P.U.M.P. It UP

Retail fuel marketers announce new coalition in response to temperature compensation controversy.

A national coalition of associations representing independent petroleum marketers announced the formation of the Partnership for Uniform Marketing Practices (P.U.M.P.) on March 26, 2007. The organization’s focus is to ensure fair competition, cost-effective distribution and equitable treatment of consumers in addressing the issue of temperature variation in the sale of gasoline and diesel fuels.

“Our coalition believes that consumers must be provided with reliable and accurate practices in the delivery of fuel at the pump,” said Lisa Mullings, president and CEO of the National Association of Truckstop Operators, an association representing truck stops and travel plazas and the driving force behind P.U.M.P. “That’s why we have joined together in support of a complete and thorough examination of fuel dispensing practices to fully understand and evaluate the impact of temperature variation on consumers.”

Retailers have banded together to fight recent allegations that consumers are receiving less than they pay for as the result of retailers selling gasoline at temperatures higher than standard 60-degree reference temperature. Based on unverifiable data provided by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association to the Kansas City Star, proponents are demanding that retail gas marketers install expensive automatic temperature compensation devices, claiming significant, but unsubstantiated, savings for consumers.

“We’ve been working with a loose coalition since the Kansas Star article came out last summer,” said John Eichberger, National Association of Convenience Stores’ vice president of government relations. “This (more formalized) effort is to provide a centralized place for industry associations and other participants to go for information on the issue. We have all been collecting information independently, and NATSO took the lead to form P.U.M.P to bring it all together.”

P.U.M.P. members counter that there is currently no accurate or statistically reliable data to suggest that consumers are being adversely impacted under the existing system. Coalition members maintain that any variation from the 60-degree standard reference temperature balances out for consumers based on year-round, seasonal averages. The coalition further emphasizes that proponents of ATC ignore the fact that the costs associated with enforcing and implementing the proposed regulatory changes would most likely be borne by the very consumers they claim to be protecting.

“The problem we’ve found, is that responding to these ATC claims does not fit well in the typical 20-second sound bite,” said Dan Gilligan, president of the Petroleum Marketers Association of America. “We have a four- or five-minute answer and were not getting our points out successfully. The goal is to develop consistant messages that we can present to the media and consumers who tend to be inherently suspicious of the industry. And were talking about a quantity on the order of a tablespoon of fuel, and people can spill more than that.”

The coalition is asking government officials and regulators to conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit study of the issue to determine the real costs to consumers compared to the benefits from ATC before any decision is made relative to the use of temperature compensation devices.

“There’s simply too much at stake for consumers, retailers, and state and local governments to rush to an ill-informed judgment on this issue,” said Jay McKeeman, vice president of government relations and communications for the California Independent Oil Marketers Association. “Before costly solutions are forced on consumers and retailers, it’s imperative to confirm whether the problem is real, how widespread it is, and whether the costs of implementing any solution will be offset by a real and measurable economic benefit, if any, to the consumer.”

Members of the Partnership for Uniform Marketing Practices (P.U.M.P.), at formation (in alphabetical order), include:

• American Trucking Associations (ATA)
• Arizona Petroleum Marketers Association (APMA)
• Arkansas Oil Marketers Association, Inc. (AOMA)
• California Independent Oil Marketers Association (CIOMA)
• Colorado Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association (CWPMA)
• Empire State Petroleum Association (ESPA-NY)
• Florida Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association, Inc. (FPMA)
• Fuel Merchants Association of New Jersey
• Indiana Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association, Inc. (IPCA)
• Kentucky Petroleum Marketers Association (KPMA)
• Michigan Petroleum Association/Michigan Association of Convenience Stores (MPAPACS)
• Minnesota Petroleum Marketers Association (MPM)
• Missouri Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association (MPCA)
• National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS)
• National Association of Shell Marketers (NASM)
• NATSO, Representing Truckstops and Travel Plazas
• Nebraska Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (NPCA)
• Nevada Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (NPM & CSA)
• New Mexico Petroleum Marketers Association
• Oklahoma Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (OPMCA)
• Petroleum & Convenience Marketers of Alabama (P&CMA)
• Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Stores of Iowa (PMCI)
• Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association of Kansas (PMCA)
• Petroleum Marketers Association of America (PMAA)
• Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers (SIGMA)
• South Dakota Petroleum & Propane Marketers Association/
• South Dakota Association of Convenience Stores (SDP2MA-SDACS)
• Tennessee Oil Marketers Association (TOMA)
• Utah Petroleum Marketers & Retailers Association
• Virginia Petroleum, Convenience and Grocery Association (VPCGA)
• West Virginia Oil Marketers and Grocers Association (OMEGA)
• Wisconsin Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association (WPMCA)