HOME IMPLEMENTATION PACIFIC ETHANOL YOUR CAR HB2210 SB1079

Strange Anomalies in HB 2210

How did this bill ever get passed?

Why isn't anyone investigating the glaring ambiguities?

If you would like a concise summary of the strange anomalies of HB 2210, without the links to the audio, click here for a pdf document.

It appears that there were no economic impact hearings for the bill. If you Google "oregon hb2210 hearings" you will find essentially no information about the hearings on this bill even though it was going to have an economic impact on every citizen in Oregon. The bill was advertised as a Bio-Fuels tax incentive bill. Unless you actually read the entire bill, you would never have suspected that it was going to be a mandatory E10 bill.

Why did the bill define gasoline as follows?

SECTION 10. ORS 646.905 is amended to read:
646.905. As used in ORS 646.910 to 646.920:

> ...

{ - (4) - } { + (6) + } 'Gasoline' means any fuel sold for use in spark ignition engines whether leaded or unleaded.

Why was the word "leaded" used in the definition of gasoline? The bill supposedly deals with gasoline for cars because a later definition of the fuel that will have ethanol added to it is:

(d) Complies with or is produced from a gasoline base stock that complies with ASTM International specification D 4814;

Gasoline that "complies with ASTM International Specification D 4814" is car gasoline which hasn't had lead in it for decades. The only gasoline in the US that has lead in it is aviation fuel, commonly called avgas or 100 LL. (The LL in 100 LL stands for "Low Lead".) Nowhere in the bill is "aviation fuel", "avgas" or "100 LL" mentioned. If it had been, then ASTM D 910 would appear in the bill. It does not. Yet there were at least three meetings between the Oregon Department of Aviation and the Oregon Department of Agriculture and interested pilots and aviation organizations, taking up numerous man hours, to clarify whether HB 2210 applied to aviation fuel. It was finally determined that it didn't apply at all.

Since HB 2210 never applied to aviation fuel, why is the word "leaded" in the definition of 'Gasoline'?

When HB 2210 was signed into law on July 3, 2007 the portion of the law that mandated E10 in all gasoline sold in Oregon without exception lay dormant because of a trigger clause in the law:

SECTION 17. { + (1) The State Department of Agriculture shall study and monitor ethanol fuel production, use and sales in this
state.
(2) When capacity of ethanol production facilities in Oregon reaches a level of at least 40 million gallons, the department
shall notify all retail dealers, nonretail dealers and wholesale dealers in this state, in a notice that meets the requirements of
subsection (3) of this section.
(3) The notice under subsection (2) of this section shall inform retail dealers, nonretail dealers and wholesale dealers
that:
(a) The capacity of ethanol production facilities in Oregon has reached the levels described in subsection (2) of this section;
and
(b) Three months after the date of the notice, a retail dealer, nonretail dealer or wholesale dealer may sell or offer for sale
only gasoline described in section 18 of this 2007 Act. + }
SECTION 18. { + (1) A retail dealer, nonretail dealer or wholesale dealer may not sell or offer for sale gasoline unless
the gasoline contains 10 percent ethanol by volume.

What was the significance of producing 40 million gallons of ethanol in the state? Where did that specific number come from? If you are going to produce enough ethanol to add 10% to all of the gasoline used in Oregon you would need a production capacity of at least 150 million gallons / yr., since about 1.5 billion gallons of gasoline are sold per year in Oregon. It should be noted that this SECTION 17 was a major change to the original language of the bill which stated:

SECTION 18. { + (1) The State Department of Agriculture shall study and monitor the ethanol fuel production, use and sales in
this state.
(2) When production of ethanol in this state reaches a level of at least 90 million gallons on an annualized basis for at least
three months, the department shall notify all retail dealers, nonretail dealers and wholesale dealers in this state, in a
notice that meets the requirements of subsection (3) of this section.

According to the testimony of Mike Grainey, Director, Department of Energy , at 21:40 into the recording of the hearing on 24 January 2007, the 90 million gallon figure is the amount of ethanol used "... in Oregon last year." This was much more conservative and realistic language for a massive, statewide change in the formulation of gasoline, but still short of the 150 million gallons that would be needed. Why wasn't the target 150 million gallons, for at least three months and why was it reduced to 40 million gallons with no demonstration of long term production capability?

Amazingly, on 7 October 2007 it was announced that a new ethanol plant in Boardman, OR. was up and running and it just happened to have a capacity of, you guessed it, wink, wink, 40 million gallons of ethanol per year. So, on or about 11 October 2007 the notification went out to all "Retail Dealers, Nonretail Dealers and Wholesale Dealers" that HB 2210 was the law. Who is Pacific Ethanol and why are their fingerprints all over this bill?

Next, notice that the law states that the changeover to selling E10 across the entire state must be accomplished in three months. Notice SECTION 17 (3) (b) includes the word "only". So theoretically all of the gas stations in Oregon must be pumping "only" E10 by the end of January 2008. Who would have ever believed that it would be possible to convert an entire state to a new gasoline formulation in three months? Did the legislators ever ask industry representatives what would be involved, how long it would take and what it would cost to convert the entire state to E10? You can check out whether Oregon is serious about implementing the law and meeting the deadline as written here. You can also go to the analysis of HB 2210 anatomy here, and listen to the warning from Tom Gallagher from Chevron Pipeline. They asked him how long it would take, then they simply ignored him.

I urge you to call, email or write your legislators and ask them to repeal this law.