YOUR WEEKLY MEMBER NEWS LETTER:
is a service provided only to members of the Nebraska Petroleum Markers & Convenience Store Association (NPCA). If you have any key personnel that would like to be added at no additional charge, please feel free to reply to
tkeigher@npcainc.com, katie@npcainc.com or call (402)-474-6691.
|
Thank You to NPCA's Partners
|
|
NACS: Plenty of Price Elasticity Before Consumers Curtail Driving Habits
|
As pump prices rise, so do industry concerns that consumers will drive less. But prices at the gas island still have a way to go before hitting the threshold at which consumers cut back on travel, based on a recent report from NACS, "How Consumers React to Gas Prices." The report noted that in January, the mean price at which consumers said they would "drive less" was $3.37/gal and the mean retail gas price was $2.30/gal -- a difference of $1.07/gal. At that time, the mean price at which consumers said they would drive "drastically less" or "seek alternative to driving" was $4.43/gal, a difference of $2.13/gal from the $2.30/gal mean street price. The chart's closest comparison is February 2017. NACS charted a $3.44/gal mean price threshold at which consumers said they would "drive less" and a $4.45/gal mean price at which consumers said they would drive "drastically less," while the mean retail price sat at $2.25/gal. That's a wider gap of $1.19/gal and $2.18, respectively. The association's data suggest that as fuel prices tend to climb going into the driving season when demand rises, consumers also expect higher prices and seem to be willing to pay more. The point at which consumers balk at fuel prices can be higher during the summer and even into the fall, based the NACS chart. In May 2017, the mean price at the pump was $2.35/gal and the mean price at which consumers would "drive less" was $3.49/gal, a $1.14/gal gap. During that month, the threshold at which consumers would drive "drastically less" was $4.53/gal, a $2.18/gal difference. --Donna Harris, dharris@opisnet.com Measure retail profit performance against key competitors in the U.S. and Canada with OPIS Retail Fuel Watch newsletter. Learn more and start a free 4-week trial at https://www.opisnet.com/product/news/retail-fuel-watch/ Copyright, Oil Price Information Service
|
|
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is setting in motion plans to review and set six new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) required under the Clean Air Act. The review is important to petroleum marketers because two of the standards under review involve ground level ozone and particulate matter, both of which could impact gasoline and diesel fuel use and formulation requirements. In a memo released this week, Pruitt laid out five "principles" for determining NAAQS which are aimed at streamlining EPA review and approval process and easing of scientific standards to determine if current standards are adequate to protect human health and environment. The memo also set out an ambitious goal to quickly finalize new NAAQS standards for ozone by 2020 and particulate matter by 2022. Pruitt also seeks to streamline procedures for evaluating scientific research used to determine whether current or proposed standards are adequate to protect public health and give greater weight to the economic costs when determining new pollution control measures. The goal for the agency is to ease NAAQS standards issued under the Obama Administration that significantly increased non-attainment areas for ozone and particulate matter. The new standards are likely to reduce the number of counties in nonattainment requiring RFG and slow the switch from diesel to natural gas-powered diesel vehicles in counties in nonattainment for particulate matter. The planned changes come less than a month after the Administration ordered EPA to revamp the NAAQS review process and just two years after the Obama Administration lowered the ozone standard from 75 ppb to 70 ppm, greatly expanding nonattainment areas nationwide.
|
GLW Scholarship Golf Outing
|
June 14- York, NE
Come network with members of the industry and raise money for the George L. Watters Memorial Scholarship Golf Outing 11:30 Lunch 12:00pm Shot Gun Start Dinner to follow
Beverages on the Course & Dinner Sponsor:
Shrimp & 2 Hole Sponsor: 19th Hole Sponsor:
Lunch Co-Sponsors:
Hole Sponsors:
Altria, Bosselman Energy, Cenex, Cubby's,
ET Products,Federated Insurance, Farner Bocken
Flint Hills Resources, Growmark, Hartland Fuels, LSI,
Midwest Pump & Equipment, Musket Oil (Love's), Phillips 66,
RDG Geoscience & Engineering, RJ Reynolds, Shell Oil, Sinclair Oil, Western Oil
|
Tentative Deal Reached on RFS Reform
|
On Tuesday, reports began emerging that the Trump Administration had reached a deal on the RFS in a White House meeting with Senators representing corn and refining states, as well as the Secretary of Agriculture and the Administrator of EPA. Since then, it has been clear that the regulatory deal is not yet complete and there are still more negotiations to come. Under the tentative agreement that was reached this week, the ethanol industry would receive a year-round RVP waiver for E15 blends, while biofuels exports would qualify for RINS generation. The White House also agreed to not pursue an artificial cap on RINs prices. The ethanol industry had already pushed back against any effort to cap RIN values and/or allow ethanol exports to qualify for RINs generation since any reduction in RINs will likely hurt E15 sales. In other words, for E15 to become a viable "new fuel" in the marketplace, the ethanol industry needs the 15-billion-gallon ethanol mandate to stay intact which maintains RIN values. Attaching RINs to exported ethanol would likely provide relief to refiners by reining in the cost of RINs.
|
New Guidance Released Regarding Menu Labeling Requirements
|
On Monday, the FDA released new guidance for the implementation of the menu labeling requirements that also went into effect on Monday. This guidance updates the guidance document that was released last year and includes new examples of alternatives to aid in compliance. It also identifies places where FDA intends to be more flexible in its approach. The guidance reflects input from stakeholders in response to an interim final rule (IFR) (82 FR 20825, May 4, 2017), as well as comments received on the draft guidance document. Enforcement of the menu labeling requirements began on Monday, May 7, 2018. For information on which establishments are required to comply with the menu labeling rule, see PMAA General Counsel Al Alfano's detailed explanation.
|
|
This week, House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), along with Rep. David McKinley (R-WV), introduced a House resolution aimed at putting lawmakers on the record as opposing a carbon tax. H. Con. Res. 119 "expresses the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to American families and businesses and is not in the best interest of the United States." The resolution finds that a carbon tax would have detrimental effects on businesses and families, arguing that it would increase the price of gasoline and home heating fuel, and therefore increase the cost of food, transportation and other necessities to consumers. Furthermore, the resolution claims that a carbon tax would negatively affect businesses and force many jobs overseas. The resolution also highlights that a carbon tax would hit the poor, elderly and other people on fixed incomes the hardest. Majority Whip Scalise also said that a carbon tax would threaten America's energy security. The idea of a carbon tax has been floating around D.C. for years and Majority Whip Scalise wants to have GOP lawmakers on the record as opposing a carbon tax. In 2016, the House approved a similar carbon tax resolution, with all Republicans and six Democrats supporting it. Conservative groups including Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks and Tea Party Nation recently said in a letter that a carbon tax would eliminate many of the benefits of the GOP's new tax law. PMAA firmly opposes the introduction of a carbon tax.
|
|