The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) and Growth Energy have filed a complaint in the Federal District Court in Fresno, California, which challenges the constitutionality of the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard.

The two organisations believes that the standard violates both the Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution as it calls for at least a 10 per cent reduction from 2006 levels in carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by 2020.  The existing regulation also levies the calculation of Indirect Land Use Change effects against biofuels to the detriment of corn ethanol.

However, the Supremacy Clause establishes that state judges be bound by “the supreme Law of the Land” and the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate commerce “with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with Indian Tribes”.

In their statement, the groups outline that the Low Carbon Fuel Standard contradicts the 2007 Energy Independence Security Act which singled out the importance of domestic ethanol for the nation’s environment, security and economy. It states that by closing California’s borders to corn ethanol from other states, the low carbon fuel standard changes how corn is farmed and ethanol is produced all over the country. It goes on to say that the standard imposes “excessive” burdens on the domestic ethanol industry “while providing no benefit to Californians”.

Bob Dinneen, RFA President and CEO, also sent a letter to Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and Susan Lapsley, director of California’s Office of Administrative Law (OAL), claiming that the Air Resources Board has failed to respond to significant comments submitted by the RFA and other stakeholders. He believes that, based on current data and information, the ILUC penalty for corn ethanol should have been in the range of 4-11gCO2e/MJ, rather than the existing estimate of 30g/CO2e/MJ.