99–010 

Calendar No. 152 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 112–72 

ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLES COMPETITIVENESS 

AND ENERGY SECURITY ACT 

SEPTEMBER 6, 2011.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. BINGAMAN, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1001] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 1001) to reduce oil consumption and improve 

energy security, and for other purposes, having considered the 

same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof 

the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Alternative Fueled Vehicles Competitiveness and Energy Security Act of 2011’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents of this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

Sec. 3. Loan guarantees for alternative fuel infrastructure. 

Sec. 4. Advanced technology vehicles manufacturing incentive program. 

Sec. 5. Conventional fuel replacement calculation and assessment. 

Sec. 6. Technical assistance and coordination. 

Sec. 7. Workforce training. 

Sec. 8. Reduction of engine idling and conventional fuel consumption. 

Sec. 9. Electric, hydrogen, and natural gas utility and oil pipeline participation. 

Sec. 10. HOV lane access extension. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) ALTERNATIVE FUEL.—The term ‘‘alternative fuel’’ has the meaning given 

the term in section 301 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13211). 

(2) ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLE.—The term ‘‘alternative fueled vehicle’’ has 

the meaning given the term in section 301 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 

U.S.C. 13211). 

(3) COMMUNITY COLLEGE.—The term ‘‘community college’’ has the meaning 

given the term ‘‘junior or community college’’ in section 312 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1058). 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

(4) DEPARTMENT.—The term ‘‘Department’’ means the Department of Energy. 

(5) NONROAD VEHICLE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘nonroad vehicle’’ means a vehicle that is not 

licensed for onroad use. 

(B) INCLUSIONS.—The term ‘‘nonroad vehicle’’ includes a vehicle described 

in subparagraph (A) that is used principally— 

(i) for industrial, farming, or commercial use; 

(ii) for rail transportation; 

(iii) at an airport; or 

(iv) for marine purposes. 

(6) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Energy. 

SEC. 3. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE. 

Section 1703(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16513(a)) is amended 

by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(11) Infrastructure for provision and distribution of alternative fuels.’’. 

SEC. 4. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING INCENTIVE PROGRAM. 

Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 

17013) is amended— 

(1) in subsection (a)— 

(A) in paragraph (1)— 

(i) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as clauses (i) 

through (iii), respectively, and indenting appropriately; 

(ii) in the matter preceding clause (i) (as redesignated by clause (i)), 

by striking ‘‘means an ultra efficient vehicle or a light duty vehicle that 

meets—’’ and inserting ‘‘means— 

‘‘(A) an ultra efficient vehicle or a light duty vehicle that meets—’’; 

(iii) in clause (iii) (as redesignated by clause (i)), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and 

(iv) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(B) a vehicle (such as a medium-duty or heavy-duty work truck, bus, or 

rail transit vehicle) that— 

‘‘(i) is used on a public street, road, highway, or transitway; 

‘‘(ii) meets each applicable emission standard that is established as 

of the date of the application; and 

‘‘(iii) will reduce consumption of conventional motor fuel by 25 percent or more, as compared to existing surface transportation technologies that perform a similar function, unless the Secretary determines that— 

‘‘(I) the percentage is not achievable for a vehicle type or class; 

and 

‘‘(II) an alternative percentage for that vehicle type or class will 

result in substantial reductions in motor fuel consumption within 

the United States.’’; 

(B) in paragraph (3)(B)— 

(i) by striking ‘‘equipment and’’ and inserting ‘‘equipment,’’; and 

(ii) by inserting ‘‘, and manufacturing process equipment’’ after ‘‘suppliers’’; and 

(C) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(4) QUALIFYING COMPONENTS.—The term ‘qualifying components’ means components, systems, or groups of subsystems that the Secretary determines— 

‘‘(A) to be designed to improve fuel economy or otherwise substantially reduce consumption of conventional motor fuel; or 

‘‘(B) to contribute measurably to the overall improved fuel use of an advanced technology vehicle, including idle reduction technologies.’’; 

(2) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘to 

automobile’’ and inserting ‘‘to advanced technology vehicle’’; 

(3) in subsection (d)(1), in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘a total of not more 

than $25,000,000,000 in’’; 

(4) in subsection (h)— 

(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ‘‘AUTOMOBILE’’ and inserting 

‘‘ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLE’’; and 

(B) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ‘‘automobiles’’ each place it appears 

and inserting ‘‘advanced technology vehicles’’; and 

(5) in subsection (i), by striking ‘‘2012’’ and inserting ‘‘2016’’. 

