Dana, I spent some time last night responding to your item, and for some reason it never got on the net, so will try again. Many of your points I agree with. Especially, that there should be no confrontation. Purpose of any preliminary actions should be only to surface the problem that small biodiesel producers have in marketing their product. As you point out, these problems will take some time to resolve and patience is indicated. Such preliminary actions could combine the various actions that are being discussed: 1) Letter to Sec. Whitman from Congressman, 2) Further discussion, possibly with your participation, to determine that Tom Lewe has got the best deal he can from NBB, and, if necessary, 3) a public hearing. This, ideally, should be a coordinated effort. None of these items should be confrontational, and, in fact, :I believe they will have an altogether negative effect if they become so. First of all it is routine and not confrontational for a constituent to ask his Congressman to surface a problem he has with the EPA (or other Agency Head) Secretary. This way the small business constituent is assured that his problem will get some attention, for several reasons: 1) Control mail items like this automatically get priority consideration and the constituent is assured of a responsive, timely answer. It is the case of getting high up enough in the priority chain to find someone authorized to say "yes." And, most such control mail items are not confrontational; it is stupid for them to be so. 2) For various valid reasons, previously discussed, Federal Agencies would prefer not to deal with small business.. They like dealing with big business, or with organizations like NBB mainly to avoid the taint of preferential treatment.
You bring up a good point in questioning whether Tom Leue has got the best response he can from NBB. Now is the time to determine that, before things proceed much further. You claim experience in such negotiations. For this reason Tom Leue may wish to talk with you. I recommend that he do so, and for this reason am copying him on this message. He might wish to consider whether he has got up high enough in the NBB organization chain to find someone who is authorized to say "yes." It would embarass the Congressman, I believe, to find out that he was discussing an issue that could have been resolved earlier by Tom Leue, if he had more seriously negotiated with NBB. Yes, I agree that, unlike a backyard producer of biodiesel, a commercial producer of biodiesel can't remain anonymous. He has to involve EPA. Operating in a black market economy, for the commercial producer, is out of the question. Nor am I casting aspersions on "special interest groups." Everyone is a member of some special interest group. My point was that every special interest group and indeed every individual has their own agendas. The problem is to determine, in each case, whether their agendas coincide, in the particular point(s) under consideration, with your own interests. As Keith brilliantly points out in a concurrent message, NBD's agenda distinctly departs from our own at the point under discussion, where biodiesel enters the marketplace. They may, however, want to at least to appear cooperative if this becomes a public issue. Whatever is done for Yellow Biodiesel ought to be done in the name of the small biodiesel producer, to avoid the taint of "preferential treatment." This would be a keyword when dealing with EPA. And, to use the concept positively, EPA, as I understand, has already provided some special consideration for small petrodiesel producers. A precedent has thererfore been set for biodiesel producers to ask for similar considerations. Federal Agencies, I have found, generally recognize, at least in concept, that small businesses, as a group, deserve some special considerations. Another point to consider, in dealing with NBD, and illustrating the importance of surfacing this issue and giving it great and open visibility, is that NBD would want to be considered as dealing fairly with the small biodiesel producers. As Keith points out, though they do not consider the small biodiesel producers as serious competitors, they depend upon farmers for much of their support, and upon biodiesel supporters generally for their lobbying activities. They would not want to alienate the biodiesel audience, but like EPA, they might be temped to handle the issue with lip service, unless pressed for more serious treatment. Some serious negotiation, as you point out, is required. Moreover these matters must be delicately handled to avoid getting noses out of joint. A "bull in a china closet" attitude is going to get nowhere and will instead set this biodiesel program back.. . Will respond further if you find this useful. Glenn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck Monitoring Service trial http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
