1
E­
Mail
Exchange
with
Sally
Allen,
Ad­
Hoc
Small
Refiner
Coalition
Regarding
the
Exclusion
Area
Concept,
12/
12/
2003
Document
Creation
Date:
3/
19/
2003
Jeff
Herzog,
EPA
Sally
Allen
<
SALLEN@
gwec.
com>

12/
12/
2003
11:
12
AM
To:
Jeff
Herzog/
AA/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
cc:

Subject:
Re:
Potential
approach
re
fuel
marker
requirements
under
the
off­
highway
diesel
final
rule
I'll
get
you
the
names
of
the
companies
on
my
distribution
list
and
those
who
respond
­­
tho
it
may
be
mid
next
week.
I
think
my
list
covers
almost
everyone.
Are
there
specific
companies
you
want
to
be
sure
to
touch
base
with?
I'm
thinking
particularly,
for
example,
of
American
Refining
in
Bradford
PA
which
is
on
my
list.
Most
of
the
small
refiners
are
west
of
the
Mississippi
and
don't
produce
home
heating
oil,
but
I
may
be
able
to
get
more
specific
info
on
who
does.
Haven't
yet
had
any
response
to
my
inquiry
sent
out
yesterday.

Sally
V.
Allen
Vice
President,
Administration
&
Governmental
Affairs
Gary­
Williams
Energy
Corporation
370
17th
Street,
Suite
5300
Denver,
CO
80202­
5653
303­
628­
3800
Fax:
303­
628­
3834
sallen@
gwec.
com
www.
gwec.
com
>>>
<
Herzog.
Jeff@
epamail.
epa.
gov>
12/
11/
03
11:
43AM
>>>

Sally,

Yes.
Please
feel
free
to
circulate
what
I
sent
to
you.
We
are
very
interested
in
the
perspective
of
small
refiners
on
the
approach.
Do
you
think
that
you
can
represent
all
small
off­
highway
refiners,
or
are
there
some
that
I
should
contact
directly?

Thanks
Jeffrey
A.
Herzog,
Mechanical
Engineer
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
National
Vehicle
and
Fuel
Emissions
Laboratory
Assessment
and
Standards
Division
2000
Traverwood
Drive
2
Ann
Arbor,
Michigan,
48105
Phone:
(
734)
214­
4227
Fax:
(
734)
214­
4816
E­
Mail:
herzog.
jeff@
epa.
gov
Sally
Allen
<
SALLEN@
gwec.
com>
To:
Jeff
Herzog/
AA/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
cc:

Received
Date:
Subject:
Re:
Potential
approach
re
fuel
marker
12/
11/
2003
requirements
under
the
offhighwaydiesel
final
rule
12:
12:
06
PM
Transmission
Date:
12/
11/
2003
12:
12:
06
PM
Jeff
­­
thanks
for
this
info.
Am
I
correct
in
assuming
it
is
ok
with
you
if
I
circulate
it
to
our
small
refiner
for
their
comments?

Sally
V.
Allen
Vice
President,
Administration
&
Governmental
Affairs
Gary­
Williams
Energy
Corporation
370
17th
Street,
Suite
5300
Denver,
CO
80202­
5653
303­
628­
3800
Fax:
303­
628­
3834
sallen@
gwec.
com
www.
gwec.
com
>>>
<
Herzog.
Jeff@
epamail.
epa.
gov>
12/
11/
03
08:
44AM
>>>

Sally,
I
thought
the
following
background
information
re
the
approach
to
the
fuel
marker
issue
that
we
are
considering
might
be
useful
to
you.
We
received
comments
from
terminal
operators
and
representatives
of
the
heating
oil
industry
that
the
proposed
fuel
marker
requirement
for
heating
oil
(
necessary
to
support
the
small
refiner
and
credits
provisions)
would
result
in
a
large
burden
to
terminals
that
market
heating
oil
(
cost
of
new
injection
equipment
and
the
marker
itself).
They
related
that
they
did
not
expect
any
small
refiner
or
credit
fuel
to
be
marketed
in
the
North
East
where
most
heating
oil
is
used.
I
floated
the
following
idea
out
for
the
consideration
of
API/
NPRA/
IFTOA/
NORA
and
others.
It
is
an
attempt
to
balance
the
concerns
of
terminal
operators
in
the
North
East
with
our
desire
to
preserve
the
flexibilities
offered
by
the
small
refiner
and
credits
provisions.
3
Following
is
an
excerpt
from
my
earlier
message
on
the
subject:
I
have
been
exploring
the
idea
raised
by
industry
of
excluding
parts
of
PADD
1
from
the
proposed
heating
oil
marker
requirements
(
for
2007­
2010)
a
bit
further.

Under
such
an
approach:
­
Terminals
in
the
exclusion
area
would
not
be
required
to
add
the
marker
to
heating
oil.
­
Terminals
outside
of
the
area
would
be
required
to
add
the
marker
to
heating
oil.
­
No
high
sulfur
(>
500
ppm)
small
refiner
or
credit
NRLM
could
be
used
in
the
exclusion
area.
All
high
sulfur
fuel
(>
500
ppm)
would
be
for
use
as
heating
oil
only.

I
think
that
we
might
also
have
to
put
in
place
some
restrictions
on
bulk
shipments
(
by
pipeline
and
barge)
of
unmarked
heating
oil
out
of
the
exclusion
area.
Its
currently
unclear
to
me
whether
we
would
also
need
to
put
in
place
restrictions
on
the
shipment
by
truck
of
unmarked
heating
oil
out
of
the
exclusion
area.

If
we
were
to
take
such
an
approach,
my
initial
evaluation
suggests
that
the
following
area
might
be
the
best
fit
wrt
to
reducing
the
potential
costs
of
the
proposed
heating
oil
marker
requirement
while
maintaining
the
potential
benefits
of
the
proposed
small
refiner
and
credit
provisions:
>>>>
No
marker
would
required
in
heating
oil
(
and
no
high
sulfur
small
refiner
and
credit
NRLM
fuel
would
be
allowed)
in
PADDs
1A
and
1B
except
the
area
in
PADDs
1A
and
1B
which
also
belongs
to
"
Appalachian
No.
1"
(
i.
e.
Western
NY,
and
PA,
and
West
Virginia).

Following
is
a
link
to
the
EIA
webpage
where
the
various
areas
discussed
above
are
defined:

http://
www.
eia.
doe.
gov/
pub/
oil_
gas/
petroleum/
data_
publications/
petroleum_
suppl
y_
annual/
psa_
volume1/
current/
pdf/
volume1_
appendix_
a.
pdf
Can
you
represent
small
refiner
concerns
wrt
our
potential
adoption
of
this
option?

Thanks
Jeffrey
A.
Herzog,
Mechanical
Engineer
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
National
Vehicle
and
Fuel
Emissions
Laboratory
Assessment
and
Standards
Division
2000
Traverwood
Drive
Ann
Arbor,
Michigan,
48105
Phone:
(
734)
214­
4227
Fax:
(
734)
214­
4816
E­
Mail:
herzog.
jeff@
epa.
gov