SEC. 5. CONVENTIONAL FUEL REPLACEMENT CALCULATION AND ASSESSMENT. 

(a) METHODOLOGY.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary shall, by rule, develop a methodology for calculating the equivaVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:40 Sep 10, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\SR072.XXX SR072

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

lent volumes of conventional fuel displaced by use of each alternative fuel to assess 

the effectiveness of alternative fuel and alternative fueled vehicles in reducing oil 

imports. 

(b) NATIONAL ASSESSMENT.—Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall— 

(1) conduct a national assessment (using the methodology developed under 

subsection (a)) of the effectiveness of alternative fuel and alternative fueled vehicles in reducing oil imports into the United States, including as assessment 

of— 

(A) market penetration of alternative fuel and alternative fueled vehicles 

in the United States; 

(B) successes and barriers to deployment identified by the programs established under this Act; and 

(C) the maximum feasible deployment of alternative fuel and alternative 

fueled vehicles by 2020 and 2030; and 

(2) report to Congress the results of the assessment. 

SEC. 6. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COORDINATION. 

(a) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out this title, the Secretary shall provide, at the 

request of the Governor, mayor, county executive, public utility commissioner, 

or other appropriate official or designee, technical assistance to State, local, and 

tribal governments or to a public-private partnership described in paragraph (2) 

to assist with the deployment of alternative fuel and alternative fueled vehicles 

and infrastructure. 

(2) PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.—Technical assistance under this section 

may be awarded to a public-private partnership, comprised of State, local or 

tribal governments and nongovernmental entities, including— 

(A) electric or natural gas utilities or other alternative fuel distributors; 

(B) vehicle manufacturers; 

(C) alternative fueled vehicle or alternative fuel technology providers; 

(D) vehicle fleet owners; 

(E) transportation and freight service providers; or 

(F) other appropriate non-Federal entities, as determined by the Secretary. 

(3) ASSISTANCE.—The technical assistance described in paragraph (1) may include— 

(A) coordination in the selection, location, and timing of alternative fuel 

recharging and refueling equipment and distribution infrastructure, including the identification of transportation corridors and specific alternative 

fuels that would be made available; 

(B) development of protocols and communication standards that facilitate 

vehicle refueling and recharging into electric, natural gas, and other alternative fuel distribution systems; 

(C) development of codes and standards for the installation of alternative 

fuel distribution and recharging and refueling equipment; 

(D) education and outreach for the deployment of alternative fuel and alternative fueled vehicles; and 

(E) utility rate design and integration of alternative fueled vehicles into 

electric and natural gas utility distribution systems. 

(b) COST SHARING.—Cost sharing for assistance awarded under this section shall 

be consistent with section 988 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16352). 

(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2016. 

SEC. 7. WORKFORCE TRAINING. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, shall 

award grants to community colleges, other institutions of higher education, and 

other qualified training and education institutions for the establishment or expansion of programs to provide training and education for vocational workforce development for— 

(1) the manufacture and maintenance of alternative fueled vehicles; and 

(2) the manufacture, installation, support, and inspection of alternative fuel 

recharging, refueling, and distribution infrastructure. 

(b) PURPOSE.—Training funded under this section shall be intended to ensure that 

the workforce has the necessary skills needed to manufacture, install, and maintain 

alternative fuel infrastructure and alternative fueled vehicles. 

(c) SCOPE.—Training funded under this section shall include training for— 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

(1) electricians, plumbers, pipefitters, and other trades and contractors who 

will be installing, maintaining, or providing safety support for alternative fuel 

recharging, refueling, and distribution infrastructure; 

(2) building code inspection officials; 

(3) vehicle, engine, and powertrain dealers and mechanics; and 

(4) others positions as the Secretary determines necessary to successfully deploy alternative fuels and vehicles. 

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2016. 

SEC. 8. REDUCTION OF ENGINE IDLING AND CONVENTIONAL FUEL CONSUMPTION. 

(a) DEFINITION OF IDLE REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY.—Section 756(a)(5) of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16104(a)(5)) is amended— 

(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon at the end; 

(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ‘‘; 

and’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(C) uses an alternative fuel to reduce consumption of conventional fuel 

and environmental emissions.’’. 

