Sign In

The Association for Convenience & Fuel Retailing

Skip Navigation LinksNACS Online / News & Media Center / News Archive

NACS Responds to U.S. House Committee on Blend Wall, RFS

The association provided answers to questions raised from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce regarding issues related to the Renewable Fuels Standard.
April 10, 2013

ALEXANDRIA, Va. – Yesterday, NACS sent a response toquestions (PDF)​ from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce white paper on the blend wall and Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). The letter was sent to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA).

The response stated: “In general, NACS believes that the fundamental assumptions that guided Congress’ decision to expand the RFS in 2007 have changed. At that time, most expected the nation’s fuel demand and reliance on imported energy supplies to continue on an unrelenting upward trajectory. Today, these assumptions are no longer accurate — yet the program enacted in 2007 remains unchanged.

“The domestic fuels market is dynamic and conditions are ever changing. As such, it is important any long-term fuels policy be constructed with inherent flexibility to accommodate such changing market conditions. If not, the market is bound to encounter unintended consequences, most of which will be very difficult and potentially expensive to overcome. Ultimately, all expenses incurred by the market will be borne by the consumer. We are beginning to encounter such challenges with the implementation of the RFS and it is appropriate that Congress begin asking questions about the implementation strategy and the effect this program will have on the market.”

The response outlined in detail answers to questions about the effect of the blend wall on gasoline retail prices and the impact of E15. “NACS appreciates your interest in reviewing the complex issues surrounding this program and encourages you to proceed cautiously, to avoid politically charged reactionary policies and to consider options that will promote regulatory certainty and enable the market to deliver to the consumer the fuels they demand in the most cost efficient manner possible.”​