My name is Jim Nussle and I am the President and Chief Operating 

Officer for Growth Energy and I welcome this opportunity to present 

comments today on EPA’s Proposed Renewable Fuel Standards for 

2012. I will be making a brief statement and we will be submitting our 

full, written comments to the docket. 

Growth Energy is the leading trade association for America’s ethanol 

producers and supporters. Growth Energy promotes expanding the use 

of ethanol in gasoline, decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, and 

creating American jobs here at home. 

The American renewable fuel industry remains critical to the success of 

the RFS program, and to achieving its dual objectives of reducing 

petroleum fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions. In 2010, renewable 

fuels successfully displaced nearly 10 percent of US transportation fuel, 

and reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 23 million metric tons. Due 

to our considerable experience and success in the fuel market, Growth 

Energy’s producers are poised to be among the first to produce cellulosic 

ethanol and advanced biofuels in order to meet the future requirements 

of the RFS program. 

As part of its proposed standards for 2012, EPA has requested comments 

on its proposal to reduce the statutory cellulosic biofuel volume, and 

whether the advanced biofuel and the renewable fuel volumes should be 

reduced as well. Given the continued state of the economy and the lack 

of commercial volume, EPA’s proposal to reduce the cellulosic biofuel 

volume to an intermediate value between 3.55 and 15.7 million gallons 
is reasonable. Growth Energy also strongly supports EPA’s proposal not 

to adjust the 2012 statutory volumes for advanced biofuel and total 

renewable fuel. The advanced biofuel volume would remain at 2 billion 

gallons and the total renewable fuel volume would remain at 15.2 billion 

gallons. 

We believe that total renewable fuel volume should remain at the 

statutory required level to continue to support the market for renewable 

fuels and to provide certainty for investors and producers. 

Growth Energy continues to request that EPA take all appropriate 

“demand side” actions to support the goals of the RFS program to allow 

the market to use 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022. We very 

much appreciate EPA’s approval of Growth Energy’s Green Jobs 

Waiver earlier this year for E15 and believe it will go a long way 

towards growing the market and attracting investment in the further 

development of cellulosic ethanol and other advanced biofuels. 

To further the goal of increasing demand, Growth Energy continues to 

advocate its “Fueling Freedom” plan that would promote the 

development of key infrastructure for intermediate ethanol blends 

through the rapid deployment of flex-fuel pumps and flex-fuel vehicles 

throughout the United States. Only by increasing the availability of 

higher ethanol blends to consumers can the ambitious goals of the RFS 

be achieved in future years. 
We do, however, have a couple areas of remaining concern. One area of 

continued concern is the exclusion of corn-based ethanol from 

competition under the advanced biofuel pathway. When the Energy 

Independence and Security Act (EISA) was enacted, it included an 

arbitrary “corn discrimination clause” that explicitly prohibits corn 

ethanol from even attempting to qualify as an advanced biofuel – no 

matter what technological breakthroughs may be achieved into the 

future. We believe that excluding corn ethanol risks many unintended 

consequences, such as increased cost, reduced supply pressures and 

market uncertainty. We would urge EPA to support any legislative 

changes that would allow conventional corn ethanol to qualify as an 

advanced biofuel. 

Another significant concern that faces not only Growth Energy 

members, but a high number of regulated parties as well is the issue of 

transfer date required to be used on RINS. This issue was brought to the 

attention of the EPA a year ago. I have copies of letters signed 

collectively by Growth Energy, the Renewable Fuels Association, the 

National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, and the American 

Petroleum Institute, all pleading for relief from the EPA on its reversal 

of interpretation on the RINS transfer date from RFS1 to RFS2. 

I will not belabor the details of the situation, but want to state that our 

primary goal is to define an acceptable compliance scenario whereby a 

seller can construct a Product Transfer Document based on information 

in their possession rather than having to exchange actual delivery dates, 

on a transaction by transaction basis, with the buyer. While we 

understand there are some concerns about enforcement of the RFS 

program if changes are made to the existing regulations, the 2012 RFS 

standards rulemaking provides a mechanism to address a technical 
amendment on this issue. We encourage EPA to reconsider the stance 

you have taken on the RINS transfer date issue and continue to stand 

ready to work with you to find a reasonable compromise to satisfy all 

parties. 

 I appreciate your consideration of my statement and of Growth 

Energy’s written comments and we look forward to working with you to 

continue to meet the goals of the Renewable Fuels Standard.