(b) FUNDING.—Section 756(b)(4)(B) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 

16104(b)(4)(B)) is amended in clauses (i) and (ii) by striking ‘‘fiscal year 2008’’ each 

place it appears and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal years 2008 through 2016’’. 

SEC. 9. ELECTRIC, HYDROGEN, AND NATURAL GAS UTILITY AND OIL PIPELINE PARTICIPATION. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall identify barriers and remedies in existing 

electric and natural gas and oil pipeline transmission and distribution systems to 

the distribution of alternative fuels and the deployment of alternative fuel recharging and refueling capability, at economically competitive costs of alternative 

fuel for consumers, including— 

(1) model regulatory rate design and billing for recharging and refueling alternative fueled vehicles; 

(2) electric grid load management and applications that will allow batteries 

in plug-in electric drive vehicles to be used for grid storage, ancillary services 

provision, and backup power; 

(3) integration of plug-in electric drive vehicles with smart grid technology, 

including protocols and standards, necessary equipment, and information technology systems; 

(4) technical and economic barriers to transshipment of biofuels by oil pipelines, or distribution of hydrogen; and 

(5) any other barriers to installing sufficient and appropriate alternative fuel 

recharging and refueling infrastructure. 

(b) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall carry out this section in consultation 

with— 

(1) the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; 

(2) State public utility commissions; 

(3) State consumer advocates; 

(4) electric and natural gas utility and transmission owners and operators; 

(5) oil pipeline owners and operators; 

(6) hydrogen suppliers; and 

(7) other affected entities. 

(c) REPORT.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing actions taken to carry out 

this section. 

SEC. 10. HOV LANE ACCESS EXTENSION. 

Section 166(b)(5) of title 23, United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘Before September 30, 2009, the State’’ 

and inserting ‘‘The State’’; and 

(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘Before September 30, 2009, the State’’ 

and inserting ‘‘The State’’. 

PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE

The purpose of S. 1001 is to build upon existing programs to promote alternative fuel vehicles, including support of infrastructure 

and other mechanisms to enable their widespread deployment. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

In previous energy laws, such as the Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007, Congress has set out incentive programs for 

the deployment of alternative fuels, alternative fueling infrastructure, and vehicles that use alternative fuels or otherwise reduce 

the use of petroleum-derived fuels. Although past measures have 

generated progress in all of these areas, there remain structural 

impediments, both within the federal programs and in local government and the private sector, that may be hindering the speed of 

deployment. S. 1001 makes adjustments to the federal framework 

to try and address some of those barriers and make existing programs more effective. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Wyden introduced S. 1001, with Senator Stabenow as an 

original cosponsor, on May 16, 2011. The full Committee held a 

hearing on the bill on June 9, 2011. 

The Committee marked up the bill in open business meeting on 

July 14, 2011, and ordered S. 1001 favorably reported with an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTES

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on July 14, by a majority vote of a quorum 

present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1001, if amended as 

described herein. 

The rollcall vote on reporting the measure was 12 yeas, 10 nays 

as follows: 

YEAS NAYS 

Mr. Bingaman Ms. Murkowski 

Mr. Wyden Mr. Barrasso 

Mr. Johnson* Mr. Risch* 

Ms. Landrieu Mr. Lee* 

Ms. Cantwell Mr. Paul* 

Mr. Sanders Mr. Coats 

Ms. Stabenow* Mr. Portman 

Mr. Udall Mr. Hoeven 

Mrs. Shaheen Mr. Heller 

Mr. Franken* Mr. Corker* 

Mr. Manchin 

Mr. Coons* 

*Indicates vote by proxy. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

The Committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which: (1) replaced tax code definitions with definitions 

from the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13211); (2) removed 

‘‘advanced biofuels’’ from the category of projects proposed to be 

made eligible for loan guarantees under section 1703 of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005; (3) added distribution of hydrogen to the matters to be studied under section 9; (4) deleted the research and development section (section 109 of S. 1001 as introduced), as it was 

deemed to be substantially redundant to the provisions in S. 734, 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

previously acted upon by the Committee; and (5) removed the title 

related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 contains the short title. 

Section 2 defines terms used in the bill. 

