Second Notice of Public Availability of Modified Text and Availability of Additional Documents and/or Information Proposed Low Carbon Fuel Standard Amendments Public Hearing --- November 8, 2024 ---

October 07, 2024

Print This Article Share it With Friends

(California Air Resources Board) Public Hearing Date: November 8, 2024 Public Availability Date: October 1, 2024 Deadline for Public Comment: October 16, 2024 The California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff has determined that additional modifications are appropriate for the proposed Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) amendments and has developed the proposed modifications (Second 15-Day Changes) as stated below in the “Summary of Proposed Modifications” section of this notice.

The Attachments showing the specific proposed modifications to the text of the proposed regulation being made with these Second 15-Day Changes are shown in multiple ways in order to meet the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) while also posting alternate/complementary versions that provide increased accessibility to view the modifications in multiple ways. The Attachments are as follows: Attachment A - Amendments to Sections 95481, 95482, 95483, 95483.1, 95484, 95486.1, 95486.3, 85486.4, 95488.3, 95488.8, 95488.9, 95500, and 95501, Title 17, California Code of Regulations · Attachment A-1: Proposed Second 15-Day Modifications to Proposed Regulation Order (compared to version released for First 15-day comments) · Attachment A-1.1: ~Alternative format to Attachment A-1 (Proposed Sections for Amendments)~ · Attachment A-1.2: Proposed Second 15-Day Modifications to Proposed Regulation Order (First and Second 15-Day Modifications and 45-Day Modifications combined and compared to existing regulatory text) in Alternative format · Attachment A-2: Proposed Second 15-Day Modifications to Proposed Regulation Order (Proposed Sections for Adoption) (compared to version released for First 15-day comments) · Attachment A-2.1: ~Alternative format to Attachment A-2 (Proposed Sections for Adoption)~ 1· Attachment A-2.2: Proposed First and Second 15-Day Modifications to Proposed Regulation Order (Proposed Sections for Adoption) (compared to version released for 45-day comments) The Attachments showing the specific proposed modifications to the text of the proposed regulation orders available for comment with this Notice are provided in the two formats denoted with the suffixes “”-1,” “-1.1,” “-2,” and “-2.1.” In the version denoted Attachment A-1 and A-2, the 45-Day Changes (proposed regulatory language as posted on December 19, 2023) and First 15-Day Changes (proposed regulatory language as posted on August 12, 2024) are shown in “normal type.” The deletions and additions to the First 15-Day Changes that comprise the Second 15-day Changes that are being made public and available for comment with this Notice are shown in strikeout to indicate deletions and underline to indication additions. In the version denoted Attachment A-1.1 and A-2.1, the 15-Day Changes are provided in a tracked-changes format to meet the requirement for accessible electronic documents. The 45-Day Changes and First 15-Day Changes are incorporated into this version as plain, clean text because they are not being made available for public comment by this Notice. The Proposed Second 15-day Changes are shown in tracked changes and are made public with this Notice and available for comment. To review this document in a clean format, without underline or strikeout to show changes, that shows all the proposed regulations being considered for adoption, please select “Simple Markup” or “No Markup,” or accept all changes in Microsoft Word’s Review menu. You can also change the view to the initially proposed First 15-Day Changes (originally proposed regulatory text prior to these proposed modifications) by selecting “Original” or rejecting all tracked changes. Additionally, “Advanced Track Changes Options” will allow for further options regarding color and other markings. In the version denoted Attachment A-1.2, the existing, original regulatory language currently adopted into the California Code of Regulations (pre-45-Day Changes) is shown as plain, clean text, while the 45-Day Changes and the proposed First and Second 15-Day Changes are combined and shown in tracked changes. To review the net proposal in this document in a clean format (no underline or strikeout to show changes), please select “Simple Markup” or “No Markup” in Microsoft Word’s Review menu or accept all changes. You can also change the view to the original (originally proposed regulatory text prior to any proposed modifications, or 45-Day Changes) by selecting “Original” or rejecting all tracked changes. By progressing through the changes and comparing them with the Second 15-Day Changes, the public can see the net and stepwise changes being proposed in relation to existing law. Please refer to the versions denoted A-1 and A-2 to review the 15-Day Changes available for comment and their companion/alternate versions A-1.1 and A-2.1 to view accessible versions showing the Second 15-Day Changes. In the version denoted Attachment A-2.2, the 45-Day Changes is shown as plain, clean text, while the proposed First and Second 15-Day Changes are combined and shown in tracked changes. To review the net proposal in this document in a clean format (no underline or strikeout to show changes), please select “Simple Markup” or “No Markup” in Microsoft Word’s Review menu or accept all changes. You can also change the view to the original (originally proposed regulatory text prior to any proposed modifications, or First 15-Day Changes) by selecting “Original” or rejecting all tracked changes. By progressing through the changes and comparing them with the Second 15-Day Changes, the public can see the net and stepwise changes being proposed in relation to existing law. Please refer to the versions denoted A-1 2and A-2 to review the 15-Day Changes available for comment and their companion/alternate versions A-1.1 and A-2.1 to view accessible versions showing the Second 15-Day Changes. In the Final Statement of Reasons, staff will respond to all comments received on the record during the comment periods. The APA requires that CARB respond to comments received regarding all noticed changes. Therefore, staff will only address comments received during this 15-day comment period that are responsive to this notice, documents added to the record, or the changes detailed in Attachments A-1 and A-2. The modifications being proposed as of this Second 15-Day Notice, as well as the First 15-Day documents, original Notice, Initial Statement of Reasons, and all subsequent regulatory documents are available on CARB's Rulemaking webpage: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/rulemaking/2024/lcfs2024 READ MORE

