How to Prepare a Complete Petition
Version 1*0
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
How to Prepare a Complete Petition
Version 1*0
Transportation and Climate Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-420-B-14-069
September 2014
-------
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 6
2. Submitting Information Claimed as Confidential Business Information 8
3. Section-by-Section Instructions 9
A. Cover Sheet (No information claimed CBI) 9
1. Date Submitted 9
2. Organization Name 9
3. Location of Headquarters 9
4. Location of Biofuel Production Facility 9
5. Fuel Pathway Requested 9
6. Primary Point of Contact 10
B. Technical Justification 11
1. Fuel Pathway Description (No information claimed CBI) 11
2. Process Flow Charts (No information claimed CBI) 11
3. Comparison to Previously Evaluated Pathways (No information claimed CBI) 12
4. Commercial Viability 12
5. Renewable Fuel Production Volumes (Historic and Projected) 12
C. Organization Information 13
1. Organization Description 13
2. Responsible Corporate Officer 13
D. Fuel Type 14
1. Technical Description 14
2. Information for New Fuel Types 14
i. Chemical Composition 14
ii. Regulatory Definition Justification 14
iii. Equivalence Value Application 14
iv. Fuel Registration 15
3. Other Relevant Information 15
E. Production Process 16
1. Type of Production Process 16
2. Mass and Energy Balances 16
3. Historical Process Data 16
-------
4. Information for New Production Processes 17
i. Energy Saving Technologies or Other Process Improvements 17
ii. Request for Special Provisions 17
iii. Processes that Use Renewable Fuel Inputs 17
5. Other Relevant Information 18
F. Feedstock 18
1. Type of Feedstock (No information claimed CBI) 18
2. Information for New Feedstocks 18
i. Technical Definition 19
ii. Category of Renewable Biomass 20
iii. Volume of Renewable Fuel Produced from the Feedstock 20
iv. Yields 21
v. Land Use Data 22
vi. Market value 23
vii. Alternative uses 24
viii. Farm Input Data 25
ix. Mass and Energy Balance Data for Feedstock Pre-Processing 25
x. Invasiveness 26
xi. Other Potential Environmental Impacts 26
3. Other Relevant Information 27
G. Coproducts 27
1. Technical Description 27
2. Market Value 27
3. Co-Products used as Livestock Feed 28
i. Animal Market Share and Feed Ratios by Region 28
ii. Feed Market Contract Specifications 28
iii. Historical and Projected Feed Prices 28
iv. Data on Maximum Inclusion Rates, Substitutability 28
v. Approved Status Documentation 29
H. List of Attachments 29
Appendix A: Formatting for New Fuel Pathway Petitions 30
Appendix B: Petition Cover Sheet Template 31
4
-------
-------
1. Introduction
The EPA is providing detailed information on how to prepare a complete petition for a new fuel pathway
under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. Parties who are considering a petition application
are strongly encouraged to start by reviewing the background information provided on EPA's website/
and to use the Pathway Screening Tool (available for download on the website). Using this tool-which is
intended to save fuel producers and the Agency time as compared to submitting a full petition that is
unnecessary or incompletegives the EPA an opportunity to review information about a proposed
pathway and respond with questions or suggested next steps before a party starts preparing a petition.
The RFS regulations at 40 CFR 80.1416(b) outline the information requirements for petitions requesting
evaluation of a new fuel pathway. This document provides additional information to help petitioners
meet the requirements outlined in the regulations. Petitions that do not include the information
required at § 80.1416(b) will be rejected as incomplete and the Agency will take no further action.
This document outlines the information that EPA needs to complete lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG)
assessments for different types of petitions, based on the methodology and modeling approach
developed for the March 2010 RFS final rule (75 FR 14670). After receiving a petition, the EPA may ask
for additional information to complete its evaluation and specify a time period in which the additional
information is requested (e.g., 30 business days). If the requested information is not provided in a
timely manner, and the petitioner does not explain the delay, the petition may be rejected as
incomplete and a whole new petition would need to be submitted. Carefully following the
recommendations in this document should help to limit the extent of additional information requested
by the Agency.
As part of our efforts to streamline the petition review process, the EPA is also asking that petitioners
prepare their application packages using the organization and format specified in this document.2
Ultimately, this document is intended to help improve the quality and uniformity of incoming petitions,
which should improve the overall efficiency of the petition process.
Section two of this document provides recommendations on how to submit information claimed as
confidential business information in a petition. Section three provides step-by-step instructions for
preparing a complete petition. Finally, this document provides step-by-step instructions for petitions
that involve new feedstocks, because these petitions often require additional information for EPA to
complete its evaluation.
This document was prepared based on EPA's experience implementing the petition process since its
creation in March 2010. As we continue to receive and evaluate more petitions, we expect to update
this document if we identify areas for improvement. We also welcome constructive input from
petitioners on how to improve this document. Stakeholders who wish to provide input can do so by
1 http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/rfs2-lca-pathways.htm
2 See Appendix A: New Fuel Pathway Petition Outline, and Appendix B: Formatting for New Fuel Pathway Petitions.
-------
emailing the EPA Fuels Program Support Line at support@epamts-support.com with "Petition Process
Input" as the subject line.
-------
2. Submitting Information Claimed as Confidential Business
Information
We recognize that in order to provide the information required for new pathway petitions, petitioners
may need to include confidential business information (CBI) in their submissions. Petitions that contain
CBI can now be submitted electronically through CDX/OTAQREG, which is the Agency's secure online
portal for handling proprietary information. (Petitions may also be submitted to EPA by email via
rfspathways@epa.gov.) This section provides recommendations on the appropriate sections of the
petition in which to include CBI and how to mark such information in your submission.
