A state regulatory agency has certified temperature compensation equipment for fuel pumps in California. The move is being viewed by consumer groups as noteworthy progress in the battle over "hot fuel."

All retailers have to do now is activate existing devices or have new ones installed on their pumps.

"The equipment exists out there. They are using it up in Canada right now," Dennis Johannes, director of the California Division of Measurement Standards, told Land Line.

Johannes said the basis of the state division's finding is that the standards guide known as "Handbook 44" does not prohibit automatic temperature compensation of fuel.

"Unless something is specifically made illegal, it is legal. That's just the way laws are constructed in the United States," he said.

On a related note, the National Council of Weights and Measures is gearing up for a vote in July that would allow states to voluntarily implement temperature compensation at retail pumps. A national standard for certification of equipment by the same group will have to wait until at least July of 2008 for a similar vote.

However, in California, the state measurement division has certified the testing procedures for temperature-compensation equipment manufactured by Gilbarco of North Carolina, a subsidiary of Veeder-Root. Other manufacturers are going through the process.

The certification of the equipment, which in turn will allow the sale of temperature-compensated fuel, comes as a small but important victory for consumers and advocate groups, including the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association.

"California is becoming the tail that will wag the dog," OOIDA Foundation Project Leader John Siebert told Land Line.

For years, retailers have been selling fuel at temperatures higher than 60 degrees, which is a national standard agreed to a century ago by regulators and the oil industry. Fuel is measured and sold at 60 degrees everywhere except at the retail pumps.

Johannes said with double-lined fuel tanks and high turnover of fuel through those tanks, fuel warmer than 60 degrees does not have a chance to cool before being sold to consumers.

Retailers in a number of states, according to Siebert and others closely involved in the research, routinely sell fuel - gasoline or highway diesel - at an expanded temperature of 70, 80, or even 90 degrees, which leads to a consumer rip-off by volume.

The National Conference of Weights and Measures took Siebert's research into account during a recent meeting.

"And now, the state of California has stepped ahead of National Conference of Weights and Measures and allowed temperature compensation devices in the state," Siebert said.

Gilbarco is manufacturing new pumps and retrofit devices to sell to retailers who agree to voluntarily activate temperature-control equipment. The cost of retrofitting an existing dispenser inside a fuel pump is approximately $2,500, according to a recent article by Oil Express.

A Gilbarco official was quoted in Oil Express as saying the manufacturer is "neutral" on the controversial issue of temperature compensation.

Johannes said the Division of Measurement Standards believes a retail chain may soon begin using Gilbarco's equipment as a marketing tool to make their brand of fuel seem more appealing than their competitors' fuel.

Siebert said he likes that prospect.

"If we get a retailer saying 'we're going to use temperature compensation,' we will see the stranglehold broken that the retailers have tried to build," he said.

Retailers involved in the California Independent Oil Marketers Association, according to Oil Express, are arguing that since there is no provision in "Handbook 44" relating to temperature compensation on fuel pumps, the announcement by the Division of Measurement Standards means little.

Siebert says the battle over "hot fuel" should be waged on what is fair for consumers, not about retailers' profit margins.

Maybe that's why consumers have filed five lawsuits against retailers in four states. Those lawsuits were filed in December 2006 in U.S. District Court in California, New Jersey, Kansas and Missouri. Although OOIDA is not a plaintiff in the lawsuits, several owner-operators are.

- By David Tanner, staff writer
david_tanner@landlinemag.com