Section 3 adds infrastructure for provision and distribution of alternative fuels as a new category of project that may receive loan 

guarantees under title 17 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

Section 4 expands the Department of Energy’s existing Advanced 

Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program so that 

efficient medium and heavy trucks, buses, and rail transit vehicles 

are eligible (currently, only light duty vehicles are eligible) and allows the Secretary of Energy to reduce the efficiency gains required 

for each selected project below 25 percent upon a determination it 

is not achievable. The section further strikes the existing $25 billion cap on loan volume, adds production of alternative fuel vehicles as another category of manufacturing eligible for loans, and 

clarifies the availability of loans to component manufacturers. Finally, it extends the appropriations authorization by 4 years (from 

2012 to 2016). 

Section 5 directs the Secretary to develop a methodology to quantify the amount of oil displaced by alternative fuels, and within 3 

years report to Congress with an assessment of alternative fuel deployment, deployment potential, and barriers to market entry. 

Section 6 directs the Secretary to provide technical assistance to 

state, local, tribal governments, and public-private partnerships 

with those governments to assist with deployment of alternative 

fuels, vehicles, and infrastructure, with costs shared. It also authorizes $50 million per year for 5 years for this activity. 

Section 7 directs the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, to provide grants for workforce training to community colleges and other institutions of higher education to develop 

training programs for manufacturing, maintaining, and installing 

alternative fuel vehicles and refueling infrastructure. It also authorizes $50 million per year for 5 years for this activity. 

Section 8 addresses an alternative fuel to reduce consumption of 

conventional fuel and environmental emissions to definition of idle 

reduction technology in section 756(a)(5) of the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005. It also reauthorizes the program at the 2008 level ($45 

million and $20 million for clauses (i) and (ii), respectively) through 

2016. 

Section 9 directs the Secretary to work with the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, utilities, state utility commissions, and 

other stakeholders to identify barriers to alternative fuel deployment in existing electric, hydrogen, natural gas, and oil transmission and distribution systems, and report back to Congress 

within 2 years. 

Section 10 extends state authority to allow energy-efficient vehicles in HOV lanes by deleting the existing 2009 deadline for state 

action. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 1001—Alternative Fueled Vehicles Competitiveness and Energy 

Security Act of 2011 

Summary: S. 1001 would authorize appropriations for a variety 

of activities aimed at promoting the development and deployment 

of alternative fueled vehicles. Current law defines such vehicles as 

those that consume fuel other than petroleum or that use technologies that consume significantly less petroleum than conventional vehicles. The bill also would expand eligibility requirements 

for two existing loan programs administered by the Department of 

Energy (DOE) to include projects related to such vehicles. 

CBO estimates that implementing S. 1001 would have a discretionary cost of $595 million over the 2012–2016 period, assuming 

appropriation of the necessary amounts. We also estimate that expanding DOE’s loan programs would increase direct spending by 

$350 million over the next 10 years; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Enacting S. 1001 would not affect revenues. 

S. 1001 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 1001 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 270 (energy) and 300 

(natural resources and environment). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2012– 

2016 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Estimated Authorization Level ...................................................... 167 188 188 188 189 920 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 48 108 131 147 161 595 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING 1

Estimated Budget Authority ......................................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 30 50 100 100 40 320 

1 CBO estimates that S. 1001 would increase direct spending by $350 million over the 2012–2021 period. 

Basis of estimate: CBO estimates that implementing S. 1001 

would have a discretionary cost of $595 million over the 2012–2016 

period. We also estimate that the bill would increase direct spending by $350 million over the 2012–2021 period. For this estimate, 

CBO assumes that S. 1001 will be enacted near the start of fiscal 

year 2012 and that necessary funds will be provided each year. 

Spending subject to appropriation 

S. 1001 would specifically authorize appropriations totaling $825 

million over the 2012–2016 period for DOE and the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) to carry out a variety of activities to improve the energy efficiency of vehicles and promote the deployment 

of alternative fueled vehicles and infrastructure. That specified 

amount includes: 

• $325 million for EPA to support the deployment of technologies to reduce energy consumed by heavy-duty vehicles and 

locomotives when idling; 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

• $250 million for DOE to provide technical assistance to state, 

local, and tribal governments to develop infrastructure, systems, and education programs related to facilities to recharge 

and refuel alternative fueled vehicles; and, 

• $250 million for grants to institutions of higher learning and 

vocational training to expand programs to train individuals to 

work in industries related to alternative fueled vehicles. 