EPA seeks to provide as much information to the public regarding its fuel programs as possible. In
addition, it is more time consuming for EPA to handle petitions that include a CBI claim. For these
reasons, EPA asks that petitioners refrain from making CBI claims if possible, with the understanding
that their petitions may be made publicly available. In the alternative, EPA requests that petitioners
minimize their CBI claims. In particular, EPA believes petitioners should be able to avoid CBI claims in
the sections below that are marked as "(No information claimed CBI)."
For these reasons, we are asking petitioners to adhere to all of the following recommendations
regarding CBI claims:
Whenever possible, provide information that is not claimed as CBI.
We are asking that certain sections of the petition include no information claimed by the
petitioner as CBI. These sections are marked "(No information claimed CBI)" in the relevant
sections.
Any information claimed as CBI should be clearly marked as such:
o At a minimum, we ask petitioners to mark all of the specific pages that include
information claimed as CBI. All such pages should include a CBI disclaimer in the
header.
o As a best practice, we ask petitioners to clearly mark which specific paragraphs,
sentences, words and data are claimed as CBI. All pages where information is claimed
as CBI in this manner should include a note in the header specifying how information
claimed as CBI is demarcated, e.g., bracketed or highlighted yellow.
The objective of these recommendations is to improve the petition review process and help the Agency
with the proper handling of any proprietary or confidential information included in petitions.
-------
3. Section-by-Section Instructions
As part of our efforts to streamline the petition review process, petitioners should prepare their
application packages using the standard organization and format provided in this document. (See
Appendix A: Formatting for New Fuel Pathway Petitions.) This document also goes through each part of
the petition outline and provides detailed information on what to include in each area.
The rest of this section walks through the information requirements for all types of petitions and
provides details on what additional information EPA will need to complete its evaluation.
A. Cover Sheet (No information claimed CBI)
Every petition should include a one-page cover sheet with general information about the petition. The
cover sheet serves as a quick reference, designed to help EPA staff efficiently and systematically process
and review incoming petitions. An example Cover Sheet is provided in Appendix B.
1.
Enter the date that the petition is submitted to the EPA.
2,
Enter the official name of the organization submitting the petition. Enter only the name of one
organization on the cover sheet. In cases where there are multiple organizations associated with a
petition, the cover sheet should only list the primary organization. If there are other co-sponsoring
organizations on the petition, they can be listed in Section C.
If there are multiple organizations associated with a petition, and only one of them is a fuel producer or
importer which intends to register for and generate RINs for fuel produced through the requested
pathway, that organization should be listed as the lead petitioner.
3,
Specify the location (city, state, country) of the headquarters for the lead organization submitting the
petition.
4,
Specify the location (city, state, country) of the biofuel production facility that will produce the finished
fuel associated with the proposed pathway. For petitioners who do not have a specific biofuel
production facility in mind (e.g., a seed company petitioning for a new feedstock), this section of the
cover sheet should be marked "N/A."
5,
Enter the fuel, feedstock and production process technology and RIN D-code for each pathway
requested. A single petition may involve more than one fuel pathway. For example, a petition involving
a new feedstock may seek evaluation of multiple types of fuels that can be produced from the
feedstock, and the associated fuel production technologies. Add rows to the table as necessary to
include all of the fuel pathways requested, but please make sure that all of the cover page information
-------
fits on one 8.5xll-inch sheet of paper. (If there are additional pathways that do not fit on the cover
sheet they can be listed in Section B(l).) If multiple fuel types are associated with the same combination
of feedstock, production process technology and RIN D-code, all of the fuels should be listed in the same
row, etc. Two examples of how a petition for algal oil as a new feedstock should be listed on the cover
sheet be are provided below in Table 1 (note, the example pathways have already been evaluated by
EPA).
Table 1: Example listing of requested fuel pathways
Biodiesel
Renewable diesel, jet
fuel
Feedstock
Algal oil
Algal oil
Production
Process
Technology
Transesterification
Hydrotreating excluding
processes that co-
process renewable
biomass and petroleum
RIN
4
4
Provide the requested contact information (see Appendix B) for the primary point of contact (POC) for
the petition. Every petition should have only one POC. EPA recommends that the POC should be
affiliated with the lead organization listed in Section A(2). If the POC is not affiliated with the lead
organization, at least one appropriate official from the lead organization should be listed under the
"Additional Contact Info" section of the Petition Cover Sheet, and included in any subsequent meetings
or calls related to the petition. EPA will send all communications regarding a petition to the POC, and it
is the POC's responsibility to disseminate information to other parties associated with the petition.
These recommendations are intended to reduce duplicative communications between EPA and parties
associated with a petition.
10
-------
B. Technical Justification
All petitions should include a technical justification that includes a description of the renewable fuel,
feedstock(s), and the production process. The technical justification should provide a summary of the
proposed fuel pathway, process modeling flow charts and a description of any significant differences
between the proposed pathway and similar pathways previously evaluated by the EPA. The Technical
Justification section by itself should provide a reader with a sound understanding of the proposed
pathway and any major issues that EPA should consider in its evaluation. It should generally not include
information claimed CBI, and it should be written in such a way that the information can be used to
explain the proposed pathway to informed members of the general public. Confidential information
and more technical details can be provided in the subsequent sections of the petition.
This section should provide an executive summary of the proposed pathway. It should generally be less
than one page, and always less than two pages. It should provide a summary of the components of the
requested fuel pathway (fuel, feedstock, process technology and requested RIN D-code), and a summary
of other key aspects of the pathway, such as:
The types of process energy used in the fuel production process.
A summary of energy saving technologies that the petitioner wants EPA to consider in the
lifecycle greenhouse gas analysis.
The production, handling and most likely uses of significant co-products.
Expected uses for new types of renewable fuel.
For examples of the types of information to include in this section, petitioners can review the
"Summary" section of EPA's previous determination documents and rulemaking preambles for the RFS
program.
2.
