[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 45 (Thursday, April 21, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: April 21, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
S. 2029--DIESEL FUEL TAX REQUIREMENTS
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my distinguished
colleague from Louisiana, Senator Breaux, by cosponsoring S. 2029, a
bill to correct a terrible problem caused by the implementation of the
diesel fuel tax requirements of last year's tax bill.
Let me make clear from the outset, Mr. President, that I did not
support this diesel fuel tax increase. I felt that it would cause
economic harm to the boating community in the State of Washington, and,
coupled with the other huge tax increases contained in the bill, would
hurt our economy. That is why I voted against the budget bill.
However, the diesel fuel tax increase has been signed into law, and I
must now turn my attention to the manner in which it is being
implemented. Unfortunately, I have heard from the boating community in
Washington State that this implementation will wreak havoc.
The problem stems from the dyeing requirements for diesel fuel
contained in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. Under this
new law, diesel fuel used in recreational boats is subject to a 24.4-
cents-per-gallon tax, while diesel fuel used for commercial purposes is
not taxed and must be dyed before it is sold.
Marinas now must stock two separate fuel systems--one for dyed fuel
and one for clear fuel. Many marinas throughout the State of Washington
are not equipped to stock two separate fuel systems to handle dyed and
clear fuels, and cannot afford the exorbitant expense of installing a
new system. In the end, the marinas will have to choose which type of
fuel they will sell.
As an example of the kind of hardship this regulation has caused, the
owner and operator of Port Angeles Marine has told me that his marina
is not set up to dispense two types of diesel fuel, yet it is the only
marine fuel facility in Port Angeles. Because he sells most of his
diesel fuel to commercial users, such as ferry boats, tug boats, and
fishing vessels, he has chosen to sell dyed fuel. In this instance,
recreational boaters are left out in the cold, without adequate fueling
facilities. Both marinas and recreational boaters lose in this
situation. Marinas lose part of their customer base and recreational
boaters lose their ability to purchase diesel fuel.
The executive director of the Port of Grays Harbor tells me of
another example. To improve the depressed economic condition of this
area, the Port of Grays Harbor is embarking on a strategy to attract
greater use of their various marinas and docks by recreational boaters
who are vacationing from Oregon and California. This economic
initiative, however, is being undermined by the fact that recreational
boaters are not able to purchase clear, taxable diesel fuel from most
marinas in this area. Therefore, this community is being denied the
opportunity to expand its tourism industry to recreational boaters.
The two situations which I just described are only a sampling of the
problems that marinas, ports and boaters throughout the State of
Washington have been experiencing. The boating community has been
telling me about the nightmare posed by these regulations and the major
headaches cased by their implementation. I have heard their call and
agree that this situation must be rectified.
That is why I wrote to Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen earlier this
month, bringing this situation to his attention, and asking how the
Treasury Department will address this issue and solve the problem. And
that is why I am joining with my colleague, Senator Breaux, by
cosponsoring this legislation.
This bill is simple. It would allow the sale of dyed diesel fuel to
recreational boaters who pay the diesel fuel tax. It will solve the
problem of inadequate fuel facilities for recreational boaters and
restore some common sense to this situation.
Mr. President, this issue is extremely important to the boating
community, the ports and the marinas of my home State of Washington.
They've presented their case very convincingly, and this issue is
important to me. I encourage my colleagues to review this legislation
and join as a cosponsor. Together, we can solve this problem.
____________________