In addition, CBO estimates that implementing other provisions of S. 1001 would require appropriations totaling $95 million over 

the 2012–2016 period. That amount includes $90 million for DOE 

to continue to administer the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) Loan Program and $5 million to complete various studies and reports. In total, assuming the appropriation of 

amounts specified and estimated to be necessary, CBO estimates 

that implementing S. 1001 would cost $595 million over the 2012– 

2016 period, with additional outlays occurring in later years. That 

estimate is based on historical spending patterns for activities similar to those authorized under S. 1001. 

Direct spending 

S. 1001 would broaden eligibility criteria for two of DOE’s existing credit programs—the ATVM program, which provides direct 

loans to support the cost of retrofitting facilities intended to 

produce energy-efficient light-duty vehicles and components for 

such vehicles, and the program established under title 17 of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005, which provides loan guarantees for 

projects that involve certain types of innovative energy technologies. Broadly speaking, S. 1001 would expand both programs to 

allow DOE to increase credit support for projects related to alternative fueled vehicles and infrastructure. In particular, changes to 

the ATVM program would make it easier for manufacturers of vehicle components to qualify for loans and permit DOE to make 

loans to manufacturers of energy-efficient medium- and heavy-duty 

vehicles and transit vehicles. S. 1001 would add infrastructure to 

provide and distribute alternative fuels to the list of projects eligible for loan guarantees under the title 17 program. 

Under current law, DOE has budget authority and specified limits on loan volumes for both programs that CBO estimates will not 

be fully utilized over the next 10 years. As a result, we expect that 

executing new loans or loan guarantees under S. 1001 would require no new budget authority or increased loan limitations over 

the next several years, and that DOE could meet the demand for 

such credit support within its existing budget authority and loan 

authority. Because increasing the amount of spending from that existing authority would require no further Congressional action, enacting S. 1001 would result in an increase in direct spending. 

CBO cannot predict the specific types of projects likely to proceed 

under S. 1001, but based on information from the Energy Information Administration and industry sources about the anticipated 

timeframe involved in deploying alternative fueled vehicles and related infrastructure, we expect that DOE would use its existing authority to provide credit support to a few projects over the next 10 

years. Taken as a whole, CBO estimates that enacting S. 1001 

would increase direct spending by $350 million for those activities 

over the 2012–2021 period—that amount is equivalent to roughly 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

10 percent of the amount that DOE has obligated to date for loans 

to support the deployment of advanced technology vehicles. 

The above estimate is driven primarily by increased spending of 

existing balances for the ATVM program. The Congress appropriated $7.5 billion for that program in 2009. According to DOE, as 

of August 2011, the agency has obligated roughly $3.5 billion to 

support six loans totaling $9.1 billion at an average subsidy rate 

of about 38 percent. Under current law, CBO expects that a significant portion of DOE’s remaining $4 billion in unobligated balances 

will not be spent over the next 10 years. As a result, CBO estimates that S. 1001 would increase direct spending of those balances. In particular, CBO expects that easing eligibility requirements for manufacturers of vehicle components would permit DOE 

to proceed with pending applications for loans to support projects 

that would not otherwise qualify under current law. In addition, 

CBO expects that at least some loans would be made to manufacturers of energy-efficient medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and 

transit vehicles. 

Finally, CBO expects that any added spending for title 17 loan 

guarantees to support investments in recharging and refueling infrastructure for advanced vehicles would most likely be issued toward the end of the 2012–2021 period and would be largely offset 

by fees paid by borrowers, resulting in an insignificant net budgetary impact. 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net 

changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table. Those changes result from 

provisions of S. 1001 that would expand eligibility requirements for 

two existing loan programs and increase DOE’s use of previously 

enacted authority to issue direct loans and guarantees for projects 

related to alternative fueled vehicles and infrastructure. 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 1001 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES ON JULY 14, 2011 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2012– 

2016 

2012– 

2021 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (¥) IN THE DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact ............... 30 50 100 100 40 10 5 5 5 5 320 350 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1001 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. 

The bill would authorize grants to institutions of higher education 

and technical assistance to state, local, and tribal governments for 

activities related to the deployment of alternative-fuel vehicles. Any 

costs to those entities would be incurred voluntarily as a condition 

of federal assistance. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Megan Carroll and Kathleen Gramp; Impact on State, local, and Tribal Governments: Ryan 

Miller; Impact on the private sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 1001. 