A process flow chart should be provided for each row of the table in Section A(5) of the petition. Each
flow chart provided in this section should fit on one standard sheet of paper (portrait layout is
acceptable). Flow charts should not include information claimed CBI, as they may be used as the basis
for information presented in public determination documents. The flow charts should include all
significant unit processes3 at all stages of fuel and feedstock production and distribution, from feedstock
generation or extraction through the distribution and delivery and use of the finished fuel to the
ultimate consumer. For each unit process, all significant inputs and outputs, including co-products and
their expected uses, should be clearly depicted and labeled. More technical process modeling diagrams,
including any information claimed CBI, can be provided as attachments in Section H.
3 ISO 14040 defines a unit process as the "smallest element considered in the life cycle inventory analysis for which
input and output data are quantified." Petitioners should use discretion in defining the unit processes to be large
enough for consideration in lifecycle analysis. For example, if there are a group of elements in a process that
perform similar functions, use the same process energy and produce the same products and/or co-products, it may
be reasonable to combine them together and consider them one unit process in the process flow chart.
11
-------
3, to
Briefly describe significant differences between the proposed pathway and any similar pathways
previously evaluated by the EPA (less than one page). For example, if the proposed pathway includes
the same feedstock and fuel types as a previously evaluated pathway but involves a different fuel
production technology, the petition should explain the differences between the two fuel production
technologies, such as differences in process energy types, energy saving technologies or co-products.
Provide a brief justification of the commercial viability of the proposed pathway (less than two pages).
Given our limited resources, EPA may not prioritize evaluation of proposed pathways that do not have a
reasonable justification for viability at commercial-scale production. The justification should explain
how the commercial viability of the pathway has been demonstrated at pilot scale, and the business
plan for commercialization, including funding and facility construction options.
5,
Explain the historic and projected future volumes of renewable fuel production through the proposed
pathway (1-4 pages). Liquid fuel volumes should be presented in terms of millions of gallons, and the
average energy content of the fuel (lower heating value Btu per gallon) should also be specified. Non-
liquid fuels should be presented in terms of the energy content of produced fuel (lower heating value
Btu). Historical volumes should be reported starting five years before the petition is submitted or the
first year significant volumes were produced, whichever is more recent. Annual projected volumes
extending out for ten years are recommended based on available information such as corporate
business plans, government or industry reports and facility construction options (all information sources
should be clearly cited). The petition should include a best estimate of projected volumes as well as a
high and low scenario, with explanation of the key assumptions/factors behind each scenario.
12
-------
C. Organization Information
In this section petitioners should provide pertinent background information about their organization.
1.
Provide a brief (one page or less) description of the organization(s) associated with the petition,
including address, website and EPA registration numbers (if applicable). Describe the role of the
organization in the supply chain for the proposed pathway, and any major partners. This information
may not be considered in EPA's lifecycle analysis, but it can provide Agency staff with helpful
background when reviewing a petition.
2.
Provide contact information (name, title, phone, email, address) for the Responsible Corporate Officer
(RCO) for the lead organization associated with the petition. Official EPA correspondence related to the
petition evaluation (e.g., the cover letter for the determination document) will be addressed to the RCO,
and the primary point of contact will be copied via email.
13
-------
D. Fuel Type
This section of the petition provides information about the type of fuel produced through the proposed
pathway. Additional information is needed for new fuel types that EPA has not previously evaluated.
1.
The petition should provide a brief technical description for each fuel type associated with the petition,
i.e., all of the fuel types listed in the table in Section A(5) of the petition. The description can be very
brief (one sentence) for standard fuel types that EPA has previously evaluated, such as ethanol,
biodiesel and butanol. For fuel types that EPA has not previously modeled the technical description
should be longer (1-2 paragraphs) and provide information about the chemistry and characteristics of
the fuel and for what applications (e.g., light duty vehicles, aircraft) it is well suited.
2, for
If all of the fuel types associated with the petition have previously been evaluated by EPA, this section
should be labeled "N/A." For all fuel types that are new, the EPA will need the information described
below to complete its evaluation.4
1.
For each new type of fuel produced through the proposed pathway, provide a laboratory report of the
full chemical composition of a representative sample.5 The laboratory report should specify the mass
(Ibs), volume (gal) and energy content (btu lower heating value per Ib) for each component of the fuel.
If the chemical composition of the fuel varies from batch to batch, attach a laboratory report specifying
the most likely value and the high and low ends of the range for each chemical component of the fuel,
and include a narrative explaining why the composition varies and what factors influence the
composition of the fuel.
II,
To qualify for a RIN D-code, a fuel must be renewable fuel, advanced biofuel, cellulosic biofuel or
biomass-based diesel as defined in the RFS regulations at § 80.1401. If the petition requests
qualification for biomass-based diesel RINs (D-code 4) the fuel must satisfy the RFS regulatory definition
for biomass-based diesel, and if the petition requests cellulosic diesel (D-code 7) RINs, the fuel must
satisfy the regulatory definition for cellulosic diesel. We ask petitioners to provide a brief justification
(one paragraph) for each new fuel type explaining how it meets the RFS regulatory definitions to qualify
for the corresponding requested RIN D-code.
Hi
Provide the equivalence value (EV) application as specified at 40 CFR 80.1415 in the RFS regulations for
each new fuel type associated with the petition. For convenience, the EV application can be included as
an attachment in Section H.
See Section 1 (Introduction) of this document for information on how to determine whether a process has been
previously evaluated by the EPA.
5 See 40 CFR 80.127 for guidelines on selecting a representative sample.
14
-------
iv.
For each new fuel type, explain the registration/certification status of the fuel for use in the applications
discussed in Section D(l), and provide appropriate citations. For example, if the petition includes a new
type of jet fuel, explain the status of the ASTM certification process, and cite the relevant certification
numbers. As another example, explain the status of the fuel with respect to the regulations for the
Registration of Fuels and Fuel Additives (40 CFR Part 79).
3, ' '
Provide up to one page discussing other relevant information about the fuel types associated with the
petition that EPA should consider in its evaluation.
