ZFW LOW ALT SECTOR CTLR EXPRESSES VARIOUS OPINIONS WHEN A B737-300 PLT ADVISES OF A 250 KT SPD RESTR DUE TO FUEL BURN CONCERNS.

Narrative

I WAS WORKING LAKE/QUITMAN LOW SECTOR. THE FIRST CTR SECTOR FOR DEPS OUT OF DFW TERMINAL AREA. DFW APCH CALLED AND INFORMED ME THAT ACR X WAS DOING 250 KTS (NOT ASSIGNED AIRSPD) AND THE ACFT BEHIND WAS ASSIGNED 250 KTS TO MAINTAIN LONGITUDINAL SEPARATION. ACR X WAS A DFW-ZZZ THAT DEPARTED DFW AT XA09Z; A B737-300. WHEN ACR X CHKED ON THE FREQ; I ASKED IF THE 250 KTS WAS AN EQUIP RESTR. THE PLT SAID NEGATIVE. I WAS USING MINIMUM SEPARATION; THUS REQUIRING SPD CTL. I ASSIGNED ACR X TO MAINTAIN 280 KTS OR GREATER; IF UNABLE ADVISE. THE PLT INFORMED ME HE MUST CHK HIS FUEL BURN AND REFUSED THE CLRNC. I HAD TO CALL THE HIGH ALT SECTOR TO GET A HIGHER ALT FOR THIS ACFT BEHIND AND THEN REASSIGN ACR X A LOWER ALT IN ATTEMPT TO MAINTAIN SEPARATION. I THEN ONCE AGAIN ASSIGNED ACR X MAINTAIN 280 KTS OR GREATER. THE PLT ONCE AGAIN SPOKE OF HIS FUEL BURN. I HAVE BEEN AN ATC SPECIALIST FOR 21 YRS AND HAVE NEVER HAD A PLT REFUSE AN ATC CLRNC; MUCH LESS BECAUSE OF FUEL CONCERNS. I DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT OPTION IN THE REGS. ACR X WAS REQUESTING A HIGHER ALT THAN THE ACFT BEHIND. MY DECISION WAS TO GET ACR X HIS REQUESTED ALT ABOVE THE OTHER ACFT. THEN I WAS FORCED TO GO TO MY 'PLAN B.' ACR X WAS RESTR TO A LOWER ALT. I AM SURE THE PLTS REFUSING THIS SPD RESTR EVENTUALLY COST THE ACFT MUCH MORE FUEL THAN THE PLT THOUGHT HE COULD SAVE BY REDUCING AIRSPD. IT IS MY OPINION; THE ATC SYS WILL FAIL IF CTLRS MUST EXPLAIN ALL ATC CLRNCS. I DO NOT HAVE TIME FOR SUCH NEGOTIATIONS. AT ONE POINT DURING THE CONVERSATION; ACR X SAID HE MIGHT GIVE ME 275 KTS -- NOT 280 KTS. THIS IS A SAFETY ISSUE AND MUST BE ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY. THIS PLT MUST BE DEALT WITH TO INSURE SAFETY FOR ALL USERS. HE CAN FLY VFR AT ANY SPD HE LIKES -- TO BLOCK UP THE SYS.