Related articles

California regulators are pressed to come clean on gasoline prices (Los Angeles Times)
While you’re waiting for election results, California could take a vote to raise your gas prices -- Gas prices could increase following a key vote from the state air resources board (San Francisco Chronicle)
Low Carbon Fuels in the Spotlight as California’s Air Board and Energy Commission Set to Review Policies and Update Guidance (Engine Technology Forum/Globe Newswire)

Excerpt from Los Angeles Times:

California Air Resources Board is set to vote Friday on a measure many say is likely to raise gas prices. Officials say they won’t make a prediction, after initially giving an estimate of 47 cents a gallon.
Some lawmakers and others want the vote delayed until there is a cost estimate of the measure, which is aimed at hastening the transition away from fossil fuels.

California regulators are poised to vote Friday on a measure intended to accelerate the state’s transition away from fossil fuels by imposing tougher carbon-reduction requirements for gasoline and diesel.

California Air Resources Board officials months ago projected that the new standards would mean potentially large price hikes for gasoline. But now they claim they’re unable to make any estimate about the price impact. That has raised predictable ire from the oil industry and Republicans, but some Democrats and environmentalists are also demanding that regulators give straight answers.

State Sen. Melissa Hurtado (D-Sanger) has called for the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office to review the policy and come up with its own estimate.

“Recent developments and estimates have raised significant concerns about the broader implications of these policies,“ Hurtado said in an Oct. 29 letter to the analyst’s office. She wants “an independent review to ensure transparency and and accountability in the regulatory process.” READ MORE

Excerpt from Engine Technology Forum/Globe Newswire: Fuel Prices and Continued Progress on Greenhouse Gas Emissions at Stake -- In proceedings before California energy and environmental agencies, the Engine Technology Forum (ETF) called on policymakers to recognize the continued importance of advanced renewable biodiesel fuels and maximize their roles and inclusion as essential decarbonization options.

On November 8, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) will consider major revisions to its Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). Separately, the California Energy Commission (CEC) is revising its Renewable Portfolio Standard Guidebook which establishes important guidance and credits toward achieving renewable energy goals in the electric power sector. Both proceedings have significant implications for the future use of advanced renewable biofuels like biodiesel and renewable diesel fuels.