15
-------
E. Production Process
This section of the petition provides information about the production process utilized to produce the
fuel through the proposed pathway. Additional information is needed for EPA to complete a lifecycle
greenhouse gas analysis for new production process types that EPA has not previously evaluated.
Provide a brief explanation of each biofuel production process technology listed in the Table in Section
A(5). For process technologies that EPA has previously evaluated, 1-3 sentences should suffice. For new
process technologies, the explanation should be no more than two pages, as more details can be
provided in the sub-sections that follow.
2,
A mass and energy balance should be included for every new process (e.g., processes not previously
evaluated by the EPA, or a process that was previously evaluated but whose approval is contingent on
the use of energy saving technologies not previously considered by EPA) listed in Section A(5). This data
should detail all of the significant inputs and outputs for the biofuel production process, including
feedstock and energy inputs and fuel, co-product and waste material outputs.
The Agency is providing updated Mass and Energy Balance Data Submission Templates in Microsoft
Excel format, available for download on the same EPA website as this document. The data submission
template files include detailed instructions on data requirements, units and citations. Review will be
expedited for petitions that attach completed Mass and Energy Balance Data Submission Templates to
the petition in Microsoft Excel format. In this case, this section should list the attached files and provide
a description for each file.
3, .'it
Petitioners who own or operate the biofuel production facility that will be used to produce the fuel in
their proposed pathway should provide historical data supporting the mass and energy balance data
provided in Section E(2). Petitioners should include monthly data for the most recent 24 months, or for
however long the plant has been producing fuel through the proposed pathway, whichever is shorter.
This section should include summarized time series data on feedstock and energy use, fuel and co-
product production, and any other data related to supporting the mass and energy balance for the
proposed pathway. Petitioners are also encouraged to provide documentation (e.g., energy bills) for the
time series data as attachments to Section H. In cases where no historical process data is available, the
petition should explain why data is not available and the basis for the mass and energy balance data
provided in Section E(2).
Petitioners who do not operate the biofuel production facility that will be used to produce the fuel in
their proposed pathway may wish to provide historical process data from another source in this section.
Doing so will help to support/verify the mass and energy balance data in Section E(2). Otherwise, the
petitioner can mark this section as "N/A", but it should be noted that a lack of historical data may delay
the review process or make it impossible for EPA to complete a lifecycle assessment.
16
-------
4, for
If all of the production processes associated with the petition have previously been evaluated by EPA,
this section should be labeled "N/A." 6 In cases where EPA has previously evaluated the same type of
technology as the production process used in the proposed pathway, the production process in the
petition should still be considered new if the argument in the petition for approving the proposed
pathway hinges on consideration of energy saving technologies or other process improvements that EPA
did not consider in its previous analysis. For all production processes that have not previously been
evaluated by EPA, the petition must include information pertaining to energy saving technologies or
other process efficiencies. Guidance on how to provide this information is provided below in this
section.
For petitions that involve new production processes, it is standard practice for EPA to share the
information provided in this section of the petition with relevant experts at the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) and/or the USDA. This consultation process takes time, and questions raised by such
experts may require further clarification by the petitioner. Petitioners are encouraged to consult with
relevant experts at DOE7 and/or USDA8 before submitting a petition to EPA, and to list such experts in
their petition. To expedite the review process as much as possible, petitioners are encouraged to include
a signed letter from experts who have reviewed and support the petition as providing a fair
representation of the best scientific information available about the new production process. Doing so
will generally decrease the likelihood of a request for additional information from the EPA.
1, or
Provide up to one page of additional information per energy saving technology or other process
improvement that was not already included in Section E(l).
11, for
If the argument in the petition for approving the proposed pathway hinges on consideration of special
provisions for the production process, all such special provisions should be detailed in this section (less
than two pages). Examples of special provisions could include novel mass or energy balance allocations
and/or co-product credits, or the use of special emissions factors for process energy use. In particular,
if the approval of the proposed pathway depends on the petitioner meeting any special conditions (e.g.,
a maximum amount of grid electricity use per gallon of fuel produced), such conditions should be
spelled out in this section, and the petitioner should explain how they propose to document and keep
reliable records showing compliance with any such conditions.
Ill
If the fuel from the proposed pathway is produced from a chemical conversion process that uses a
feedstock which itself was a renewable fuel produced by another party, the petitioner should review 40
CFR 80.1426(c)(6) in the RFS regulations and provide information on the types of renewable fuel used,
6 See Section 1 (Introduction) of this document for information on how to determine whether a process has been
previously evaluated by the EPA.
7 http://www.energy.gov/eere/bioenergy/bioenergy-technologies-office
8 http://www.usda.gov/oce/
17
-------
the suppliers of such fuel and the fate of the renewable fuel after it goes through the chemical
conversion process (for example explain if it ends up in the finished fuel, in a coproduct or is recycled
back into the process). The fate of the renewable fuel feedstock should be specified on a mass and
energy basis, and documented based on appropriate test procedures and laboratory reports.
Provide up to one page discussing other relevant information about the production process associated
with the proposed pathway that EPA should consider in its evaluation.
F. Feedstock
This section of the petition provides information about the feedstock used to produce the fuel through
the proposed pathway. Additional information is needed for new feedstocks that EPA has not
previously evaluated.
Briefly describe the general characteristics of the feedstock. Specifically note which portions of the
feedstock will be transformed into fuel (e.g., starch, cellulosic sugars, lipids). To the extent applicable,
compare and contrast the feedstock to other similar feedstocks which EPA has previously evaluated.
2. for
If EPA has already published a lifecycle analysis for all of the feedstocks associated with the petition, this
section should be labeled "N/A."9
If the requested pathway involves the use of a feedstock that EPA has not previously evaluated, the
additional information required for such petitions is outlined at 40 CFR 80.1416(b)(2). This additional
information is required because in order to make a determination on the petition, we need to evaluate
the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the requested pathway, including significant
indirect emissions as required by Section 211(o) of the Clean Air Act. This section provides additional
details on the information that EPA needs to complete its evaluation of new feedstocks.
