements are met. 78 The equivalence values for renewable diesel and jet fuel are similar, with renewable diesel generating 1.6-1.7 RINs per gallon depending on the energy content of the fuel and Jet fuel generally generating 1.6 RINs per gallon. In addition, in April 2022 the Biden Administration announced a new Sustainable Aviation Fuel Grand Challenge to inspire the dramatic increase in the production of sustainable aviation fuels to at least 3 billion gallons per year by 2030. This effort is accompanied by new and ongoing funding opportunities to support sustainable aviation fuel projects and fuel producers totaling up to $4.3 billion. The remainder of this section provides historical data on biodiesel and renewable diesel production and production capacity, briefly discusses potential feedstock limitations for biodiesel and renewable diesel production in future years, and summarizes our assessment of the rate of production and use of qualifying BBD from 2023 to 2025, and some of the uncertainties associated with those volumes. Our assessments of production capacity, available feedstocks, and likely future production of biodiesel and renewable diesel in this final rule reflect our consideration of the comments we received on this rule as well as updated data not available at the time of the proposed rule. Our projections of the likely future production of biodiesel and renewable diesel in this final rule are higher than in the proposed rule, particularly in 2025 due to higher projections of feedstock availability. Further details on these volume projections can be found in RIA Chapter 6.2. a. Biodiesel Historically, the largest volumes of biomass-based diesel and advanced biofuel supplied in the RFS program have been biodiesel. Domestic biodiesel production increased from approximately 1.3 billion gallons in 2014 to approximately 1.8 billion gallons in 2018. Since 2018 domestic biodiesel production decreased slightly, to approximately 1.6 billion gallons in 2022. The U.S. has also imported significant volumes of biodiesel in previous years and has been a net importer of biodiesel since 2013. Biodiesel imports reached a peak in 2016 and 2017, with the majority of the imported biodiesel coming from Argentina. 79 In August 2017, the U.S. announced tariffs on biodiesel imported from Argentina and Indonesia. 80 These tariffs were subsequently confirmed in April 2018. 81 Since that time no biodiesel has been imported from Argentina or Indonesia, and net biodiesel imports have been relatively small. 79 EIA U.S. Imports by Country of Origin, https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_EPOORDB_im0_mbbl_a.htm. According to EIA data, 67 percent of all biodiesel imports in 2016 and 2017 were from Argentina. 80 82 FR 40748 (Aug. 28, 2017). 81 83 FR 18278 (April 26, 2018). Available data suggests that there is significant unused biodiesel production capacity in the U.S., and thus domestic biodiesel production could grow without the need to invest in additional production capacity. Consistent with comments we received on the rule, we have updated our assessment of domestic biodiesel production capacity using the latest information available from EIA. Data reported by EIA shows that biodiesel production capacity in January 2023 was approximately 2.05 billion gallons per year. 82 According to EIA data biodiesel production capacity grew slowly from about 2.1 billion gallons in 2012 83 to a peak of approximately 2.5 billion gallons in 2018. 84 EIA reports that domestic biodiesel production capacity was approximately 2.5 billion gallons as recently as October 2021. 85 This facility capacity data is collected by EIA in monthly surveys, which suggests that this capacity represents the production at facilities that are currently producing some volume of biodiesel and likely does not include inactive facilities that are far less likely to complete a monthly survey. EPA separately collects facility capacity information through the facility registration process. This data includes both facilities that are currently producing biodiesel and those that are inactive. EPA's data shows a total domestic biodiesel production capacity of 3.1 billion gallons per year in April 2022, of which 2.8 billion gallons per year was at biodiesel facilities that generated RINs in 2021. These estimates of domestic production capacity strongly suggest that domestic biodiesel production capacity is unlikely to limit domestic biodiesel production through 2025. 82 EIA Monthly Biofuels Feedstock and Capacity Update, https://www.eia.gov/biofuels/update. Mar. 31, 2023 (). 83 EIA Monthly Biodiesel Production Report. February 2013. 84 EIA Monthly Biodiesel Production Report. February 2019. 85 EIA Monthly Biofuels Feedstock and Capacity Update. January 31, 2023 ( https://www.eia.gov/biofuels/update ). b. Renewable Diesel and SAF Renewable diesel and SAF are currently produced using the same feedstocks and very similar production technologies, and in most cases are produced at the same production facilities. Historically, greater incentives have been available for renewable diesel production, which has caused many of these production facilities to maximize renewable diesel production. In the near term, we expect that any increase in SAF production will result in a corresponding decrease in renewable diesel production. 86 In this section we have focused on renewable diesel production, but we acknowledge that an increasing portion of this fuel may be used as SAF in future years. 86 We recognize that new technologies are being developed to produce SAF from a wider variety of feedstocks. Production of SAF using these technologies would not negatively impact renewable diesel production. Through 2025, however, we expect that only relatively modest volumes of these fuels might be produced. Renewable diesel has historically been produced and imported in smaller quantities than biodiesel as shown in Figure III.B.2-1. In recent years, however, domestic production of renewable diesel has increased significantly. Renewable diesel production facilities generally have higher capital costs and production costs relative to biodiesel, which likely accounts for the much higher volumes of biodiesel production relative to renewable diesel production to date. The higher cost of renewable diesel production can largely be offset through the benefits of economies of scale, since renewable diesel facilities tend to be much larger than biodiesel production facilities. More importantly, because renewable diesel more closely resembles petroleum-based diesel than biodiesel fuel (both renewable diesel and petroleum-based diesel are hydrocarbons while biodiesel is a methyl-ester) renewable diesel can be blended at much higher levels than biodiesel. This allows renewable diesel producers to benefit to a greater extent from the LCFS credits in California and other states in addition to the RFS incentives and the federal tax credit. The greater ability for renewable diesel to generate credits under California's LCFS program provides a significant advantage over biodiesel. Biodiesel blends in California containing 6 to 20 percent biodiesel require the use of an additive to comply with California's Alternative Diesel F [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2023-13462. Public record. Not legal advice.