“Both CARB and the CEC have important obligations in these proceedings this fall to promulgate effective and inclusive policies and guidance that will signal to the marketplace and to consumers that vehicle owners and businesses alike will have a full array of proven, available and affordable tools to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without harming the economy,” says Allen Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Engine Technology Forum.

As we noted in our comments to CARB, California’s goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are ambitious and challenging for all sectors. It envisions near complete shifts from traditional internal combustion engines (ICE) and liquid and gaseous fossil fuels to zero emissions technology.

Through gradually reducing carbon intensity of the fuel pool, low carbon fuels such as biodiesel and renewable diesel have been a reliable success story in delivering near term progress toward decarbonization. However, the proposed feedstock caps and “sustainability guardrails” on biofuel production proposed by CARB impart a greater burden than benefit to Californians. Renewable fuel producers, petroleum suppliers and fleets that must rely on ICEs using low carbon fuels to comply with the spirit of California’s ZEV/near-ZEV transition will be most impacted.

The use of low carbon renewable fuels across this vast population of vehicles has contributed substantially to California’s progress and current success in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. According to CARB’s own data (see Figure 1, LCFS Dashboard), the program in its present form is exceeding expectations in reducing carbon intensity from transportation fuels.

However, these proposed amendments seem certain to deter further progress from renewable fuel producers and their suppliers while undermining the viability of transportation fuel providers. and driving up the cost of producing and supplying California’s unique transportation fuels.

The proposed amendments disrupt the predictable and orderly transition of the fuels industry in a way that unnecessarily increases costs to the economy and discourages investment in renewable low carbon fuels. In its present form, it discourages improvements that could help California accelerate achievement of the continued progress toward the state’s climate goals, and through its leadership, the contribution of other states in helping to achieve national climate goals.

The proposed amendments’ increased stringency and diminished compliance tools will likely compromise technology neutrality by the elimination of pure market signals that incentivize the production of lower-carbon intensity fuels.

Internal combustion engines (ICEs) running on gasoline, diesel or natural gas are the dominant power behind California’s economy today. They are expected to continue to serve trucking and other sectors as the majority fuel type for decades to come, even as the state implements its policies that seek to transition only to zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). As is evidenced by consumer response, delaying, or downgrading electric vehicle investments and deferring introduction of new models announced by several vehicle manufacturers, the pace of electrification of the transportation sector (light, medium and heavy-duty vehicles) is proving to be uneven and uncertain. This elevates the importance and significance of having an effective and affordable low carbon fuels policy available for all sectors.

As the California Energy Commission updates its Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard Guidebook, as we noted in our comments, a significant deficiency in the current Guidebook scope is that it is lacking appropriate recognition of Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (“HVO”), also known as Renewable Diesel (RD) as a distinct qualifying renewable fuel in Chapter 2.

While it can be produced using the same feedstocks as biodiesel, the chemical process to produce Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO) is different and results in a far different fuel than biodiesel, which warrants its own specific and separate energy resource listing in the Guidebook. As a “drop in” alternative to diesel fuel, HVO provides significant carbon reductions when compared to diesel fuel or lesser blends of biodiesel, and as such has a potentially significant role to play in the decarbonization of California’s Electrical grid.

California’s ambitious climate goals demand a full range of solutions of fuels and technologies that are able to reduce carbon emissions. HVO/RD is one of those solutions and should be included in the Guidebook. Considering the sheer size of the diesel power generation fleet in California, including HVO/RD ensures that those utilizing diesel technologies will strive to maximize the use of renewable fuels, which has the potential for a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the energy sector.

About the Engine Technology Forum

Founded on the principles of fact-based education, science, outreach and collaboration, the Engine Technology Forum is dedicated to promoting a greater understanding of the benefits of advanced internal combustion engines and the fuels that they use and how these contribute to a sustainable future. Please join us. We also invite you to connect with us on LinkedIn, X, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. Sign up for our digital newsletter, too. READ MORE