In accordance with the approach taken in the March 2010 RFS rule, EPA's lifecycle analyses of biofuel
pathways are country-neutral - meaning they apply regardless of the point-of-origin of the feedstock
(assuming the feedstock meets the regulatory definition of renewable biomass). Thus, we need to
consider the impacts of approving the requested pathway, which may extend beyond the fuel and
feedstock operations undertaken by the petitioner. In fact, we need to consider the global impacts of
production from any country that may import the feedstock or resulting fuel under the requested
pathway. For these reasons, petitioners requesting pathways for new feedstocks should provide
information for all states or countries (or using another regional aggregation justified by the petitioner)
that would be reasonably likely to use the feedstock under the requested fuel pathway if EPA were to
9 See Section 1 (Introduction) of this document for information on how to determine whether a feedstock has been
previously evaluated by the EPA.
18
-------
approve the petition. This section provides further guidance on how to provide this information in your
petition.
It is standard practice for EPA to share the information provided in this section of the petition with
relevant experts at the DOE and/or the USDA. This consultation process takes time, and questions
raised by such experts may require further clarification by the petitioner. Petitioners are encouraged to
consult with relevant experts at DOE10 and/or USDA11 before submitting a petition to EPA, and to list
such experts in their petition. To expedite the review process as much as possible, petitioners are
encouraged to include a signed letter from experts who have reviewed and support the petition as
providing a fair representation of the best scientific information available about the new feedstock.
Doing so will generally decrease the likelihood of a request for additional information from the EPA.
I,
The petitioner should describe the defining characteristics of the feedstock in sufficient detail that the
feedstock being used can be differentiated from other similar feedstocks. The description should
include proposed regulatory language on how the feedstock could be defined at 40 CFR 80.1401, with
references to definitions used by other authoritative organizations as appropriate.
a.
Describe the taxonomy of the feedstock to the extent possible and applicable. This section is most
applicable if the feedstock is a planted crop or forestry product, but also applies to algal feedstocks. If
the feedstock is a specific genus, species, subspecies, and/or strain within a larger group, the petitioner
should provide that information. This is especially important if particular subtypes of the feedstock have
significantly different qualities as biofuel feedstock than others.
Further, if some types of the feedstock are potentially invasive in the United States, it will be important
to differentiate which types are and are not invasive. The taxonomic nuances of any such dynamic
should be detailed here and the more detailed discussion of any potential invasiveness should be
detailed in Section F(2)(x) below.
b.
Describe the full chemical composition of the feedstock on a percentage of total mass basis. Include the
percentage of fats, starches, cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, other sugars, minerals, ash, and any other
molecules present in order to account for the full mass balance of the feedstock's composition.12 To the
extent possible, provide peer reviewed literature as documentation of the figures in the mass balance.
To the extent that there is variance in these percentages (due to variance in growing conditions,
degradation between harvest and conversion to fuel, or any other significant factor), provide minimum
and maximum expected ranges as well as expected averages. Document ranges using peer reviewed
10 http://www.energy.gov/eere/bioenergy/bioenergy-technologies-office
11 http://www.usda.gov/oce/
12 EPA, "Cellulosic Content of Various Feedstocks-2014 Update," Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0401-0240. July 18,
2014.
19
-------
literature to the extent possible, including non-peer reviewed sources where peer reviewed literature is
not available or outdated.
il, of
The definition of "renewable biomass" in 40 CFR 80.1401 of the RFS regulations includes several
subcategories of biomass that can be considered renewable. The petitioner should specify which
category their feedstock falls under, including a justification for their categorization.
ili, the
Information on the current and projected quantities of the feedstock that will be used to produce the
fuel is needed for petitions that involve a new feedstock. Petitions should also include mass and energy
balance data, including the yield of fuel per amount of feedstock consumed. Therefore, petitioners
should include information on the current and projected volumes of renewable fuel produced from the
feedstock.
To complete its evaluation EPA needs some understanding of the current and expected volumes of fuel
that are produced from this pathway, or which could be produced should the pathway be approved for
inclusion in the RFS. We understand projecting expected volumes can in certain circumstances be a
difficult task that can be associated with significant uncertainty, but in such cases petitioners should
provide a best estimate, a plausible range, and an explanation of how the estimate and range were
derived. Recommendations on what to include, and how to present this information, are provided
below.
To the extent that the petitioner plans to produce renewable fuel themselves, they should provide an
estimate of the quantity of renewable fuel they expect to produce if the pathway is approved. This
should include both a near-term estimate (i.e., over the next few years) and an estimate for the year
2022. Ranges for all of these projections should also be provided, and accompanied with a brief
explanation of the key factors that would likely drive the eventual outcome towards the low or high
ends of the range.
In accordance with the methodology and modeling framework developed for the March 2010 RFS rule,
the evaluation of significant indirect emissions, including emissions from land use change and other
market-mediated impacts, is a necessary and integral part of the EPA's evaluation of new biofuel
pathways. In order to complete this evaluation, the Agency needs an understanding of the market
potential for the requested pathway. Provided below are recommendations on what information to
include in this section of your petition, and how to characterize the market potential in a manner that is
most helpful for the EPA to complete its evaluation.
We ask the petitioner to provide estimates for the total volume of renewable fuel that could be
produced under the proposed pathway in the year 2022 by all potential producers. This includes both
producers in the United States and any potential production in other countries. To be clear, this is not
limited to the volume of fuel that the petitioner might produce themselves. This estimate should
20
-------
include all fuel that could be produced by any and all producers under this pathway in the year 2022,
and volumes from each country should be broken out separately in the projection. It should be an
estimate of the quantity of fuel that could be produced under reasonable economic assumptions. To
support this projection, the petition should include analysis of key parameters that influence the market
potential for the fuel, including feedstock availability, fuel production capacity and market demand for
the finished fuel. Ranges for all of these projections should also be provided, and accompanied with
explanation of the key factors that would likely drive the eventual outcome towards the low or high
ends of the range.
iv.
