AUTHORITYID | CHAMBER | TYPE | COMMITTEENAME |
---|---|---|---|
hsif00 | H | S | Committee on Energy and Commerce |
[House Hearing, 115 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] BACKGROUND ON RENEWABLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS UNDER THE RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD ======================================================================= HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ JULY 25, 2018 __________ Serial No. 115-158 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce energycommerce.house.gov __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 35-909 WASHINGTON : 2019 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free). E-mail, po@custhelp.com. COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE GREG WALDEN, Oregon Chairman JOE BARTON, Texas FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey Vice Chairman Ranking Member FRED UPTON, Michigan BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois ANNA G. ESHOO, California MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GENE GREEN, Texas STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois GREGG HARPER, Mississippi G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey DORIS O. MATSUI, California BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky KATHY CASTOR, Florida PETE OLSON, Texas JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia JERRY McNERNEY, California ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois PETER WELCH, Vermont H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida PAUL TONKO, New York BILL JOHNSON, Ohio YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York BILLY LONG, Missouri DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana KURT SCHRADER, Oregon BILL FLORES, Texas JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III, SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana Massachusetts MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma TONY CARDENAS, CaliforniaERR67*UL RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina RUIZ, California CHRIS COLLINS, New York SCOTT H. PETERS, California KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan TIM WALBERG, Michigan MIMI WALTERS, California RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina Subcommittee on Environment JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois Chairman DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia PAUL TONKO, New York Vice Chairman Ranking Member JOE BARTON, Texas RAUL RUIZ, California TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania SCOTT H. PETERS, California MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GENE GREEN, Texas GREGG HARPER, Mississippi DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado PETE OLSON, Texas JERRY McNERNEY, California BILL JOHNSON, Ohio TONY CARDENAS, California BILL FLORES, Texas DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina DORIS O. MATSUI, California KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex TIM WALBERG, Michigan officio) EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio) C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Hon. John Shimkus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, opening statement.................................... 1 Prepared statement........................................... 3 Hon. Paul Tonko, a Representative in Congress from the State of New York, opening statement.................................... 4 Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, opening statement...................................... 5 Prepared statement........................................... 6 Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 6 Witnesses Brent Yacobucci, Energy and Minerals Manager, Congressional Research Service............................................... 8 Prepared statement........................................... 10 Sandra Dunphy, Director, Energy Compliance Services, Weaver and Tidwell, LLP................................................... 26 Prepared statement........................................... 28 Paul Niznik, Senior Consultant, Argus Media Incorporated......... 44 Prepared statement........................................... 45 Gabriel E. Lade, Assistant Professor of Economics, Iowa State University..................................................... 46 Prepared statement........................................... 48 Corey Lavinsky, Director Oof Global Biofuels, S&P Global Platts Analytics...................................................... 66 Prepared statement........................................... 68 Submitted Material Statement of the Renewable Fuels Association..................... 102 Transcript of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations' hearing entitled, ``RIN Fraud: EPA's Efforts to Ensure Market Integrity in the Renewable Fuels Program'' \1\ ---------- \1\ The information can be found at: https://docs.house.gov/ meetings/IF/IF18/20180725/108610/HHRG-115-IF18-20180725- SD099.pdf. BACKGROUND ON RENEWABLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS UNDER THE RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD ---------- WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 2018 House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Environment, Committee on Energy and Commerce Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:15 a.m., in room 2322 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Shimkus (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Members present: Representatives Shimkus, McKinley, Harper, Olson, Flores, Hudson, Walberg, Carter, Duncan, Walden (ex officio), Tonko, Ruiz, Peters, McNerney, Cardenas, Pallone (ex officio), and Loebsack. Staff present: Samantha Bopp, Staff Assistant; Kelly Collins, Legislative Clerk; Jerry Couri, Deputy Chief Counsel, Environment; Wyatt Ellertson, Professional Staff Member; Margaret Tucker Fogarty, Staff Assistant; Adam Fromm, Director of Outreach and Coalitions; Jordan Haverly, Policy Coordinator, Environment; Mary Martin, Chief Counsel, Energy & Environment; Sarah Matthews, Press Secretary, Energy & Environment; Drew McDowell, Executive Assistant; Brannon Rains, Staff Assistant; Austin Stonebraker, Press Assistant; Hamlin Wade, Special Advisor, External Affairs; Everett Winnick, Director of Information Technology; Jean Fruci, Minority Energy and Environment Policy Advisor; Tiffany Guarascio, Minority Deputy Staff Director and Chief Health Advisor; Caitlin Haberman, Minority Professional Staff Member; Rick Kessler, Minority Senior Advisor and Staff Director, Energy and Environment; Alexander Ratner, Minority Policy Analyst; and C.J. Young, Minority Press Secretary. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN SHIMKUS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Mr. Shimkus. I'd like to call the Subcommittee on the Environment hearing to order and recognize myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement. And, really, before I start going through some prepared text, I want to allow the interested parties that are--oh, is that Whitfield there? Former member of the committee. And I see Kenny Hulshof, former member of the House. Good buddy of mine. So a lot of other friends out there. To interest groups, we plan to legislate and we are about ready to go on an August break and I would encourage you to educate, especially members of the subcommittee, take the time during the break and visit with them as we try to move forward. To my colleagues on both sides, I would encourage you to do your homework on your free time so that when we come back we can really have a good discussion. I would like to have a really open process as we go through--actually put down original text and then go through some--a markup that wouldn't be preordained but we would work through some of the processes. So that's just an editorial comment, and then I will start with my prepared opening statement. Today's hearing continues this subcommittee's ongoing efforts to examine the future of our nation's transportation fuels. One of the most significant programs that influences transportation fuel in America is the Renewable Fuel Standard, today's topic of discussion. More specifically, the focus on this hearing is to provide members the opportunity to better understand Renewable Identification Numbers, frequently referred to as RINs. RINs are the main component of the Renewable Fuel Standard's tradable credit system and serve as its compliance mechanism. RINs are attached to renewable fuel gallons at the time of production and they are separated when that renewable fuel is blended into the Nation's nonrenewable fuel supply, at which time the blending party can use the RINs to comply with the RFS or they can trade the RINs to another party. Obligated parties, typically refineries, must submit RINs to the EPA on a yearly basis to demonstrate compliance with annual renewable fuel obligations. So that's a mouthful. The purpose of today's hearing is very much educational in nature and is intended to promote greater understanding of how RINs fit into the overall Renewable Fuel Standard. In order to chart a legislative path forward, it is critical that the subcommittee first gather the facts and comprehend the various complexities of the RFS program. With an emphasis on getting clear objective information and answers about RINs, we have invited a panel of witnesses who can provide independent impartial testimony based on their extensive and varied experience working with RINs. Witnesses that are joining us today include Brent Yacobucci, the Research Manager for the Energy and Minerals Section of the Congressional Research Service, who has analyzed and written on the RFS since the program's inception; Sandra Dunphy, the Director of Energy Compliance at Weaver and Tidwell LLP and a nationally recognized RINs expert who provides RFS- related services to a diverse range of clients; Paul Niznik, an energy consultant with Argus Media who specializes in RINs and will help demystify the factors affecting RINs prices-- demystify; Dr. Gabriel Lade, an Assistant Professor of Economics at Iowa State University who has authored multiple academic publications on the RFS, which have been cited by a wide range of RFS-related stakeholders and industries; and Corey Lavinsky, the Director of Global Biofuels with Standard and Poor's, who will explain how the RIN market works in comparison to other commodity and environmental markets. I'd like to thank these witnesses for their attendance and participation and I look forward to hearing their perspectives on a number of subjects, such as what factors are influencing the RINs market, how the current RINs system impacts various types of stakeholders including consumers, and the prevalence and circumstances of RIN fraud. While understanding that the topic of this morning's hearing can bring about strong viewpoints, my hope and intent is that this hearing will result in a constructive and productive dialogue that will further this subcommittee's effort to improve the Nation's transportation fuel policies. And with that, I have 40 seconds remaining. Anybody wishing for that time? Seeing none, I'll yield back the balance of my time and yield to my friend the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Tonko, for 5 minutes. [The prepared statement of Mr. Shimkus follows:] Prepared statement of Hon. John Shimkus Good morning. Today's hearing continues this Subcommittee's ongoing efforts to examine the future of our nation's transportation fuels. One of the most significant programs that influences transportation fuel in America is the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), today's topic of discussion. More specifically, the focus of this hearing is to provide members the opportunity to better understand Renewable Identification Numbers, frequently referred to as RINs. RINs are the main component of the Renewable Fuel Standard's tradable credit system and serve as its compliance mechanism. RINs are attached to renewable fuel gallons at the time of production and they are separated when that renewable fuel is blended into the nation's non-renewable fuel supply, at which time the blending party can use the RINs to comply with the RFS or they can trade the RINs to another party. Obligated parties, typically refineries, must submit RINs to the EPA on a yearly basis to demonstrate compliance with their annual renewable fuel obligations. The purpose of today's hearing is very much educational in nature and is intended to promote greater understanding of how RINs fit into the overall Renewable Fuel Standard. In order to chart a legislative path forward, it is critical that the Subcommittee first gather the facts and comprehend the various complexities of the RFS program. With an emphasis on getting clear, objective information and answers about RINs, we have invited a panel of witnesses who can provide independent, impartial testimony based on their extensive and varied experience working with RINs. Witnesses joining us today include:Brent Yacobucci--the Research Manager for the Energy & Minerals Section of the Congressional Research Service who has analyzed and written on the RFS since the program's inception; Sandra Dunphy--the director of Energy Compliance at Weaver and Tidwell LLP and a nationally recognized RINS expert who provides RFS-related services to a diverse range of clients; Paul Niznik--an energy consultant with Argus Media who specializes in RINs and will help demystify the factors effecting RINs pricing; Dr. Gabriel Lade--an Assistant Professor of Economics at Iowa State University who has authored multiple academic publications on the RFS which have been cited by a wide range of RFS related stakeholders and industries; and Corey Lavinsky--the Director of Global Biofuels with Standard and Poor's who will explain how the RIN market works in comparison to other commodity and environmental markets. I'd like to thank these witnesses for their attendance and participation and I look forward to hearing their perspectives on a number of subjects, such as what factors are influencing the RINs market, how the current RINs system impacts various types of stakeholders including consumers, and the prevalence and circumstances of RIN fraud. While understanding that the topic of this morning's hearing can bring out strong viewpoints, my hope and intent, is that this hearing will result in a constructive and productive dialogue that will further this Subcommittee's efforts to improve the Nation's transportation fuel policies. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL TONKO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for joining us this morning. This is the latest in this subcommittee's series of hearings on our nation's use of transportation fuels and the renewable fuel standard program. Today, we will examine renewable identification numbers, or RINs. As you know, RINs are unique 38-digit codes given to each gallon of biofuel produced or imported into the United States. These credits are used to comply with the RFS. At the end of each year each obligated party must haven RINs to demonstrate it has met its renewable volume obligation. RFS compliance can be achieved in two ways--either by purchasing the required volume of biofuel and blending it into the fuel supply to obtains RINs directly or by purchasing the required number of RINs on the open market. The debate over the future of the RFS cannot be separated from the performance of the RIN marketplace. Earlier this Congress, we received testimony on RIN price volatility and heard some stakeholders support for a RIN price cap. According to press reports, these have been among the issues considered by members working on RFS reform, and while the RIN market certainly has had price spikes, I do not think we should ignore the political figure's ability to impact market stability. With each White House meeting or EPA announcement, the RIN market can be put into flux. Over the years, the RFS has experienced administrative issues in both Republican and Democratic administrations such as missed RVO deadlines that have impacted its ability to provide for that market certainty. The latest example, which I have voiced my concerns about in the past, is former EPA Administrator Pruitt's excessive use of small refinery hardship exemptions. In the past 2 years, nearly 50 exemptions, representing approximately 2.25 billion RINs worth of obligation have been granted in virtual secrecy. We still do not fully know whether these exemptions were justified, whether those obligations were reallocated to larger refiners, or how these waivers may have impacted RIN prices in the biofuels market. Secret exemptions are not good for the sake of a healthy market and the lack of transparency is extremely troubling, although it is reflective of standard operating procedures within the RIN marketplace. While RIN transactions are reported to EPA's moderated transaction system, there are legitimate concerns that the market lacks meaningful transparency. Very little information on RIN transactions is made public and the market is not subject to scrutiny by regulators similar to other commodity markets. This has led to numerous reported issues of RIN fraud in the past and leaves the door open for potential market manipulation. Publicly available data may not be sufficient to even know if market manipulation is indeed occurring. That is a problem. I know members of this committee hold a wide range of views on the RFS. But regardless of your position, I hope that we can agree that there should be sufficient transparency and oversight of this marketplace in order to ensure that it is functioning and functioning properly. Thank you again for being here. I look forward to the discussion. And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. Mr. Shimkus. Gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the chairman of the full committee, Chairman Walden, for 5 minutes. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON Mr. Walden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for holding yet another hearing on this overall topic. We appreciate it. This is the fifth hearing on the future of transportation fuels and, as we have heard, this morning's topic is Renewable Identification Numbers known as RINs. And I would argue if we gave a test about what RINs are and how the market works, perhaps within this room but I am sure outside of this room, even our most learned members might not test so well. So that's why we are having this hearing. It's not to pit one side against the other or rip off Band-Aids or anything else. It is to learn, to better inform our work so that we can address the issues before this committee. So I won't restate how RINs works. We have done that already. But there are nuances. This does affect markets and therefore it affects consumers, and we are going to put consumers first. So this hearing is intended to be educational, and for those of you of a certain vintage, some of you may remember something called encyclopedias like World Book or Britannica. There are people here who are nodding and people who are scratching and others are going right to Google. This hearing will help the Environment Subcommittee better fill out its set of books on transportation renewable fuels more generally. Why? Well, as I've said before, it is my desire to move legislation that will pave the future of transportation fuels into the next decades in the United States and in order for this to happen it's important that we understand what RINs are and how they fit into the renewable fuel standard, a program that in 2017 spurred the production of 15.8 billion gallons of ethanol and 1.6 billion gallons of biodiesel in the United States. That said, this hearing is not meant to drive a preordained policy or to settle scores. It is intended to help members understand the program so they can make informed decisions when the time comes for us to legislate. So I want to thank our witnesses for being here. We appreciate it. You've been asked to join us not just for your extensive knowledge base on the complicated matter but also for your demonstrated ability to be both informative and objective when it comes to communicating the fundamental elements of the RINs program. So I look forward to hearing your testimony today. And so we will proceed. I want to thank the chairman and other members of this committee who have been working overtime on the broad set of issues related to renewable fuels and how this committee can move forward. So we will move forward. Hearings are part of doing our due diligence in business and we won't be talked out of them and we are here today to hear from all of you. So thank you very much, and with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. [The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:] Prepared statement of Hon. Greg Walden Thank you for yielding to me, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief. Today, the Environment Subcommittee is holding its fifth hearing on the future of transportation fuels. This morning's topic is Renewable Identification Numbers, also known as RINs. RIN credits are used for compliance with the Renewable Fuel Standard, but also can be traded, making RINs both a compliance tool and a commodity. Each gallon of qualifying, produced biofuel is assigned a RIN, a group of 38 digits that identify the fuel producer, the year the fuel was produced, and the type of fuel. RINs are ``attached'' to the fuel and, once the biofuel has been blended or sold, the RINs are detached. At the end of each year, either the biofuel producer--based on a predetermined compliance obligation formula--submits its required RINs to EPA, purchases RINs from other RIN holders to meet their regulatory obligations, or the biofuel producer sells excess RINs like other commodities. There is, however, much greater detail and nuance to RINs. Most of these nuances and other issues are foreign to most of us as well as most Americans. That's where this hearing comes into play. This hearing is intended to be educational in nature. For those of you of a certain vintage, you will remember encyclopedia collections--such as World Book or Britannica. This hearing will help the Environment Subcommittee better fill out its set of books on transportation and renewable fuels more generally. Why? Well, as I have said before, it is my desire to move legislation that will pave the future of transportation fuels in the United States, and in order for this to happen it is important that we understand what RINs are and how they fit into the Renewable Fuel Standard--a program that in 2017, spurred the production of 15.8 billion gallons of ethanol and 1.6 billion gallons of biodiesel in the United States. That said, this hearing is not meant to drive a pre- ordained policy or to settle scores. It is intended to help members understand the program so that they can make informed decisions when the time to legislate comes. I want to thank our witnesses for agreeing to be with us today. You have been asked to join us not just for your extensive knowledge base on this complicated matter, but also for your demonstrated ability to be both informative and objective when it comes to communicating the fundamental elements of the RINs program. I look forward to hearing your testimony and learning from your experience. Thank you again Mr. Chairman for this time. I yield back the remaining amount of time that I have. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, Congressman Pallone from New Jersey, for 5 minutes. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today we are here to talk about the renewable identification number, or RIN. The RIN market provides a mechanism to bridge the gap between biofuel supply and demand created by the renewable fuel standard mandate. And the market allows parties blending more than their required gallons of biofuel to sell their excess RINs to parties that blend less than their required gallons. When the market functions properly, it lowers the cost of compliance for all participants in the renewable fuels standards program. But it must be fair, transparent, and well regulated. It should also primarily serve the interests of RFS participants, not the interests of speculators. Well, that's how things are supposed to work. But today, they are not working and I believe much of the recent vocality in the RIN market can be attributed to the way the Trump administration has operated the RFS program. Press reports of the on again off again RFS negotiations conducted by the White House over the past year or so have driven RIN prices up and down, depending upon the headline of the day. No new RINs were created or removed from the market in these meetings and no changes to the program were made if the price fluctuated enough to create losses or gains for everyone involved in the program over the course of the last year. Now, former EPA Administrator Pruitt also nearly doubled the number of small refinery waivers that were granted last year, which lowered the price of RINs. It appears that some of these waivers were granted to refineries not experiencing financial hardship which is required under the law. If that's the case, then former Administrator Pruitt intentionally misused this waiver authority to manipulate the RIN market and undermine the RFS, and the lack of transparency and accountability in the waiver program raises serious questions about how this program is being managed. Market mechanisms can work well. They can lower compliance costs as long as they are not manipulated, which is what I fear is happening under this administration. And I guess we will find out more about it today. I don't know if anybody else wants the time. Otherwise, I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. We now conclude members' opening statements. The chair would like to remind members that pursuant to committee rules, all members' opening statements will be made part of the record. We appreciate you all being here today. I've kind of done the initial formal introduction in my opening statement. So I'll just turn to you. Your full statements are submitted for the record. You'll have 5 minutes. Again, this isan educational process. So I am not going to be Attila the Hun with the gavel. But as you see the clock tick then kind of know that we should get to the end so that we can get to members' questions. So with that, I'd like to recognize Mr. Brent Yacobucci from CRS for 5 minutes. STATEMENTS OF BRENT YACOBUCCI, ENERGY AND MINERALS MANAGER, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE; SANDRA DUNPHY, DIRECTOR, ENERGY COMPLIANCE SERVICES, WEAVER AND TIDWELL, LLP; PAUL NIZNIK, SENIOR CONSULTANT, ARGUS MEDIA INCORPORATED; DR. GABRIEL E. LADE, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY; COREY LAVINSKY, DIRECTOR OF GLOBAL BIOFUELS, S&P GLOBAL PLATTS ANALYTICS STATEMENT OF BRENT YACOBUCCI Mr. Yacobucci. Good morning, Chairman Shimkus, Ranking Member Tonko, and members of the subcommittee. My name is Brent Yacobucci. I am the Energy and Mineral Section Research Manager for the Congressional Research Service. Congressional guidelines on objectivity and nonpartisanship require that I confine my testimony to technical, professional, and non-advocate aspects of matters under consideration and that I limit myself to areas within my knowledge and expertise. Although I can discuss policy options and potential ramifications, the service does not take a position on pending or proposed legislation. I've been with CRS for 19 years, providing analysis on alternative fuels, automotive design, and transportation- related provisions of the Clean Air Act. I have a Bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology and a Master's degree in public policy from the George Washington University. I am a member of the Society of Mechanical Engineers, the Society of Automotive Engineers, and the Society of Petroleum Engineers, although today I am representing only CRS. The Federal Renewable Fuel Standard was established by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and expanded in 2007 by the Energy Independence and Security Act. The RFS requires the use of renewable biofuels in transportation. For 2018, the mandate is, roughly, 19.3 billion gallons. Within the larger mandate, there are sub-mandates for advanced biofuels including biomass-based diesel and cellulosic biofuels. The RFS is a market-based program in which obligated parties, typically refiners, must submit credits to cover their obligations. These credits, renewable identification numbers, or RINs, can be bought or sold like other commodities. In general, for each gallon of renewable fuel produced, one RIN is generated. A RIN is a 38-character number issued by the biofuel producer or importer at the point of production or import. Each qualifying gallon has its own unique RIN. The characters signify various attributes to the batch of fuel, including the decode, which identifies the category of fuel and which part of the RFS that fuel satisfies--D3 for cellulosic biofuel, D4 for bio-based diesel, D5 for advanced biofuels, and D6 for unspecified biofuel--typically, corn-based ethanol. From the beginning of the RFS program there have been concerns with RIN generation and the RIN market, in part to address concerns over errors, inaccuracies, and potential fraud, when EPA finalizes rules for the RFS in 2007, sometimes referred to as the RFS 2, EPA also established a new EPA- moderated transaction system, or EMTS. EPA maintains that obligated parties must exercise due diligence, and under their buyer beware system, those purchasing RINs must certify the validity of those RINs on their own. They are generally responsible for any invalid RINs they pass on to others or submit to EPA for compliance. At times, RIN prices have been volatile. Most RINs are initially bought and sold through private contracts. But in the spot market for RINs in 2013 spot prices for conventional ethanol RINs--the D6 RINs--rose dramatically before dropping even more rapidly. Stakeholders have identified various factors as potentially causing the price increase, including whether submission amounts of ethanol can be blended into gasoline to meet the RFS mandates and the extent to which non-obligated parties are speculating in RIN markets. Further, some stakeholders have suggested that a few actors could be actively working to manipulate those RIN markets. Concerns have been raised about the volatility of RIN prices on the secondary market and the potential effects on the costs faced by gasoline blenders and oil refiners, particularly those refiners without the infrastructure to blend, as well as the effects on consumer fuel prices. The complex interactions among the prices for various commodities makes such analysis difficult. Stakeholders who propose various options to address some of these concerns including limiting the participation of non-obligated parties in the markets and in the EMTS, establishing a price cap for RINs, requiring more public real-time reporting for RIN training data, and granting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission authority to regulate the RIN market similarly to other agricultural commodities. Each of these options could affect agricultural and biofuel producers, gasoline suppliers, blenders, and consumers. But it is beyond the scope of this testimony to address economic effects. I thank the subcommittee for its time and I am happy to answer any questions you have. [The prepared statement of Mr. Yacobucci follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Shimkus. Thank you very much. The chair now recognizes Ms. Dunphy for 5 minutes. Thanks for being here. STATEMENT OF SANDERS DUNPHY Ms. Dunphy. Thank you very much, and good morning. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee, my name is Sandra Dunphy and I am a Director in the Energy Compliance Services Group of Weaver and Tidwell, a certified public accounting firm ranked among the 40 largest CPA firms in the U.S. My area of expertise is the RFS program. Weaver is the largest provider of attestation services under the EPA's gasoline and diesel programs and Weaver was the first auditor that the EPA approved under the RFS quality assurance plan program. In 2017, we verified more than 1.1 billion RINs and we are currently auditing about 50 renewable fuel producers. Weaver has a diverse client base for these RFS- related services--renewable fuel producers, importers, exporters, blenders, and consumers. Our clients also include gasoline and diesel refiners and importers. These companies are classified as obligated parties under the RFS program because they must acquire RINs to comply with the renewable fuel blending targets set annually by the EPA. Because of this diverse base of customers, Weaver takes a neutral position on the RFS regulations. My comments to you today are intended to provide useful information as you explore potential revisions and updates to the RFS regulations, not to advocate for any particular position or provision. Today, I've been asked to describe some of the nuances or inconsistencies that exist in the regulations so that that will be focus on my remarks today. In order for companies to make the necessary investments in new technologies and renewable fuel production facilities, they need clear consistent long-term policies and regulations and, of course, they need financial incentives. Under the RFS program, that financial incentive comes primarily from RINs. If new technologies and fuels can meet the stringent feedstock production process and finished fuel requirements of the RFS, then RINs are the reward. But if any part of those feedstocks, processes, or fuels fails to meet the requirements, no RINs can be generated and facilities cannot acquire the funding needed to get built. Let me provide just a few examples of things that are currently either not allowed or where the regulations are so stringent that few if any facilities can comply. Some of the things currently not allowed, fuels that require two separate facilities to be produced--for example, one facility converts wood, straw, grasses, or municipal solid waste, feed stock into some type of liquid, and another facility, such as a petroleum refinery, turns that liquid into a finished fuel, then fuel cannot generate RINs. Bio gas used to produce electricity that is then used to power motor vehicles, here the pathway exists in the regulations but has not yet been implemented. Renewable fuels used in ocean-going vessels is not available for RINs. By comparison, renewable fuel used in jet planes that leave the U.S. are eligible for RINs. Here are examples of some feed stocks with stringent requirements that often disqualify their fuels from earning RINs: sawdust and wood chips from a lumber mill, waste wood pulled from construction and demolition debris, old railroad ties, and disease and insect-infected trees generally don't qualify. Tree thinning and forest floor logging residues are also very difficult to use, even if sustainable harvested. Bio gas from digesters located at farms or wastewater treatment facilities that take in a variety of wastes, some cellulosic and some non, are only allowed to make noncellulosic RINs if they cold process any amount of noncellulosic material. Being able to make only noncellulosic RINs often kills a project. The fuels of the future depend on a renewable fuels producers' ability not only to generate RINs but on the type and quantity of RINs that can be made for each gallon of fuel. This dependency holds true for both standalone renewable fuel production facilities and for petroleum refineries wanting to co-process renewable feed stocks in their facilities. The RFS regulations, by their very nature, dictate winners and losers in the renewable fuel market. Whatever changes you may propose to the RFS regulations, I encourage you to seek clear, predictable, practical standards and take advantage of RINs as a powerful market incentive toward change. Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for your work in reviewing how RINs can help incentivize production of the best fuels for the environment and the American consumer. Weaver stands ready to assist your committee in any way possible as you consider different options for accomplishing these goals. Thank you. [The prepared statement of Ms. Dunphy follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Shimkus. Thank you very much. Now, next I'll turn to Mr. Niznik. You're recognized for 5 minutes. STATEMENT OF PAUL NIZNIK Mr. Niznik. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee, my name is Paul Niznik. I am a Senior Consultant for Argus Media Incorporated. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning on RINs prices and fuels markets. Argus Media is a global commodity price reporting agency with over 40 years of experience providing a broad range of industries with objective and independent market assessments. Billions of dollars of commodity prices are based on Argus published indices which are produced in over 20 offices spread across global market hubs. Argus provides its services to entities within the petroleum, biofuel, and power markets, among others. In my role as a consultant, I provide strategic planning services, investment due diligence and market research specifically in biofuels and RINs markets. Research on historic price data demonstrates that most RINs price behavior can be explained in the context of four main factors: the RFS rules, commodities prices, fuel quality regulations, and other incentives on the national and state level. Historically, changes seen in any of these areas can have quantifiable effects on RIN prices. In my experience with clients, at every level of participation in the market, understanding the logic of RINs price behavior creates opportunities for investment and opens chances to optimize business efficiency. Uncertainty around potential changes to the RFS or the policies disrupts the logic of the market and creates RINs price movements and volatility not normally seen under similar market conditions. Likewise, policy clarification and long-term guidance have decreased RINs price volatility and returned the markets to logical behavior in the past, such as the issuance of guidance by EPA on the intention for annual RFS rulemaking in 2015 after a multiple year lapse. RFS price volatility, driven by policy news, as well as policy uncertainty, are the two largest complaints about the RFS that I hear from my clients, both RIN buyers such as petroleum refiners, and RINs generators such as biofuels producers. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to answering questions from members of the committee. [The prepared statement of Mr. Niznik follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Shimkus. Well, you get a gold star for short 5 minutes there. So thank you very much. I will now turn to Dr. Lade. You're recognized for 5 minutes. STATEMENT OF GABRIEL LADE Mr. Lade. Chairman Shimkus, Ranking Member Tonko, and other members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's hearing. I am an Assistant Professor of Economics at Iowa State University, a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management at Cornell University, and a Faculty Affiliate at the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, a public policy and economic research institute at Iowa State University. To these roles, I bring my expertise in environmental economics and policy analysis. In recent years, I have particularly focused on state and Federal policies that increase the production and use of renewable transportation fuels including the renewable fuel standard. I published several peer reviewed and outreach articles on RIN price determinants and their impacts on downstream consumer markets, and this is the topic on which I will speak today, though I will note that all my views expressed are my own and do not reflect those of the entities that I am associated with. RIN markets serve a vital role in enforcing the renewable fuel standard. Key questions have arisen around the operation and integrity of RIN markets, particularly since 2013, due to observed volatility. These include have RIN markets operated as intended by the enacting legislation, what changes can improve the RIN market and limit volatility, and what impact would administrative or legislative changes to the RFS have on RIN markets and biofuel demand in the United States. In the written testimony that I submitted to this committee, I summarized RINs' accounting and economic purpose as well as review the empirical evidence on RIN price determinants and their impacts on downstream market prices. I also address potential effects of proposed changes to the RFS program, their likely impacts on RINs, and their implications for biofuel demand in the United States. I want to emphasize four points from my testimony here. First, RINs serve a vital accounting role in RFS compliance. However, their economic role is even more important. RIN prices adjust to ensure that congressional biofuel blending mandates are met each year and are a key market signal about the value of investing in biofuel production and distribution infrastructure. Second, several features of RIN markets suggest that they are efficient. Prices adjust quickly to changing compliance cost expectations and market fundamentals, and most RIN price volatility since 2013 can readily be attributed to ever changing biofuel blending targets and uncertainty around future mandates. However, publicly available data is insufficient to fully determine whether the market is efficient or free of manipulation. Greater transparency would allow researchers and regulators to study these issues, and further transparency would make attempt to manipulate the market more difficult and costly. Third, we all know that fuel retailers and refiners are not driven out of business every time states raise their fuel taxes. Instead, consumer prices at the pump increase typically by the full amount of the tax. Fuel providers pay the tax bill but consumers ultimately bear the tax cost. The same situation arises in RIN markets. The empirical economics literature continues to show that wholesale fuel prices on average rise one for one with refiners' RIN costs. This means that so long as refiners offset their RFS compliance obligations as they accrue them, on average, they're fully compensated for their RIN costs through higher wholesale gasoline and diesel prices. Finally, recent actions by the Environmental Protection Agency likely undermined RIN markets. RIN markets are designed to provide a signal about the value of biofuel production and distribution in the United States. That signal becomes unreliable when EPA decisions are unpredictable and lack transparency. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. [The prepared statement of Mr. Lade follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Shimkus. Thank you very much. Now I will turn to Mr. Lavinsky. You're recognized for 5 minutes. Thanks for being here. STATEMENT OF COREY LAVINSKY Mr. Lavinsky. OK. Good morning, Chairman Shimkus, Ranking Member Tonko, and other members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to speak today. I am grateful for the opportunity to share information for this hearing. My name is Corey Lavinsky and I am with S&P Global Platts handling global biofuels analytics. S&P Global Platts is a leading provider of energy and commodity market data. We provide news, market commentary, fundamental data and analysis, thousands of daily price assessments, and analytical tools to help customers spot and seize opportunities with confidence. I've been analyzing biofuels markets for nearly 10 years during which I have seen conventional biofuel RINs rise from pennies apiece to as much as $1.40. RINs, which are currently hovering around five-year lows, are of great interest to our clients and to the agricultural biofuels and petroleum industries in general. RINs are the currency of the renewable fuel standard--the RFS. Refiners and importers that are subject to the RFS prove compliance with their renewable volume obligations by retiring RINs at the end of each compliance year. Obligated parties can obtain RINs by physical blending or by purchasing them on the open market. RINs are typically traded on a bilateral basis and off exchange. Independent pricing organizations like S&P Global Platts have shined a light on the opaque markets by publishing RIN price assessments. Some RINs are more versatile than others and can be used to satisfy multiple mandates. For instance, a D4 RIN with the production of biodiesel can be used to satisfy three of the four mandates. The most common RIN, a D6 RIN, generated from corn ethanol, can only be used toward the total renewable fuel mandate. Adding to flexibility, all RINs have a two calendar year lifespan. Unused RINs can be carried over to the next year with some limitations. The government publishes extensive aggregated monthly data on RIN generation and renewable fuel production. It's also responsible for making decisions on small refinery hardship exemptions. Exemptions lower the number of RINs needed to satisfy the annual mandates. Currently, small refinery hardship exemption decisions are not make public. This makes analyzing RIN supply and demand challenging. Earlier this month, S&P Global Platts and other news organizations broke news as to how many small refinery exemptions were issued. In a letter to Senator Grassley, the government confirmed that it had granted 19 out of 20 waivers for 2016. Further, for 2017, 29 of 33 petitioners were granted exemptions with the four remaining still pending. In total, 48 exemptions have been granted over the past two years with a total exempted renewable fuel volume obligation of approximately 2.25 billion RINs. Recent court decisions have also had an effect on RIN supply. A few cases including one that was decided by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals last Friday have overturned denials of waiver petitions. In Ergon-West Virginia vs. EPA, the court vacated a denial of the small refinery exemption, saying that it was arbitrary and capricious. If this decision opens the door to more litigation that leads to restatement of retired RINs, supply demand in prices would be affected. When compared to other policy-driven environmental commodity markets, a key distinguishing characteristic of the RINs market is that it is a floor and trade system rather than a cap and trade system. This ensures that a minimum volume of biofuels is blended into the transportation pool. Cap and trade sets a cap for behavior that the government seeks to limit and penalizes companies that exceed the cap. On the other hand, under the RFS, the government sets the floor and companies are penalized if they don't blend enough to meet their RVOs or do not acquire a sufficient amount of RINs in lieu of blending. RINs of the same year and category are priced the same anywhere in the country. RINs do not have the same complications across state lines that renewable energy certificates often have. Unlike the RINs market, renewable energy certificate policies are set by individual states and require electricity suppliers to account for a certain percentage of the final sales customers with particular kinds of renewable power. Renewable energy generation creates certificates which are regional tracking systems. Individual states decide targets and which types of certificates can be used for compliance. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the statement at such an important time. I welcome any questions you might have. [The prepared statement of Mr. Lavinsky follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Mr. Shimkus. Thank you very much and I thank you all for your testimony and we'll now move to the question asking portion of the hearing. I will begin the questioning and recognize myself for 5 minutes. I understand RINs are used by obligated parties to demonstrate compliance with the renewable volume obligations set by the EPA and that those volumes are based upon energy information and administrative numbers and projections. Ms. Dunphy, are those Energy Information Administration projections and, by extension, the RVOs based solely on past biofuel production levels or do they reflect realistic growth in biofuel production capacity? Ms. Dunphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The annual RVOs are set by EPA using the EIA forecast for gasoline and diesel demand for the coming year, and if you think of the way the allocations work among the refineries, the EPA's job is to come up with a percentage that each refinery can use to calculate their obligation and there's a percentage for each of the four compliance categories that they multiply how much gasoline and diesel they may buy. To come up with that, they forecast what renewable fuel is going to be available for introduction into the U.S. market. That becomes the numerator of the fraction. The denominator is gasoline and diesel. You come up with a percentage for all four categories. So it actually is a forward looking fraction, if you will, that creates this percentage that the oil companies use in the next year. Mr. Shimkus. Thank you. Mr. Lavinsky, in your testimony you note that in your 10 years of analyzing biofuels you have seen RIN prices go from pennies to as much as $1.40. What usually causes such changes to the price? Is it market related or more affected by regulations and policy actions? Mr. Lavinsky. Thank you for your question. Historically, large movements in RIN prices can be tied to spikes in ethanol prices due to higher feedstock costs. Higher mandates also contribute. In 2013 when RIN prices reached their peak, corn prices were over $7 per bushel and they're currently only around $3.25 now, and while ethanol prices were about $1.18 per gallon more than they are now. There are usually small policy bumps in prices each year as new mandates are proposed in the spring and finalized around November. But they're not comparable in size to the spike 5 years ago. Currently, the low RIN prices now are the result of a record domestic ethanol production and consumption and this abnormally high RIN bank. Mr. Shimkus. Thank you. Some stakeholders had expressed frustration with the transparency of the RIN market--I think we've heard that today from some of you all--including what information is available to the public, when it's available, and what information is deemed confidential business information and who is trading in the market, among other concerns. Is there a RIN market transparency issue and, if so, quickly, what would be some of the benefits of a more transparent market? And this is for the whole table. So Mr. Yacobucci, if you would start and then we'll just go down the table. Mr. Yacobucci. Certainly, there is limited information that's available. For example, EPA maintains a spreadsheet of literally thousands of companies that are required to comply with various fuel requirements under the Clean Air Act. It is difficult from that current database to figure out which RIN participants are individual trading companies versus subsidiaries of a large company and so being able to suss out who is performing, trading, and participating in the MTS as an independent third party versus a subsidiary of a biofuel company or an oil company with refining. Those sorts of information are very difficult to suss out currently. Mr. Shimkus. OK. Let me go to Ms. Dunphy. Ms. Dunphy. Yes. The other---- Mr. Shimkus. And I only have a minute left so try to be real---- Ms. Dunphy. Yes. Other panelists are probably more expert on this---- Mr. Shimkus. OK. Ms. Dunphy [continuing]. But there are private contracts where the RINs transact on the intraday basis. So it's not public information. Mr. Shimkus. OK. Mr. Niznik. Mr. Niznik. Yes. Argus Media is a price reporting agency that tracks data and marketplace transactions. We track RINs transactions from real market participants' reporting of actual trades. So that's how we gather data on pricing. Mr. Shimkus. OK. Mr. Niznik. And still, even at that level, we can't have the understanding of full volumes of the marketplace at any one given time that would be able to elucidate any issues on market manipulation. Mr. Shimkus. Dr. Lade. Mr. Lade. I echo a lot of the other participants' statements here. However, I would say, more on the transparency side it's really the policy signal that has been driving much of the volatility recently. Mr. Shimkus. Mr. Lavinsky. Mr. Lavinsky. Some companies occasionally report that they received a waiver in the public filings. So sometimes we get additional information through the public filings that wouldn't otherwise be available. Mr. Shimkus. That's awesome. Thank you very much. I yield back my time and turn to the ranking member, Mr. Tonko, for 5 minutes. Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Yacobucci, thank you for your work with CRS. EPA signed a memorandum of understanding with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 2016. As I understand it, only EPA has the authority over the RIN market. Is that true? Mr. Yacobucci. Currently that is the case that EPA has the only regulatory authority. Congress has not granted CFTC specific authority to regulate that market. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. So rules that govern other markets-- regulations prohibiting speculative practices like spoofing where a buyer initiates an order for a commodity they do not intend to complete for the purposes of influencing the price of that commodity--do not apply to the RIN market. Is that correct? Mr. Yacobucci. As I understand it, but this is more out of my area of expertise. I am not as familiar with CFTC regulations. Mr. Tonko. Is there any way to track this type of thing with EPA's monitoring system? Mr. Yacobucci. Certainly that has been one of the criticisms is because there is such limited data publicly available that it's hard to tell, again, who's participating and what actions they might be taking. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. And if Congress were to subject this market to a regulator, would the CFTC be the most appropriate regulator? Mr. Yacobucci. I would defer to Congress on their decisions on that. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Proper functioning of markets requires transparency and market participants need to have reliable information about prices and supplies. You point out in your testimony there is little public information on the volume or price of RIN trades. This doesn't sound very transparent to me. How can buyers and sellers be sure they are trading at a fair price? Mr. Yacobucci. I would defer to some of the other witnesses on that question. Mr. Tonko. OK. Anyone on the panel want to take a stab at a comment there? Mr. Niznik. Well, the price-reporting agencies do have the ability to do price discovery and most of the transactions that occur, both from buyer and seller, are usually benchmarked to RINs prices published by either my company or, if I am being generous, Mr. Lavinsky's company also, and those are private price discovery agencies, though, requiring subscriptions. Mr. Tonko. Anyone else want to comment on that? Mr. Lavinsky. I am part of the analytics team, not the pricing team, but I can discuss it with them and provide you with an answer for the record after the hearing. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. And Dr. Lade? Mr. Lade. I would argue that most of the uncertainty is around trading volumes rather than the price. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. RINs are created and sold within a compliance year with some limited ability to carry over some RINs into the next compliance year. What effect does a delay in the release of the annual RVO have on the RIN markets? Anyone? Ms. Dunphy. I will go ahead and try to answer that, sir. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Ms. Dunphy. So the RVO, more recently in the last couple of years, have come out on a timely basis--by November the 30th is what's required by law. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. And we are referring to the RIN market as if there is only one type of RIN. But, of course, that's not the case. RINs attach to biodiesel or advanced biofuels trade at different prices than RINs or conventional ethanol. What is the effect of RIN prices on the development and production of advanced biofuels? Mr. Niznik. I will answer that. I work on due diligence for people who are investing particularly in advanced biofuel projects. For advanced biofuel projects that might use an advanced RIN or a D4 RIN or a cellulosic RIN--those are the top three category RINs, the advanced biofuel RINs--the variability in that area and, more importantly, on certainty of the policy moving forward are critical because none of those projects can go forward without the RFS RINs price incentive making those fuels possible to be blended in the marketplace economically. Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Has RIN market volatility affected all biofuel markets to the same degree? Mr. Niznik. No, it has not, sir. The biofuel markets for D4 RINs from biodiesel are more stable than the biofuel markets for D6 RINs from ethanol primarily because of D4's ability within the rules to replace the costs of a D6. They are a market setter. When the D6 RIN is short, you replace them with a D4 RIN so that if it's a short D6 marketplace, the D6 RIN is now suddenly at the D4 price. But the D6 marketplace is long and oversupplied, then it can drift downward to another level and so volatility can be higher in that space. It almost has a binary value. Essentially, under current market conditions if you had more than enough D6 RINs, the D6 RINs would be essentially around 3 cents or zero because it's very, very economical to blend ethanol to gasoline. But when that marketplace is short because of the regulations or otherwise, it will jump up to the D4 price. Mr. Tonko. Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Shimkus. Clear as mud, right? Clear as mud. You got that. [Laughter.] Mr. Niznik. That's how it is. Sorry. Mr. Shimkus. The chair recognizes the chairman of the full committee, Chairman Walden, for 5 minutes. Mr. Walden. Yes. Thank you for this enlightening discussion. I am sitting here wondering what all this costs consumers but we'll get to that at another time. As an Oregonian, we've had a lot of talk about biomass and what we can do with the wastes from the forests and all--and I know, Ms. Dunphy, in your testimony you talked about the inconsistencies and barriers that prevent some renewable fuels from qualifying for RINs. Do you think we are missing out on some opportunities to better integrate woody biomass into the fuel supply due to the way the RFS regulations are written? Ms. Dunphy. Yes, and I think history has proven that. We only have one company today in the U.S. after all these years of the program using woody biomass as a feedstock to produce a renewable fuel that makes RINs. Mr. Walden. Well, that is something we'll look at, I guess. Probably have to change it congressionally, right? Is that something---- Ms. Dunphy. I think we need clarification in the current regulatory language to enable EPA to determine which of the woody biomass feedstocks falls under the existing categories. So the pathways exist today but they need clarification. Mr. Walden. OK. Mr. Yacobucci. And I would just add that there is a much more complex definition of what qualifies as qualified biomass under the 2007 law than was in the original 2005 law and that has added to that complexity. So there are regulatory definition issues but there's also the statutory definition as well. Mr. Walden. I remember those debates on this committee when some of the advocates for this tried to argue that woody biomass of a Federal forest was somehow not renewable energy but if it was on the other side of the line--the same trees falling different sides--then it would be and it had no scientific basis. It was all political and results in this complicated mess. Mr. Lavinsky and Yacobucci, what are the key challenges you see facing this RINs market now and what do we need to do here, if anything, from your perspectives. Some may not want to suggest policy so I will ask it in the other way. What are the challenges facing the RINs market? Mr. Lavinsky. I would say one challenge is managing the opposing opinions as to whether RIN obligations need to be reallocated from the granting of small refinery waivers. Small refinery waivers are mostly issued after the year has ended and obligated parties have already submitted their RINs and compliance. So, to date, waivers have been issued retroactively. Retired RINs have been reinstated. But RIN obligations have not been reallocated. Mr. Yacobucci. And I would just add to that, it's not just the small refinery exemptions. It is the timeline for rulemakings. It is the level that EPA sets because under the statute the EPA has the authority to lower the targets from what they were--the targets set in law. All of these different pieces, whether it's the specific waivers against the overall caps, individual waivers for companies, whether you're talking about refiners, you're talking about biofuel producers, all the participants in the market have raised issues in one form or other about uncertainty and that's what drives a lot of this, and Mr. Niznik has talked about how that's affected the markets and there's just all these questions about what is the current demand for fuel, given the different levels as they change. Mr. Walden. So for any of you, what's your assessment with how well the EPA has overseen the RINs market and implementation and where is there room for improvement there? Ms. Dunphy. So I think the EPA does a pretty good job at administering the regulations as they were written. But the RIN market oversight is missing. There's really not any oversight of the trading activity of RINs by the---- Mr. Walden. Anywhere? Is there anywhere? Ms. Dunphy. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Walden. Should there be? Ms. Dunphy. That's your call. Mr. Walden. Oh, I see how this works. Yes. Anybody else want to weigh in on that topic, about the EPA's oversight and what we should or shouldn't do? Mr. Niznik. There's some hardworking folks down there and they are administering---- Mr. Walden. Oh, yes. Mr. Niznik [continuing]. And they're administering very well. If you look at the public record on the rulemakings you can see a lot of input from multiple departments, some of which I've worked with under consulting before and there's a broad base of information being put into the decision making from both the USDA and EIA at every step. So the ability to make a good decision as best as humanly possible is there, in my opinion, based on the regulations and the review process necessary to do so. Whether or not the ultimate human decision at the end is qualifiably good is up to this body, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Walden. Well said. Thank you. All right. That's my time. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Shimkus. The chairman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. McNerney for 5 minutes. You don't want to go? Mr. McNerney. I do. I just thought that the ranking member of the full committee was here. Thank you. Well, I hear from the testimony this morning that the RINs volatility is due to three factors. One is commodity prices, one is uncertainty in the market, and the other is fraud. Is there anything I am missing in that list? Mr. Niznik. There are other fuel quality regulations and state and local incentives for biofuels usage or petroleum usage that can weigh in onto the RINs price. Mr. McNerney. So it might be good then to have Federal standards that override state rules? Mr. Niznik. If you want another civil war. [Laughter.] Mr. Shimkus. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. McNerney. Sure. Mr. Shimkus. But isn't that like when a state might provide an incentive through a local percentage or tax incentive or something that--it's not just a fuel incentive. It could be just in a policy incentive? Mr. Niznik. Yes, sir. That's what I am talking about. Either a tax that is for production, taxes that are for sales can weigh very heavily and on the national level one of the most important factors on RINs price is the biodiesel blenders' tax credit, which can come back retroactively or can come back actively in any given year, depending on the actions of this body. Mr. McNerney. OK. Thanks. Reclaiming my time. Some of the solutions I hear are transparency, rational consistency, referring to Ms. Dunphy's list of items, and clear, predictable simple rules. Are there other factors that would be helpful? Ms. Dunphy. If you can do clear concise long-term rules that would make everyone in the market very happy. Mr. McNerney. So how has the volatility of the past 3 years compared to prior years before that? Mr. Niznik. Are you saying price volatility, sir? Mr. McNerney. Right. RINs price volatility. Mr. Niznik. Actually, RINs price volatility was relatively calm, I would say, during 2016 and 2015. But at the end of 2016, with the administrative change, there's been a large amount of policy uncertainty-driven price behavior. Mr. McNerney. But you mentioned that the EPA's guidance helped stabilize the market. Mr. Niznik. In 2015. Yes, sir. Mr. McNerney. Oh, so that's---- Mr. Niznik. That's the last time things got kind of rational for a while. Yes, sir. Mr. McNerney. OK. Thank you. I didn't understand that. So how much have the small refinery waivers contributed to the volatility? Ms. Dunphy. Ms. Dunphy. So small refinery waivers, as has already been said, are given retrospectively. So they are granted after the compliance year is over with. So to some extent the news of the waivers did impact the market, which--because they weren't aware of the waivers prior to those most recent announcements. But the waivers themself are retrospective. So individual waivers don't have an impact on the market when they're granted. Mr. McNerney. OK. Thank you. Dr. Lade, you testified that the consumer prices go one to one--consumer price impacts--but are all refineries impacted similarly or do some refineries impacted more drastically by RINs' market than others? Mr. Lade. The empirical evidence to date is that all refiners are--in the economics literature all refiners are affected similarly and I've looked at--again, more data and more research is necessary, particularly looking at markets and there are members of the academic community looking at that. But by and large, there's been a consistent consensus that on average these wholesale prices are adjusting to compensate for refiner costs. Mr. McNerney. Aren't the large refineries able to produce their own RINs? Aren't they affected less, or even make a profit off RINs? Mr. Lade. Correct. However, you're either going to produce your own RINs in house if that is the most cost-effective way to comply with this or you--if it's not cost-effective for you to comply then you will purchase RINs from those who can produce RINs even cheaper than this. And so this is the beauty behind the market-based mechanism here that it allows parties to decide whether it's more cost- effective to get into the biofuel business or to just purchase RINs from people who are better at producing biofuel. And so either way, that cost is borne. It's just whether it's borne through biofuel production or through RIN purchases. Mr. McNerney. Yes, but the problem in my mind is that the large producers are producing RINs and selling them so they're getting a double benefit whereas the small refiners are having to buy RINs. So they're paying for it. Mr. Lade. That's a great point. Similar as to the side where when you're having to pay for these RINs and you then are compensated for that through higher wholesale gasoline prices. Whether or not these oil refiners who are producing RINs upstream through biofuel production, whether they actually get to keep that depends on what happens to downstream consumer prices and work of my own has shown that ethanol prices are actually being--this incentive is being passed through to consumers. Therefore, it wouldn't actually be impacting those refiners. The consumers are benefiting from the RINs on the ethanol side. Mr. McNerney. OK. I don't quite follow that, but I will yield back my time. [Laughter.] Mr. Shimkus. I love this hearing. So the gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia for 5 minutes. Mr. McKinley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a point of personal privilege. I would like to recognize in the audience-- he was my mentor when I joined the Energy and Commerce Committee--Ed Whitfield back there. Thank you. Thanks, and you have showed you have not deviated one bit from your interest in energy. So thank you for coming. Mr. Lavinsky, you kind of took the wind out of my sales. I wanted to talk about that Fourth Circuit--the ruling on Friday, because it overturned the previous denial from the EPA for Ergon, which is just a boutique refinery in West Virginia, and they've been burdened with this. Think about for all of us to understand this, here we have a boutique refinery, 23,000 barrels a day, and they're faced with the same issues that, like, Marathon is. Marathon refinery. It's a hundred times larger. That doesn't seem right. We should be able to differentiate between these and provide these hardship grants, waivers, for some of these small--think, a hundred times larger, because we know that for Ergon in West Virginia it's the third biggest expense they have behind raw materials and labor, and what they--the biofuels industry has argued that granting these small refineries like the one at Ergon this hardship exemption was going to result in demand destruction. So I want to go to Ms. Dunphy and say in a kind of a yes or no, if you could, please, do you believe that granting these small refinery hardship exemptions result in less renewable fuel being included? Ms. Dunphy. So as I mentioned earlier, the small refinery waivers are granted retrospectively. So the compliance year has already passed. But every refiner assumes that they're going to be an obligated party during that year and they will continue to blend renewable fuels and buy RINs as needed because they don't know that they're going to get the exemption at the 12th hour when they go to report to the EPA by March the 31st of the following year. So I suggest that you all definitely talk to the small refineries in the U.S. and ask them if they have changed their blending policies because they think they're going to be exempted for the year and I think you will find that they have not changed their blending policy. They continue to blend. They continue to purchase RINs. What they do is focus on current year RINs rather than the 20 percent prior year. So if they get the exemption they still will be able to use the current year RINs in the next year. So that puts more RINs into the market. We understand that. But does it destruct the demand of the current year? I would say that if you look at the RIN data through June we are at the same production level that we were in 2017 and we are halfway toward meeting the 2018 compliance RVOs. So whether that will hold true for the entire year I don't know. Mr. McKinley. The EIA had come out--I saw some information yesterday on the EIA that said that actually the blending over the first part of this year--there was 6 months, 7 months--we are actually up over last year--that actually we are increasing. So despite having all of these small refinery exemptions, is this a confirmation that small refinery exemptions do not destroy the demand for renewable fuel? Ms. Dunphy. We should remember that refiners would probably blend ethanol regardless of whether there was an RFS or not because ethanol represents a very good source of octane. It helps them meet their gasoline, sulfur, and benzene requirements. So they have an incentive to blend ethanol and they're going to do that. So I would say that the data through 6 months for the EMTS data that's published that anyone can see--it's public information--shows that we are on track with last year. Whether that will continue through the rest of the year, I can't predict. Mr. McKinley. Thank you. Mr. Yacobucci. Mr. Yacobucci. Just one open question is whether or not a prior year's waiver creates a supply, potentially--and increased supply of carry forward RINs that a refiner can use, because a refiner can use either this year or last year's RIN to meet this year's obligation and that's the question going forward is if there's more of last year's RINs available what does that do to the market? I think that's still an open question. Mr. McKinley. Let's stay with you just for a minute. With the original intent of this RFS and RIN program, have we achieved that objective that we set out on that or have we created a confusing and costly commodity system? What would be your opinion? Mr. Yacobucci. In terms of congressional intent, I wouldn't speculate. I will say that there are no congressional findings or specific stated goals in the statute. And so various players have attributed various goals to the program, whether that is increasing agricultural production, raising farm incomes, reducing imports of fuel. Certainly, increased biofuel use has displaced petroleum use. There have been economic benefits to agricultural states from the program. If you consider those to be the goals of the RFS, then yes, they have been successful. Is the program complicated? Certainly. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman's time is expired. Mr. McKinley. My time has expired. I yield back. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Harper, for 5 minutes. Mr. Harper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you each for being here. It is a topic every time I read it I think I come away and study it--I come away more confused than when I started that study. So thank you very much. Mr. Yacobucci, if I could ask you and I certainly agree with what Mr. McKinley has said. But I wanted you to just try to educate me as best you can. Give me a brief explanation of the terms RIN long and RIN short so I can understand that. Mr. Yacobucci. I would defer to Mr. Niznik on that. It's his term. Mr. Harper. OK. Mr. Niznik. Mr. Niznik. I apologize for confusing the committee. I come from the trading world, which has got its own language. Mr. Harper. Yes. Mr. Niznik. When we say long, we mean over supplied. Mr. Harper. OK. Mr. Niznik. And when we say short, we mean under supplied. So to apply that to Ms. Dunphy's statement from before, if previous year obligations got waivered under a small refinery exception and those RINs were suddenly dumped back into the market, it could cause a case of long or over supply of RINs that weren't expected to be in the market. Mr. Harper. OK. So explain why some companies are RIN long and some are RIN short a little further so that--if they have an over supply---- Mr. Niznik. Yes. You would say they're over supplied for what they might need for their obligation for this year. Mr. Harper. OK. Mr. Niznik. So they may say oh--or if they perceive they will be long--and this is more important is the perception--if they perceive they're going to be over supplied then they're not willing to pay a certain price. They're going to depress the market price because they're less interested in a purchase. Mr. Harper. And certainly when you're looking at some of the smaller refineries, for instance, and all of these waivers are done retrospectively, as Ms. Dunphy pointed out--the way that it's set up--what would happen if all of a sudden they were done prospectively. You have been getting them each year and you just planned ahead. You knew, hey, you have done that--probably going to be like that next year--we are going to go ahead and tell you now on the front end. How would that impact it, Ms. Dunphy? Ms. Dunphy. According to the regulations today, the EPA would take that into consideration. In the fraction I mentioned earlier where the renewable fuels are the numerator and gasoline and diesel demand is the denominator. Today, those small refineries are in there because the EPA doesn't know that they're not going to be exempted. Mr. Harper. OK. Ms. Dunphy. If they get exempted, they come out of the denominator. That makes the overall fraction greater for all of the other obligated parties who don't qualify under that small refinery. So, obviously, Mr. Niznik, jumping back to that, companies that are RIN long obviously have a competitive advantage over the those that are RIN short? Mr. Niznik. Yes. So that's a business strategy that they may employ to be--to take advantage of the rules as they're written, just like someone might take advantage of the tax code or any other code. Yes. Mr. Harper. Sure. All right. Well, let's talk for a minute regarding RIN fraud, and I know that's an issue. What instances are unreported and what other types of fraud are possible in the future and what are the implications of this fraud? Who would like to answer that? Ms. Dunphy. Ms. Dunphy. I will go ahead and answer that. So the RIN fraud cases have decreased in number over the years and many of the RIN fraud cases involve a period of time when the RFS was relatively new to the market, so 2010, 2011, 2012. I would say the current instances of potential RIN invalidity relate to exports of renewable fuel for which RINs are not retired because remember that renewable fuel can be blended into petroleum, gasoline, or diesel and that blend can be exported from the United States and calculating how much renewable fuel is in that blend is difficult. But yet, it's required under the regulations that a certain amount of renewable fuel RINs be retired. I would say RIN fraud of the future it's all about feedstock and use of the fuel. Mr. Harper. OK. Explain that a little further. Ms. Dunphy. OK. So RIN fraud, basically, doesn't happen on the use side. It happens at the generated side. So if I use a feedstock that does not qualify, I shouldn't be making RINs. If I take the feedstock that qualifies and I use a process and I produce a fuel but I put it into an ocean-going vessel, for example, I am supposed to retire those RINs or I shouldn't have made them in the first place. So I see the RIN fraud potential of the future being feedstock or use, but it's much less today than it was in the past. Mr. Shimkus. Gregg---- Mr. Harper. Thank you. Mr. Shimkus [continuing]. Mr. Lavinsky wanted to respond to that question. Mr. Harper. Yes. Mr. Lavinsky. Thank you very much. Now, one other thing--when you asked for what occurrences occurred in the past, is that a few years back--a handful of individuals and companies would generate and sell RINs for biodiesel that they did not produce---- Mr. Harper. OK. Mr. Lavinsky [continuing]. And that's how they got the RINs in their hands and sold them off and put them into the market. Mr. Harper. Thank you. Now I yield back. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Olson, for 5 minutes. Mr. Olson. I thank the chair, and welcome to our five witnesses. A special howdy to the one Texan on the panel, Sandra Dunphy. She lives in Kingwood, Texas, where Ted Poe is her congressman, and my colleagues worry about me bragging about the Houston Astros, World Series champions. Rest assured---- Mr. Shimkus. Who? Who? Mr. Olson [continuing]. I can't brag about them. Ms. Dunphy can brag for me and she will, she will, she will. Ms. Dunphy. Happy to. Mr. Olson. An Astros repeat aside, over the years we've heard stories about fraud in the RIN markets. One story I read was titled, ``The Fake Factory that Pumped Out Real Money,'' about a company that made out of thin air 60 million gallons of biodiesel. Wow. Ms. Dunphy, you said that RINs fraud is much less than today, to Mr. Harper's question. Can you talk about the steps that have been taken to prevent RINs fraud and whether you think more is needed like you talked about with Mr. Harper, please? Ms. Dunphy. Yes. Mr. Olson. Also you're on deck too, Mr. Yacobucci. Ms. Dunphy. Yes, sir. Happy to. So the making RINs out of thin air, there's two things that really transformed the marketplace since the time that all of this happened. The first was the EPA initiated a quality assurance plan program, which is optimal for producers to participate and they hire a company like mine to come in and audit what they're doing to make sure they're complying with the rules and we probably have the most stringent quality assurance plan out there in the marketplace today. The second thing that happened was because the obligated parties had to replace RINs and pay penalties, they do today and started doing even then a much better job at due diligence. So they will research all of the producers of the RINs who they are going to use for compliance. Mr. Olson. Thank you. Comments, Mr. Yacobucci? Mr. Yacobucci. One thing I would just note is there's necessarily a time lag when the fraud occurs to when we necessarily even know about it. EPA is doing its various inspections, looking at their data. State inspectors may be going out to these different facilities. And then EPA needs to make a decision with the Justice Department whether or not this is simply a civil violation of the Clean Air Act because Title 2 of the Clean Air Act where the RFS exists only employs civil violations or whether there is criminal action, in which case there's a whole additional amount of time where the Justice Department needs to do their own investigation. And so as I said, there's necessarily this time lag and so in some of the cases that we are hearing about most recently still go back to that earlier time because they involve wire fraud, tax fraud, and other sorts of things that are outside of EPA's purview and rest with the Justice Department. Mr. Olson. Thank you. The next question is for you, Mr. Lavinsky. This is no news, but there has been some serious volatility in RINs prices in recent years. What sticks out in my mind January of 2013 to March of that same year RINs prices were about 1 to 2 cents in January, spiked up to almost over $1 2 months later in March. A local refiner back home, on paper, lost $600 million in value just because of the RINs issue. But now the price is low and that's great. But can you talk about the swings and what drives these RINs swings and how we could prevent them or moderate them? Mr. Lavinsky. I could talk about historically. Like I said earlier, historically the big spike that occurred in 2013 was associated with super high ethanol prices and feedstock costs. Corn was $7 per bushel, more than twice as much as it is now. So having the really high ethanol and having an increase in the mandate that year--I believe there was a 9 percent increase in the mandate from 2012 to 2013. So there was a combination of an increase in the mandate coupled with sky-high ethanol prices and feedstock costs and that's what drove that huge spike in RINs, which is incomparable. It has not repeated itself. There has been volatility over the last 3 years but nothing like it was in 2013. Mr. Olson. Another question--do you think market transparency can add the clarity to what happens in a few years when EPA takes over the settling the mandates? Do you think that market transparency helps EPA out or hurts them? How can we prepare for EPA taking over in a couple of years? Mr. Lavinsky. Just speaking generally without speaking about the EPA, speaking generally, transparency helps everybody out because it's easy to determine how many RINs are out there, what the true supply and demand are, and if everybody knows what the RIN bank is and how many RINs are on the market then it's easier to pick a price that's fair for everybody. Mr. Olson. Thank you. And one final question, Ms. Dunphy--will the Astros repeat World Series champions? Ms. Dunphy. Absolutely. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman's time has expired. [Laughter.] The chair now recognizes the other gentleman from Texas, who's been deep diving on this issue with me all this Congress, so Mr. Flores for 5 minutes. Mr. Flores. Mr. Chairman, thanks for holding this hearing. As has been said before, this is the fifth in a series of hearings that we've had as we look at our nation's transportation fuel system. I think that America needs to be a world leader when it comes to producing efficient vehicles and also having the fuel system that will properly power those as we move forward, and I appreciate this subcommittee's work as we look forward to examine the market and regulatory environments that impact our nation's fuels as we move further into the 21st century. Some of the reflections that I've had that I've learned so far that were interesting, coming out of this hearing, Ms. Dunphy's comment that even though we've had the small refinery exemptions with the--the EIA numbers show that ethanol demand has still been higher than--or at least equal to last year-- than even with that small refinery exemption. So that's been interesting. Ms. Dunphy, as we all know, many of the statutory provisions and requirements of the RFS programmers sunsetted after 2022. In your view, what does the RIN ecosystem look like after 2022? Ms. Dunphy. I think that's a really good question. Certainly, Congress gave EPA more latitude at that point in time for how they structure the program, going forward. But they do need to take into the consideration the things you ask them to look at--the RFS impact on the economy, on infrastructure, on air quality, water quality, employment, et cetera, et cetera, and to be honest with you, I think that the EPA, in setting standards year after year after year, it's quite burdensome to the staff and it takes a lot of their resources to do that--that they otherwise are not helping their constituents to try to register and do things correctly under the program. So somehow make it a more simple program and easier to administer. Mr. Flores. Would you agree that the ecosystem becomes much less transparent and much cloudier? There's no certainty whatsoever after 2022 for pretty much every player in this market, whether you're a farmer growing the corn or whether you're a refiner, even an automaker, because you don't know what kind of fuels you're going to have. Would you agree that-- -- Ms. Dunphy. I would tend to agree that there's a lot of concern as to what will happen to the program after that point in time. Mr. Flores. All right. Since uncertainty is bad for the market, to the extent that Congress can help create that certainty we are better off, I would think. Does anybody disagree with that? OK. Second question--Mr. Lavinsky, as you pointed out, government policy--and Mr. Niznik said the same thing is that government policy impacts RIN prices. Can you give me examples of how government policy has impacted RINs prices versus how government policies impacted any other energy commodity? You can pick the one that you're most comfortable with. Mr. Lavinsky. OK. Well, policy, I guess, with biofuels, with, certainly, the mandates. The mandates of government policy and they--according to the RFS they're supposed to go up every year and as they go up it requires companies to do more blending. Mr. Flores. OK. Mr. Lavinsky. And that has an impact on RIN prices. With regard to the other types of programs, I am part of a larger group that includes a team on emissions. I probably would refer that question to them and provide you with a full answer. Mr. Flores. OK. Yes, if you can answer that supplementally that would be great. Mr. Yacobucci, what impact, if any, has the RIN market and RIN prices had on advanced biofuel production? Mr. Yacobucci. I think it's probably worth turning that question around a little bit and I think it's more important to say that the RIN market for cellulosic fuels has responded to EPA's repeated reductions in that part of the mandate. So you have these different subcategories--the cellulosic biofuel category, which was originally scheduled in the statute to be the lion's share--16 billion gallons out of the 36 billion gallons that would be required in 2022. But each successive year EPA has made very drastic reductions in---- Mr. Flores. And that's because we don't have a way to produce it. Yes, I mean---- Mr. Yacobucci. Because---- Mr. Flores [continuing]. The technology is not there. But have RIN prices helped to encourage advanced biofuel production? Mr. Yacobucci. I would refer to my colleagues, if they may comment. Mr. Flores. OK. Mr. Niznik. Yes. Mr. Flores. Mr. Niznik, they have? OK. All right. It looks like I am down to 3 seconds so I am going to yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. Mr. Shimkus. The chair thanks the gentleman. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg, for 5 minutes. Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the panel for being here. And Ms. Dunphy, I refuse to ask you the question that Representative Olson left for me to ask you about Verlander and Cy Young. [Laughter.] It just goes on and on, the discussion today. As a theologian, thinking through the Creation story I don't remember that in any of the 7 days that the RIN was created. I will have to go back to the fall of man and see if that was the forbidden fruit. We'll see what happens. But Ms. Dunphy---- Ms. Dunphy. The RIN was right after the mosquito. [Laughter.] Mr. Walberg. Right after the mosquito. OK. I will check that out, too. According to EPA, since December of 2010 it has issued 37 notices of violations regarding RIN fraud. A couple of years ago, EPA issued regulations creating a quality assurance program aimed at cleaning up some of the RIN fraud problems. Do you believe that the quality assurance program has done a good job of eliminating the problems? Ms. Dunphy. I think it's done a very good job. But it is a voluntary program. A producer has to be willing to participate in the program as an auditor. We are available to producers but they contact us to say hey, I want to participate in the program. It's not an across the board program. As much as Weaver would love that, because we'd get more work, but it's on a case by case basis, basically, and I think the QAP has helped reduce RIN fraud, yes. Mr. Walberg. Well, are there then other areas of RIN fraud that need to be addressed that are missing now? What might you propose to address this? Ms. Dunphy. I think that probably the easiest is the export of renewable fuels for which RINs are not retired and I know that EPA is working hard with Homeland Security to look closer at exports to determine if they contain renewable fuel. Mr. Walberg. OK. The RIN market is different than any other commodity trading markets. Some have suggested that installing a governing structure to oversee it would help increase transparency and decrease fraud. How much buyer beware still exists in the RINs marketplace? Ms. Dunphy. I think there's still quite a bit, especially for the advanced biofuels. As those transactions are being negotiated, it's the only transactions where the seller must tell the buyer who the renewable fuel producers are of the RINs, whereas on D6 or corn ethanol RINs it's pretty much everyone will accept them. So the companies have blocked lists in EMTS. This is probably something we haven't talked about. But refiners doing their due diligence have the option to block certain producers and so therefore RINs from those producers can't come into their EMTS account and they use this feature of EMTS after doing due diligence on the marketplace on the producers. Mr. Walberg. Added to that, would a governing body be helpful and why? Ms. Dunphy. I do believe it probably would be helpful. But it would be an enormous task to set up a RIN training platform that was administered by either EPA or another body because there are different vintages of RINs. There's the different producers of RINs and there's different RIN codes themself. So it would be somewhat complex, but it's possible, I guess, and it would be helpful. Mr. Walberg. Mr. Niznik, I saw you respond to that. Would you like to add something here? Mr. Niznik. I would like to add, for the record, since this is a public record and it should be true, that I am a member of the State of Texas also and please pass on a note to Mr. Olson to that effect, that he had more representation here than he thought before. I would agree that there have been multiple attempts, I must say, to put RINs on trading boards, both the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and its previous incarnations and then the International Commodity Exchange--ICE. Both Argus and, I believe, Platts have participated in trying to be paper benchmarks--to try to be a benchmarkable RIN that you could trade as a future and I would say, without speaking for Mr. Lavinsky's company, that it hasn't been particularly successful in the private sector to attempt to do something that would assure some sort of broader transparency on a board-traded commodity level. Mr. Walberg. OK. Ms. Dunphy, I see I have 8 seconds left. So I would probably better not open it up. But I thank you. I yield back. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Carter, for 5 minutes. Mr. Carter. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all of you for being here today. I appreciate it, although I will have to admit it is as clear as mud. It's pretty tough sitting here trying to figure out is this really necessary. Seriously. Ms. Dunphy, you look like you want to answer that. [Laughter.] Ms. Dunphy. Trying to figure out how to answer that question fairly diplomatically, and keep my job--yes. Mr. Niznik. We make a lot of money because of this complex---- Mr. Carter. Yes, I know. It's just---- Mr. Niznik. Thank you. By the way---- Mr. Carter [continuing]. If we created something just to-- -- Ms. Dunphy. Yes. Mr. Carter [continuing]. Just to create something. Ms. Dunphy. The more complex the regulations the more work we have. Mr. Niznik. Yes, my kids are going to go to college because of you all. Thank you. Mr. Carter. I think at the end of the day I think Thoreau is just turning over in his grave right now, just--yes. Simplify, simplify, simplify, and I am just trying to figure out. But in all seriousness, I will ask questions about it. I am just interested, Mr. Yacobucci, you mentioned in your testimony that there's been concerns with RIN generation since the program's inception and that there's duplicate counting and fraudulent RINs on the market. How can it be manipulated? I don't really understand how you can manipulate it. Mr. Yacobucci. To the first question, I will say yes, there have been concerns going forward. EPA's stated goal of when they came out with the RFS 2 and the EMTS was to address some of those questions. Whether or not the current system has succeeded, it's still an open question. To your original question, is it necessary, if you want a market-based system you do need a market. There are simpler systems you could come up with. But they may not provide the flexibility that a market does. So that's a trade- off. In terms of your question about how fraud can occur, I think Ms. Dunphy has gone through a list of some of those topics. I wouldn't speculate on ways going forward folks could do it. But, certainly, the ways that EPA has listed are production that has not actually happened where basically a company has just on paper said they have produced fuel that they haven't produced, companies that have produced fuel that doesn't actually qualify because of the feedstock requirements but they've attested that it has, and companies that have exported fuel that's otherwise not eligible because in any case where a fuel isn't eligible those RINs need to be retired and if they're not retired then, those RINs are invalid. Mr. Carter. OK. Well, you mention in your testimony also that there are two markets. There's a primary market and there's also a secondary market, and that secondary market, as I understand it, that's where the owners buy and sell the excess RINs. Mr. Yacobucci. Correct. Mr. Carter. Can the secondary market impact the primary market? Mr. Yacobucci. I would believe so but I will refer to my market folks. Mr. Niznik. We don't tend to look at it as primary and secondary markets. The RINs are all traded sort of evenly. They don't have any distinguishing characteristics that would attach them to other markets. So from a price reporting agency standpoint, they're the same market. Mr. Carter. Can they have an impact on the price of fuel? Mr. Niznik. They do, yes. So, in fact, we report an aggregate cost of RINs as it would be affecting any gallons sold in the United States. We call it the RVO per gallon cost. Currently, that's around 4 cents per gallon of petroleum and fuel sold. Mr. Carter. Hmm. OK. Yes, sir. Mr. Lade. However, if I could speak to that---- Mr. Carter. Please. Mr. Lade. So that is the cost on the gasoline blended into fuel. However, almost all fuel in the United States contains 10 percent ethanol and RIN is actually reducing the cost of that ethanol. So as RIN prices rise, that tax or the RVO cost on the gasoline is nearly exactly offset by the reduction in the costs on the ethanol side. And so consumer prices for almost all fuel that's consumed in the United States, which is 10 percent ethanol, 90 percent gasoline, remains by and large, unaffected. Mr. Carter. OK. Good. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. Ms. Dunphy, I want to ask you because I represent the entire coast of Georgia. So ocean-going vessels are of interest to me and you--I know you had a discussion with another member about ocean-going vessels and about the renewable fuel that's used in those. And I just wanted to ask you, can you explain to me why it's necessary to retire RINs when it comes to fuel for an ocean-going vessel? Ms. Dunphy. It's a bit of a mystery to all of us, to be honest with you. But transportation fuel is gasoline or diesel. It's motor vehicle, locomotive, marine fuel in the U.S. If you put it in an ocean-going vessel, that's usually going to be a higher sulfur fuel like a bunker fuel, and that was not a transportation fuel. So, therefore, even though you put in a renewable fuel and it's displacing a high-sulfur product, the RINs were to be retired. That was part of the regulations. Mr. Yacobucci. Which were driven by the statutory definitions in the---- Ms. Dunphy. Right. It's in the law. It's in the law. Mr. Carter. Do we need to change the statutory definition? Ms. Dunphy. It's in the law. Mr. Yacobucci. Basically, you have three categories of fuel that qualify. Highway transportation fuel, heating oil, and jet fuel are basically the three fuel components or three fuel categories that qualify to generate RINs. All other fuel categories are exempted by the statute. Mr. Carter. Brilliant. Mr. Chairman, I yield. [Laughter.] Mr. Shimkus. Just yield, not surrender, right? The chair now recognizes the very committed, patient, and long-suffering Mr. Loebsack. If he was on a good subcommittee, he could have spoken an hour ago. But he's waiving on, has great interest in this. You're recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. Loebsack. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for letting me waive on, and quite honestly, as a former professor, I would have loved the testimony. I've been trying to read as much as I can but, unfortunately, as a political science professor, not an economics professor. But I am an alumnus of Iowa State so I am actually going to pick on you today. How do you pronounce your last name again? Mr. Lade. Lade. Mr. Loebsack. Lade. OK. Thank you so much. This is an incredibly complex subject. There's no doubt about it. As I said, I was a political science professor, not an economics professor. So this stuff is not easy for me, I have to say. But I do want to say at the outset that recent comments by EPA Administrator Wheeler the last couple days have been pretty disheartening and were not reassuring to those of us from biofuels country, if you will. Some of the things that he said continue the policy of Administrator Pruitt, whether it has to do with waivers or on the E15 issue or whatever the case may be. I just want to say that for the record at the outset that I am not very encouraged by the new administrator when it comes to biofuels production. But I think I will talk to Mr. Carter later. He had a good point--do we really need all this, in some ways. Actually, I could be wrong but I think the quickest and easiest way to address RIN prices would be if the obligated parties simply would blend more biofuels and I think that the RIN system was created in the first place because there are going to be folks who didn't want to blend biofuels. Is that correct, basically? Create a market for RINs? If we just simply blended more biofuels we wouldn't have to worry about RINs. Is that correct, Professor Lade? Mr. Lade. The entire purpose of the market is--or of the policy is to get the market to do something that it would not do without the policy. And so yes, whenever RIN prices are high that signals that the market would not do or would not blend as much biofuels as it would without the policy. Mr. Loebsack. Right. Thank you. Also we could remove current EPA restrictions on the Reid vapor pressure. I think we could do that and get more biofuels into the system. And I did look at your testimony, Professor Lade. I was a little bit confused with the final part of it there when you talked about what effect E15 might have on all of this. Can you sort of elaborate on that a little bit? Mr. Lade. Absolutely. So it's really difficult to say what an E15 and RVP waiver would do to RIN prices because we are not quite sure of what it would do to overall biofuel demand. If consumers begin to switch over to E15 quite a bit, then it would absolutely put downward pressure on RIN prices. However, this is a new fuel. Consumers are uncertain about whether they can even put it in a lot of their vehicles. And so there are a lot of reasons to believe that there would maybe be some limited--even with year round offering at some fuel stations there would be limited consumer demand on that side, which means not that much extra biofuels or ethanol is going into the system, which would not resolve this RIN price problem. Mr. Loebsack. Right. Mr. Lade. And so while it's certainly, potentially, over the long run and if E15 infrastructure were to roll out and consumers, as they learned that this was a viable fuel--that it's something that they could put into all of their cars if it's priced competitively, that could certainly have that intent. In the short run, I have my doubts. But, again, this is in uncertain territory because this is a new fuel that we really don't know much about. Mr. Loebsack. Well, I am going to ask you to project on--a little bit more with respect to E15 because when you were talking about RIN prices and their effects on gas prices, you were talking about E10. Can you speculate at least some with respect to E15? Mr. Lade. Correct. So when RIN prices rise, like I said, the higher cost on gasoline is nearly fully offset by the lower cost on ethanol as RIN prices are increasing. As you increase the percentage of ethanol in that gasoline, that lower cost on ethanol actually starts to drive the retail prices down. This is exactly how the market-based mechanism is going to put more biofuel blending into the system. And so you will see, as RIN prices rise, greater and greater discounts on E15 relative to E10 and that's exactly how you get consumers to move their hand over about 15 inches and fill it with E15 instead. Mr. Loebsack. Right. Right. Mr. Lade. And so RINs are vital to stimulating that demand and so that's where it's kind of difficult to predict that. It depends how responsive consumers are and how quick they are to switch over. Mr. Loebsack. Got it. And then one last question--as we all know, in response to refiner complaints about RINs, EPA has secretly issued 48 small refinery waivers, and I know there's some question about this. I am glad I came when that was being addressed by Ms. Dunphy. And some of the refiners are neither small nor experiencing economic hardship. These secret waivers, one can argue about what the effects of them but some would argue up at 2 billion gallons of demand destruction and cutting the consumption by over 2 billion gallons. What do you think the impact of all this might have on RIN prices then? Mr. Lade. I think we've seen the impact that it's decreased RIN prices as it necessarily--if these allocations are not reallocated it necessarily means that less biofuels are needed to meet the requirements from EPA. Mr. Loebsack. Well, I want to thank all of you and thank you, again, Mr. Chair, for letting me waive on. Mr. Shimkus. Well, next time get on a better committee and you can question earlier. Mr. Loebsack. I will do the best I can. It'll help me for November. Mr. Shimkus. So we've been asked to do a second round of questions. I hope you don't mind that. I think the folks who are here, obviously, are interested in addressing that. So with your permission, the folks here would go a second round. We don't think it'll take that long. So I want to thank Mr. Tonko for agreeing to that. So I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for a second round. I want to make sure we clarify this small refinery exemption, because what I am hearing is that they're blending already at 10 percent. This exemption comes at the end. So my question is--maybe Ms. Dunphy--what's the remedy? Is there a remedy for these small refiners? If they've been blending most of the year, they get the exemption, what do they do? Throw a party? What do they get for that? Ms. Dunphy. Well, if they've already retired RINs then they'll seek EPA's permission to get those RINs back again, and as we've talked about, that does come back into the market. It has replenished the RIN bank, OK. So remember, as Mr. Yacobucci pointed out, the oil companies can use 20 percent prior year RINs to satisfy their current year compliance. The RIN bank had declined. It got down to as low as 9 percent. So that means there's more pressure on current year to have the RINs and get them in your hand. As the RIN bank has been replenished, because these small refinery exemptions have been granted, the number of prior year RINs comes back into the market and replenishes the RIN bank overall, reducing the concerns that we won't be able to meet this year's compliance. Mr. Shimkus. All right. Thanks. The spike that was talked about--we talked about high prices, high volumes. But I think another factor was in the EPA there was increased regulation in that year also and increased regulation increases higher prices. So there was three variables that I just wanted to make sure we put on the table. There's proposals floating out there on a RIN cap. What would that do to this market? Anyone want to address that? Mr. Niznik. It would cause Senator Chuck Grassley to explode. [Laughter.] Mr. Loebsack. And Congressman Loebsack as well. [Laughter.] Mr. Niznik. But also it would just end the market functionality that Professor Lade talked about and it would, certainly, impair the ability of RINs to do some of the functioning that they've been talking about doing in terms of stimulating production and having the marketplace respond to the volumetric requirements that the EPA would put out each year. If it just was kept at 5 percent, it wouldn't matter whether EPA asked for more or less. Mr. Shimkus. Right. Dr. Lade. Mr. Lade. So I would---- Mr. Shimkus. Quickly. Mr. Lade. Quickly, I would push back a little bit on that. It depends critically what the RIN price cap is because that then determines how much of a discount you can give to biofuels and how much of an incentive you can give to biofuel consumption. So if a RIN price cap is 10 cents, then absolutely no one's going to use E85 or E15 most likely, given market prices. Mr. Shimkus. Right. Mr. Lade. However, if a RIN price cap is set 60 cents to a dollar, all else being held equal in this regulation, that could serve a very stabilizing role because what we've seen is that EPA has responded to high RIN prices by adjusting mandates and that's led to a lot of this volatility. If, instead, EPA said no, we will cap RIN prices at this level and you can come to us to buy paper credits after RINs on the private market have reached above this level, they no longer need to use that option to adjust RIN prices through mandates, which has led to a lot of volatility. So---- Mr. Shimkus. Thank you. Let me go, because I've got 2 minutes or a minute and a half. I've got three questions. Mr. Yacobucci, you talk about engines and that's a part of your world. What is the most efficient engine as far as octane? Do you know? Mr. Yacobucci. So, there's a lot of discussion about this right now. To get to your question, if one were to increase the compression of engines, you could squeeze out more efficiency from that engine. Mr. Shimkus. What would be Iran? Mr. Yacobucci. There's a lot of discussion for that but, certainly, a higher octane number fuel would allow for greater efficiency if you tuned the engine to do so. If you just put higher octane fuel in---- Mr. Shimkus. Right. No. No. We are talking about--part of our debate--and Mr. Flores with me--as you get your best engine engineers, you get your best petrochemical engineers, and you create the most efficient engine for a next-generation vehicle, because I think that's kind of what we are---- Mr. Yacobucci. But there's a trade-off between the energy content. For example, ethanol has a lower energy content. So even if you're burning it more efficiently you may be getting fewer miles per gallon versus the cost to the engine. Mr. Shimkus. I am not--you're the smart guy--but that's not what we were being told with the engineers and the engineering of a high-compression high-octane engine. I wanted to address, in my 7 seconds remaining--there is also a proposal out there that talks about a D8 RIN, which would be above the blend wall. Anyone hear that and what's your thoughts on that? Mr. Niznik. Mr. Niznik. Yes, I investigated that for a company that asked me to research the concept, and it would change the current shape of the RFS but it would overcome one of the internal hurdles of the RFS--blocking expanded ethanol usage. So right now, I confused the group before talking about how the RIN from ethanol right now is essentially capped at the price of the next category up RIN because of the replaceability. If you took it out from underneath that umbrella and that cap and gave it its own category the RINs price mechanism has proven very efficient in other categories, forcing those fuels into the marketplace. So if you wanted to provide an opportunity specifically for one type of fuel and you made a new RIN category just for that type of fuel and put a mandate on it, I am convinced that, based on market history, you could get the amount blended you wished. Mr. Shimkus. And my time is way expired. I appreciate my colleagues. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Flores, for 5 minutes. Mr. Flores. I am assuming the ranking member doesn't---- Mr. Shimkus. I am sorry. Mr. Tonko. Dr. Lade, yes. Dr. Lade, in your written testimony you state that volatility isn't always caused by speculators and that volatility in a market can attract speculators, presumably, because all the fluctuations present opportunities for profit. You also indicate that EPA's management of the program including delays in setting RVOs are sources of volatility in the RIN market. Is that accurate? Is that---- Mr. Lade. Correct. Mr. Tonko. OK. What about the changing headlines following the efforts of the White House, several senators, and some RFS stakeholder discussions about reforming the RFS? Would those headlines have any effect on RIN prices? Mr. Lade. Likely, if they believe that that could lead to credible changes in the mandates coming out of EPA. And so what really the market is trying to do is figure out how much extra biofuel they need to push in, particularly beyond the E10 blend wall because that's where all the real costs come into this. It's much more expensive to push ethanol and biodiesel and be on this E10 blend wall and that's where the market is trying to guess is how much they need extra beyond that. So to the extent that some news organization reports that the mandate may be increasing or decreasing that would certainly have that impact as you're trying to guess what's going to come out. Mr. Tonko. OK. Thank you. In your testimony, you discuss several studies that looked at the potential effect of RIN prices on bulk wholesale and retail prices for fuel. Refiners claim they cannot pass high RIN prices on to their consumers. But these studies suggest that they can. Mr. Lade. Correct. Mr. Tonko. The discussions in your written testimony seems to conclude they often can but it isn't a certainty. Would you please explain the potential reasons why a refiner might not be able to pass on high RIN costs? Mr. Lade. So the studies that speak to this look particularly at bulk wholesale fuel prices. So those that are on large traded commodities markets and a lot of those serve as benchmark prices throughout the entire wholesale system. However, there could certainly be differences in, say, at blending stations and wholesalers when you're blending in Illinois, Iowa, New York, et cetera. And so there are certainly studies beginning to look at RIN pass through to those to see if the same thing that you see on these larger tradeable market are really translating down to the markets that refiners may be selling into and so far it's still inconclusive on that. However, so far, the academic literature has continue to find these prices being reflected in wholesale prices. Mr. Tonko. OK. Thank you. With that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Flores, 5 minutes. Mr. Flores. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the second round of questions. One of the other takeaways that I didn't mention in my first round of questions was that I think each of you agree that ethanol has a place to play in the fuel markets of the future, primarily because of the octane and some of the environmental characteristics that it has, and that's the reason that Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Welch, and I are working on legislation that doesn't adversely impact the ethanol markets. One of the things that I've heard from different constituent groups is that there are some disruptions in the biodiesel market because of the way the D4 ran as embedded in the nesting structure. This is somewhat subjective on your part but I would like to know what feedback you all have in terms of the market impact on D6 prices if we were to de-nest D4s and have D4s trade totally--be useable only for the biodiesel market. If you feel comfortable commenting on that I would like to know what your thoughts are. Mr. Niznik. I am an old biodieseler myself so I can---- Mr. Flores. I am glad you're from Texas, too. [Laughter.] Mr. Niznik. Thank you, sir. So the D4 RIN really isn't a victim to any other RIN. It's the 500-pound gorilla RIN right now. Mr. Flores. Right. Right. Mr. Niznik. So its behavior right now is unfettered and the historical record shows that it does a really great job. In fact, if there's one RIN that's working in the RFS, it's the D4 RIN. Mr. Flores. Right. Mr. Niznik. So when it goes up just a little bit, the market signals blend more and producers produce more and it works great. But when you have the nested structure, if you have a particular interest in other fuels working and they're underneath there, then no, it's not as good. So I would suspect that if you designed a system of separate unnested RINs that---- Mr. Flores. Just D4, though. Mr. Niznik. Yes. Mr. Flores. I am just talking about D4. Mr. Niznik. You're just talking about D4s. I don't think it would change at all for the D4s. I think they would continue. Under the current circumstances, they move very freely with the exception of worrying about the recurring dollar a gallon biodiesel tax credit, which is outside of the RFS system but, again, a policy thing. Mr. Flores. How would the D6 RIN change if we de-nested the D4? Mr. Niznik. Well, then perhaps it could rise to the occasion that it needs to incentivize infrastructure, usage in fuels. We don't really know how high a D6 RIN needs to be to, for instance, inspire more E15 use or even E85 use because under the time of the program it's always been butting heads against the D4 price, right. So we've never seen a free shot at it. I've done research, for instance, on E85 usage, which has a lot of ethanol in it. But every time I did it, again, I couldn't say hey, what would happen to this. I didn't have any market data on where the customers needed to be incentivized. Mr. Flores. Mr. Lavinsky, do you have any thoughts on this issue? Mr. Lavinsky. Not that has---- Mr. Flores. OK. Mr. Lavinsky. He's covered it well. Mr. Yacobucci. I would just add that, and Mr. Niznik can correct me if I am wrong, but that the biodiesel RIN drives-- because it's the majority of the advanced biofuel RINs, the D5 RINs, that it drives that market. If you took it outside of the advanced biofuel pool then there would certainly be some effects there because that is the primary supply for the advanced biofuel as well. So it depends on whether you mean de-nesting it from the overall mandate, the D6 mandate, or whether you mean taking it out of the advanced biofuel pool. Mr. Flores. OK. That's a good point. OK. That's something we as policymakers need to keep in mind. Ms. Dunphy, any thoughts on that? Ms. Dunphy. Well, today, because of the nesting, when there's a shortage of D6 RINs versus the mandate, that his fulfilled with higher--other types of advanced biofuel RINs. So if you look at it from that perspective, that total renewable fuel category is dominated by corn ethanol. Mr. Flores. Yes. Ms. Dunphy. But if there's not enough D6 RINs to fulfill it then that category gets filled with advanced biofuel RINs, which are greater greenhouse gas-reducing fuels---- Mr. Flores. Yes. Ms. Dunphy [continuing]. Which is kind of the overall objective of the law is to have greater greenhouse gas-reducing fuels. So you would lose that added volume that the biodiesel--the D4 RINs fulfil in that D6 space. So there's some demand loss there if they don't have that space to grow into. Mr. Flores. Dr. Lade. Mr. Lade. Yes. I would just like to reiterate that was my main point was that you would have demand loss on the biodiesel side because you wouldn't be producing more of it to compensate for the lack of D6 RINs. So that you're over meeting these mandates for the D4 in order to fill in what you can't push through with E85 or E15 right now. Taking that out would remove that option and make the market meet--pass the blend law with E85 or E15 instead. Mr. Flores. And, again, hypothetically, what would happen to diesel prices if you de-nested the D4 and set it aside by itself? Mr. Niznik. The RFS is borne--the price of the RFS compliance of RINs is borne equally in the marketplace by either gasoline or diesel. Even if they do, for instance, pay more to blend one particular biofuel and one type of petroleum versus another-- let's say ethanol biodiesel--they tend to, on the petroleum cost side, aggregate all the costs and pass it through evenly. That's what the historic price data shows. Mr. Flores. OK. Thank you. My time is expired. I yield back. Mr. Shimkus. The gentleman yields back his time. The chair thanks the gentleman. Before we conclude, my wife's family farm is in South Dakota. So I was up there for 4th of July--a family reunion--and then took a drive to North Dakota and then back through South Dakota and probably one of the weirdest guys that would take a picture of every retail location that I filled up with gas. And what's instructive there is that they have--yes, I know, it's sad---- [Laughter.] And I have them. I can show them to you. They're right on here. But, and we always got to remember retailers, too. This is the whole debate and there are pumps in the Dakotas that have E0 because of motorcycle riders and boaters and stuff. But the delta price difference for the same level is, like, 30 cents cheaper because of the ethanol--the depression of prices because it's a cheaper mix. But there's just so many things that we got to think about. I will show you those pictures, if anybody wants to see them. Mr. Niznik. I do the same thing. I have the same hobby. Mr. Shimkus. You are sick. Ms. Dunphy. And I did the same thing last weekend on the way to San Antonio and took a picture of the Buc-ee's pumps. Mr. Shimkus. There you go. Thank you. [Laughter.] Seeing there are no further members wishing to ask questions or make stupid statements for the panel, I would like to thank all of our witnesses again for being here today. Before we conclude, I would like to remind members interested in the RIN fraud issue that I would point you to letter two, the Subcommittee on Oversight Investigations hearing transcript on RIN fraud. 2012? Thank you. And I also would like to ask for unanimous consent to submit the following documents for the record: the letter from Renewable Fuels Association and then the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation hearings on the transcript on RIN fraud \*\. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \*\ The information has been retained in committee files and can be found at: https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF18/20180725/108610/HHRG- 115-IF18-20180725-SD099.pdf. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] Mr. Shimkus. And pursuant to committee rules, I remind members that they have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the record. I ask that witnesses submit their responses within 10 business days upon receipt of the questions. Without objection, this subcommittee is adjourned. Thank you very much. [Whereupon, at 11:13 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] [all]
MEMBERNAME | BIOGUIDEID | GPOID | CHAMBER | PARTY | ROLE | STATE | CONGRESS | AUTHORITYID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rush, Bobby L. | R000515 | 7921 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | IL | 115 | 1003 |
Upton, Fred | U000031 | 7991 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MI | 115 | 1177 |
DeGette, Diana | D000197 | 7859 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CO | 115 | 1479 |
Shimkus, John | S000364 | 7939 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IL | 115 | 1527 |
Schakowsky, Janice D. | S001145 | 7929 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | IL | 115 | 1588 |
Walden, Greg | W000791 | 8115 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OR | 115 | 1596 |
Murphy, Tim | M001151 | 8723 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 1744 |
Blackburn, Marsha | B001243 | 8154 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TN | 115 | 1748 |
Burgess, Michael C. | B001248 | 8182 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 1751 |
McMorris Rodgers, Cathy | M001159 | 8209 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | WA | 115 | 1809 |
Matsui, Doris O. | M001163 | 7810 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 1814 |
McNerney, Jerry | M001166 | 7816 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 1832 |
Bilirakis, Gus M. | B001257 | 7881 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 1838 |
Castor, Kathy | C001066 | 7883 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 1839 |
Loebsack, David | L000565 | 7915 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | IA | 115 | 1846 |
Sarbanes, John P. | S001168 | 7978 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | MD | 115 | 1854 |
Walberg, Tim | W000798 | 7992 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MI | 115 | 1855 |
Clarke, Yvette D. | C001067 | 8072 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 1864 |
Welch, Peter | W000800 | 8204 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | VT | 115 | 1879 |
Latta, Robert E. | L000566 | 8095 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 1885 |
Scalise, Steve | S001176 | 7959 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | LA | 115 | 1892 |
Guthrie, Brett | G000558 | 7954 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | KY | 115 | 1922 |
Harper, Gregg | H001045 | 8021 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MS | 115 | 1933 |
Lance, Leonard | L000567 | 8049 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | NJ | 115 | 1936 |
Lujan, Ben Ray | L000570 | 8058 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NM | 115 | 1939 |
Tonko, Paul | T000469 | 8082 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 1942 |
Schrader, Kurt | S001180 | 8118 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | OR | 115 | 1950 |
Olson, Pete | O000168 | 8178 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 1955 |
Kinzinger, Adam | K000378 | 7931 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IL | 115 | 2014 |
Bucshon, Larry | B001275 | 7947 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IN | 115 | 2018 |
Long, Billy | L000576 | 8015 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MO | 115 | 2033 |
Johnson, Bill | J000292 | 8096 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 2046 |
Duncan, Jeff | D000615 | 8143 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | SC | 115 | 2057 |
Flores, Bill | F000461 | 8173 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 2065 |
McKinley, David B. | M001180 | 8222 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | WV | 115 | 2074 |
Cardenas, Tony | C001097 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2107 | |
Ruiz, Raul | R000599 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2109 | |
Peters, Scott H. | P000608 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2113 | |
Brooks, Susan W. | B001284 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IN | 115 | 2129 | |
Hudson, Richard | H001067 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | NC | 115 | 2140 | |
Cramer, Kevin | C001096 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | ND | 115 | 2144 | |
Collins, Chris | C001092 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 2151 | |
Mullin, Markwayne | M001190 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OK | 115 | 2156 | |
Walters, Mimi | W000820 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2232 | |
Dingell, Debbie | D000624 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | MI | 115 | 2251 | |
Costello, Ryan A. | C001106 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 2266 | |
Doyle, Michael F. | D000482 | 8132 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 316 |
Engel, Eliot L. | E000179 | 8078 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 344 |
Eshoo, Anna G. | E000215 | 7819 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 355 |
Green, Gene | G000410 | 8185 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 462 |
Barton, Joe | B000213 | 8162 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 62 |
Pallone, Frank, Jr. | P000034 | 8048 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NJ | 115 | 887 |
Disclaimer:
Please refer to the About page for more information.