EPA needs detailed and reliable estimates of the current and projected feedstock and fuel production
yields associated with this pathway. If the feedstock is a planted crop, this should include estimates of
feedstock production per hectare.
If the feedstock is an extract of some other type of renewable biomass (e.g., vegetable oil extracted
from oilseeds, sugar extracted from beet or cane), then the petitioner should also provide detailed
information documenting the process yield of this extraction. This should include all currently known
extraction methods, as well as an analysis of which method(s) are most likely to be utilized in future
years and which methods the petitioner themselves plans to utilize (if applicable).
Similarly, the petitioner should provide detailed yield information for any coproducts of feedstock
harvesting, processing, or use for renewable fuel production. See Section G for other coproduct
information that should be included in the petition.
We ask that all yield estimates be documented with peer reviewed literature or data from USDA to the
extent possible. If peer reviewed literature and/or USDA data are not available, then it should be
explained why and the best available information should be submitted for consideration.
a,
For all of the yield data specified above, the petitioner should provide a range of historical and projected
estimates that document expected minimum, maximum, and average values for their operations.
Projected yields should extend at least ten years into the future, including low, high and best estimate
projections. For each projection scenario (low, high and best estimate) the petition should provide
analysis of key factors that are likely to influence the future yield trajectory for the feedstock.
In cases where there are significant coproducts from the feedstock production stage of the lifecycle, the
historical and projected yield data explained above should include information about the coproduct
yields (e.g., yield of soybean meal coproduct from producing soybean oil).
b.
As explained above, analysis of the market potential for the requested pathway, which may extend
beyond the fuel volume projected by the petitioner, is a key part of the EPA's evaluation of new fuel
pathways. In order to properly estimate these impacts, we need to understand the best available
information on feedstock yields covering the full market potential for the pathway. This data is
21
-------
especially important for feedstocks that are derived from planted crops, but it may be important for
other types of feedstocks as well. Provided below are recommendations on what information to include
in this section of your petition, and how to characterize the global feedstocks yields in a manner that is
most helpful for the EPA to complete its evaluation.
The petitioner should provide historical data on average yields.13 Such data should be broken out by
country or state, or by using another regional aggregation justified by the petitioner. Official USDA data
are preferred, especially for domestic data. If data from USDA are not available then data from other
authoritative scientific organizations (e.g., governmental or international scientific bodies) and/or peer
reviewed journal articles should be provided, and if the data are not provided from these sources the
petitioner should explain why.
In addition to all of the historical yield data specified above, we ask the petitioner to provide a range of
projected estimates that document expected low, high, and average yields values for all countries (and
for each U.S. state) where significant production can be reasonably expected to take place using this
pathway. Again, USDA projections are preferred, and if such data is not available then projections from
other authoritative scientific organizations or peer review journal articles should be provided. This data
should provide a reasonable range of values across all producers (or producer regions) who might utilize
the proposed pathway by the year 2022, including producers outside the United States. We ask the
petitioner to include a low, high and best estimate for each yield projection, by region. The projected
yield data provided in this section should be accompanied by an explanation/analysis of the key factors
that would likely drive the eventual outcome towards the low or high ends of the yield ranges provided.
Again, in cases where there are significant coproducts from the feedstock production stage of the
lifecycle, the historical and projected yield data explained above should include information about the
coproduct yields (e.g., yield of soybean meal coproduct from producing soybean oil).
The petitioner should submit detailed information regarding the land where the feedstock is currently
grown, including maps and accompanying data tables with land area by region (i.e., all countries and
each U.S. state) for all regions of significant production. Such data should be accompanied with written
analysis of the types of land displaced/used for current production of the feedstock (e.g., cropland,
grown in rotation, pasture, forest).
To complete its analysis of significant indirect impacts, EPA also requires information on the projected
locations and types of land that would likely be impacted if the requested pathways are approved.
Therefore, the petitioner should provide a written analysis of the locations and types of land that would
be the most likely to be impacted under the projected volume scenario(s) described in Section F(2)(iii) of
the petition. Such analysis should consider suitable growing conditions for the feedstock, available land
and competing land uses.
13Regarding units, domestic production for field crops yields should be provided in bushels per acre or based on
the standard units used in USDA publications. For foreign field crops yield should be provided in metric tonnes per
hectare or based on the standard units used by USDA or other authoritative organizations.
22
-------
Provided below are recommendations for how this land use data and analysis should be organized and
presented in the petition.
a.
The petitioner should describe the land on which feedstock will be grown for their expected biofuel
production. This should include the quality of the land, including its most likely alternative use
(agricultural, silvicultural, pasture, etc.).
b.
The petitioner should describe the physical conditions required to grow the feedstock. This should
include any limitations related to soil moisture (e.g., requires arid conditions, tropical conditions),
temperature conditions (e.g., the feedstock is not frost tolerant), and any other relevant factors that
EPA might utilize to understand the conditions under which this feedstock can be grown for commercial
production.
c.
The petitioner should provide detailed historical data documenting the location and extent of planted
acres of the feedstock. This should include the name and historical acreage quantity for every country
and U.S. state where the feedstock is currently grown or has been grown in the past. This analysis
should also identify countries and U.S. states where the feedstock might be grown in the future, based
on growing condition suitability.
d.
The petitioner should provide information regarding the feedstock's main competitors for land use. This
should include any agricultural commodities that, at commercial scale, the feedstock is likely to compete
with for acreage. To the extent that the feedstock already has established competitors for land, those
should be highlighted. If the petitioner does not believe the feedstock has competitors for land use, they
should submit a thorough justification including published materials if possible.
a.
The petitioner should provide data on the historical and projected market prices of the feedstock, the
plant it is derived from (if applicable) and any feedstock coproducts that are currently marketed or that
are likely to be marketed in the future. This should include data on farm gate prices, prices on
commodity exchanges, and other relevant domestic and international price data for any of these
commodities. To the extent that any of these commodities are currently marketed, historical price data
should be from a reliable published public source, such as USDA, or the administrative data of the
relevant commodity exchange(s). Projected price data should include USDA projections if such data are
available. Data should be reported in as frequent an interval and as regionally disaggregated as is
available.
If no historical or projected price data is available from a citable source, data for similar feedstocks may
be substituted. If no such feedstocks exist, then a price based on projected bottom-up cost of
23
-------
production data may be presented as a last resort. Such estimates should not be used in lieu of more
generalizable data, but only when other data does not exist.
vii.
a.
The petitioner should describe any established alternative uses for the feedstock. This should include
the scale of historical and projected use (i.e., is demand from this alternative use likely to increase,
decrease, or remain flat in the future?) and the price that the feedstock commands for alternative uses.
This data is especially important if the feedstock is currently used for food or animal feed. But it is also
relevant if the feedstock is used in any significant volumes for other industrial or commercial purposes
for the purpose of evaluating potential indirect impacts of an approved biofuel pathway.
a,
The description of alternative uses should provide historical data and projections regarding the domestic
use and export of the feedstock for these alternative uses.
b.
The petitioner should describe the key substitutes for the feedstock for each alternative use. For
example, if the feedstock is used as a feed product, the petitioner should identify the alternative feed
products that the feedstock is most directly a substitute for.
As a part of this description, the petitioner should provide data and analysis regarding the displacement
ratio of the feedstock to its substitutes. For example, if one pound of the feedstock displaces 0.8
pounds of wheat in dairy cattle diets on average according to the peer reviewed literature, this should
be documented with the appropriate source citations in the petition.
c. /or
If the feedstock is a livestock feed, then the petitioner should submit all of the following information. If
not, this section should be labeled "N/A."
1. Animal Market Share and Feed Ratios by Region
The petitioner should provide information on the quantities of the feedstock that are sold into the
various animal markets, both nationally and by region. The petitioner should also provide data
regarding historical average feed ratios of the feedstock in animal diets for each animal that eats the
feedstock, both nationally and by region.
2. Feed Market Contract Specifications
The petitioner should provide information regarding standard or common contract specifications for the
feedstock, if this data exists. This should include any minimum or maximum nutrient values that the
feedstock must meet to be sold on contract as feed. If this data does not exist, this section may be
labeled "N/A".
24
-------
3. Historical and Projected Feed Prices
The petitioner should provide data on the historical feed prices for the feedstock in the United States
and on any major international commodity exchanges, if this data exists. The petitioner should also
provide available data on the projected future price of the feedstock as an animal feed, especially if such
data is available from USDA or the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). If
this data does not exist, this section may be labeled "N/A".
4. Data on Maximum Inclusion Rates, Substitutability
The petitioner should provide data regarding the maximum inclusion rates of the feedstock in animal
diets, for each animal type (e.g., beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, poultry) that is capable of eating the
feedstock. Petitioner should provide information on whether this feed's nutritional content make it a
direct or close substitute to other feed types.
5. Approved Status Documentation
The petitioner should indicate whether the feedstock is approved by the FDA for use in animal diets, or
not. If it has been approved, the petitioner should provide documentation of that approval. If it has not
been approved, petitioner should provide information on the application status.
viii.
The petition should list chemical and energy inputs needed to produce the feedstock and prepare it for
processing. This section provides recommendations on how to provide this information. The petitioner
should provide all of the following data regarding the farm inputs used to grow the feedstock. More
specifically, the petitioner should submit all data requested in the "Crop Inputs" section of the "New
Feedstock" tab of EPA's Data Submission Template for New Pathway Petitions, available online.14
If the petitioner is growing the feedstock themselves, they should provide the crop input data specified
in the "Crop Inputs" section of the "New Feedstock" tab of EPA's Data Submission Template for New
Pathway Petitions for their own farming operations.
b. A Imp life by
Regardless of whether the petitioner is themselves a feedstock producer, they should provide average
farm data for each input specified in the above template by region for every U.S. state and country
where the feedstock is grown.
ix, for
If there are any pre-processing steps (e.g., soybean crushing) in the lifecycleforthe requested pathway
between the harvest of the feedstock and its delivery to the production process facility, the petitioner
should include mass and energy balance data for all of these steps in this section.
14 Please see http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/renewablefuels/new-pathways/how-to-submit.htm
25
-------
a.
The petitioner should provide mass and energy balance data for each pre-processing step, including all
inputs and outputs for each step, for its operations. Such data should be provided in the same format
and follow all of the other recommendations as for the mass and energy balance data required in
Section E(2) of the petition.
b,
The petitioner should provide industry average mass and energy balance data for each pre-processing
step. Such data should be provided in the same format and follow all of the other recommendations as
for the mass and energy balance data required in Section E(2) of the petition. Differences between the
data provided for the petitioners operations and the industry average data provided in this section
should be explained with appropriate supporting documentation as appropriate.
x,
The producer should provide any information regarding the potential invasiveness of the feedstock in
the United States.
a.
If the feedstock is included on any federal, state, or local invasive species or noxious weed lists, the
petitioner should note this in their petition.
b, on
Even if the feedstock is not currently included on any government list, if there is official U.S. government
or peer-reviewed literature which suggests that the feedstock may be invasive in certain areas, the
petitioner should include this literature in their petition. Furthermore, if there are any concerns that the
feedstock could be an invasive species and/or noxious weed that could require mitigation or
remediation of any kind we strongly recommend that the petitioner discuss these issues with relevant
experts, such as experts at the USDA or university researchers. If the experts consulted agree that the
feedstock does not pose any risk of invasiveness that should be considered in EPA's lifecycle GHG
analysis, the petitioner is advised to include a letter supporting this conclusion signed by relevant
experts.
If the petitioner acknowledges that the feedstock poses a risk of invasiveness, this section should explain
the risks and recommend mitigation strategies and other procedures that growers/users of the
feedstock could take to prevent and address any potential problems. As an example of the type of
requirements that could be put into place see the registration requirements for using Arundo donax as a
renewable fuel feedstock at 40 CFR 80.1426(f)(14).
xi,
The petitioner should note any other potentially significant environmental impacts that the feedstock
may have if produced at commercial scale.
26
-------
3,
The petitioner may include any other information that they feel is relevant to EPA's lifecycle greenhouse
gas analysis of the feedstock.
G. Coproducts
Petitions should include information on all coproducts associated with the proposed pathway, including
their expected use and market value. If in the rare case that no coproducts are produced this section
can be labeled "N/A."
1, *! I H
Provide a thorough description of each and every coproduct (up to two pages per coproduct) from the
proposed pathway. The description for each coproduct should include an analysis of its expected uses
and market value, and should include information on the other products that would likely be displaced
in the market (e.g., feed corn and soybean meal are displaced by distillers grains and solubles used as
livestock feed). The analysis should include available data/analysis on how the coproduct is currently
used and on the other products used for the same purposes.
If all of the following apply for a coproduct from the requested pathway, then the coproduct has
previously been evaluated by EPA and the technical description of the coproduct can be brief (1-2
paragraphs) with an explanation of why EPA's previous evaluation applies in terms of the coproduct's
expected uses and the other products it would displace in the market:
The requested pathway uses a previously evaluated feedstock and fuel type.
The requested pathway uses a production process that is similar to a previously evaluated
production process (e.g., same type of process technology with new energy saving
technologies).
The new aspects of the production process in the requested pathway do not impact the market
value or likely uses of any of the coproducts compared to the coproducts from the previously
evaluated production process.
2,
Information on the market value of all coproducts is required. Provide data on historical and projected
market prices for all of the coproducts. If available, historical price data should be from a reliable
published public source, such as USDA or the administrative data of the relevant commodity
exchange(s). If data from reliable published sources are unavailable, explain why and provide the best
available data. In general, twenty years of historical annual data and ten years of projected annual data
are advisable, but the petitioner may use discretion in terms of providing data over the most relevant
periods for each coproduct.
Projected price data should include USDA projections if such data are available. Data from other
reputable sources (e.g., other governmental organizations, industry trade associations) can be included
27
-------
for comparison. If projected price data are unavailable explain why and provide the best available
information.
The petitioner should provide a brief analysis (less than one page) of the key factors impacting historical
and projected prices. For projections, the petitioner should explain important market trends that could
significantly impact the price of each coproduct in the near and long term.
If no historical or projected price data is available from a citable source, data for similar commodities
may be substituted. If no such commodities exist then a price based on projected bottom-up cost of
production data may be presented as a last resort. Such estimates should not be used in lieu of more
generalizable data, but only when other data does not exist.
If the coproduct was previously evaluated by the EPA (see the criteria listed above), the market value
data provided for the co-product can be brief, with a reference to current market data and a short (1-2
paragraph) explanation of why EPA's previous evaluation applies in terms of the coproduct's market
value.
3, as
For any coproducts that will be used as livestock feed, the petitioner should also submit all of the
following information.
1, by
The petitioner should provide information on the quantities of the coproduct that are sold into the
various animal markets, both nationally and by region. The petitioner should also provide data
regarding historical average feed ratios of the coproduct in animal diets for each animal that consumes
the feedstock, both nationally and by region.
11,
The petitioner should provide information regarding standard or common contract specifications for the
coproduct. This should include any minimum or maximum nutrient values that the coproduct must
meet to be sold on contract as feed.
ill,
The petitioner should provide data on the historical feed prices for the coproduct in the United States
and on any major international commodity exchanges. The petitioner should also provide available data
on the projected future price of the coproduct as an animal feed, especially if such data is available from
USDAorFAO.
iv. on
The petitioner should provide data regarding the maximum inclusion rates of the coproduct in animal
diets, for each animal type (e.g., beef cattle, dairy cattle, swine, poultry) that is capable of eating the
coproduct. The petition should indicate whether the feed's nutritional content make it a direct or close
substitute to other feed types.
28
-------
₯.
The petitioner should indicate whether the coproduct is approved by the FDA for use in animal diets, or
not. If yes, the petitioner should provide documentation of that approval. If not, the petitioner should
provide the current status of the approval request.
H. List of Attachments
Provide a list of the attachments submitted with the petition, including a short name and brief
description (1-2 sentences) for each attachment.
29
-------
Appendix A: Formatting for New Fuel Pathway Petitions
Electronic file type: PDF
Font and Section Headings:
For the body of the document: Calibri, size 11, black color
First level section headings (e.g., F. Feedstock): Cambria, size 14, bold, no indent, capitalize
the first letter of each word, color = Blue, Accent 1, insert page break
Second level section headings (e.g., 2, for Calibri, size
13, bold, capitalize the first letter of each word
Third level section headings (e.g., vii. Uses): Calibri, size 11, normal font, indent by
one tab, capitalize the first letter of each word
Fourth level section headings (e.g., d. Calibri, size 11, italics,
indent by one tab, capitalize the first letter of each word
Fifth level section headings (e.g., 1. Animal market share and feed ratios by region): Calibri,
size 11, normal font, indent by one tab, capitalize only the first letter of the first word
Paper size: Standard 8.5 by 11-inch copier paper
Table of Contents: Include a table of contents
30
-------
Appendix B: Petition Cover Sheet Template
[This page intentionally left blank]
31
-------
[MM/DD/YYYY]
[Organization Name]
[City, State, Country]
[City, State, Country]
Fuel Pathway Requested
Fuel
Feedstock
Production
Process
Technology
RIN
Requested
Primary Point of Contact
Name:
Title:
Address:
(If any):
32
------- |