The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses, but rather providing direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants to private industry 

that may be voluntarily applied for. 

No personal information would be collected in administering programs authorized under the bill. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

While an applicant to the loan, loan guarantee, and grant programs authorized in the measure will have to submit paperwork 

through the application process, little if any additional paperwork 

would be required of any entity or person that is not an applicant 

to a program. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

The bill, as reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Department of Energy on June 9, 

2011 follows: 

STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN HOGAN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY, OFFICE OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Chairman Bingaman, Ranking Member Murkowski and 

Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity 

to discuss the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) energy efficiency and Advanced Vehicles Technology Programs. The 

Administration is still reviewing the Reducing Federal Energy Dollars Act of 2011 (S. 963), the Energy Savings and 

Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2011 (S. 1000), and the 

Alternative Fuel Vehicles Competitiveness and Energy Security Act of 2011 (S. 1001). While the Administration does 

not take a position at this time, my statement will provide 

you with information on work DOE is already doing to create jobs, build a new clean energy economy, and help save 

consumers and businesses money through improved energy 

efficiency. 

At EERE, we work to remove the barriers to the rapid 

conversion of innovative research into commercial products, manufacturing, and jobs. And we work with other 

federal, state, and local governments to speed the adoption 

of these American innovations. The new businesses in 

clean energy production, installation, and operation are 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

playing a key role driving economic growth and job creation. 

The market for clean energy technology is growing 

quickly and many countries have mounted aggressive national efforts to capture market share. China, for example, 

has moved quickly to dominate the development of next 

generation clean energy products through low-cost production and investments in research infrastructure. As the 

President said, ‘‘this is our generation’s Sputnik moment.’’ 

To show his clear commitment to our future, he has asked 

for a significant increase in funding for energy efficiency 

and renewable energy in the FY12 budget proposal, even 

in a budget which moves overall domestic discretionary 

spending to the lowest levels in a generation. 

To win the future, we have to be a nation that makes, 

creates, and innovates. Across the country, we are seeing 

strong evidence that the out-build and out-innovate pillars 

the Administration has put forward are paying off. In October of last year, for example, manufacturing posted its 

first twelve-month gain in more than ten years, and has 

added close to 250,000 jobs since the December 2009 low. 

The Administration continues to be optimistic about the 

prospects for manufacturing in the recovery. 

Manufacturing remains one of the most globally competitive economic sectors we have. It also is one of the 

most visible economic sectors we have, with middle-class 

Americans clearly understanding the impact that strengthened manufacturing has on their lives and their communities. 

The challenges we face mean that we need to move with 

unprecedented speed and scale. Success is measured by 

private innovation and investment but can begin with 

well-crafted federal programs that will help achieve a 

number of important goals: 

• A vigorous and profitable residential and commercial 

building retrofit industry, cost-effectively saving 30–50 

percent of the energy used in existing buildings; 

• Solar energy, offshore wind energy, and geothermal 

plants fully competitive with conventional sources of electricity; 

• Fuels that can be drop-in replacements for gasoline, 

diesel fuel, or jet fuel priced competitively with products 

produced from petroleum; 

• Large fleets of electric and hybrid cars supported by a 

network of charging stations to support them; and 

• Trucks with over 50% improvement in fuel economy. 

Small federal investments have led to major breakthroughs like the invention of the internet and Global Positioning Systems or ‘‘GPS’’ found in most cellular devices 

today. Similarly, EERE investments past, present, and future are critical to achieving these goals. As one example, 

in 2009, the U.S. had only two, relatively small, factories 

manufacturing advanced vehicle batteries, and produced 

less than two percent of the world’s hybrid vehicle batVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:40 Sep 10, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR072.XXX SR072

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

1http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/blueprint_secure_energy_future.pdf. 2http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/vehicles_fs.pdf. 3http://www.bels.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm. 

teries.1 But over the next few years, thanks to investments 

from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

(Recovery Act) in battery and electric drive component 

manufacturing, and electric drive demonstration and infrastructure, the U.S. will be able to produce enough batteries 

and components to support 500,000 plug-in and electric vehicles per year. High volume manufacturing, coupled with 

battery technology advances, design optimization, and material cost reductions, could lead to a drop in battery costs 

of 50 percent by 2013 compared to 2009, which will lower 

the cost of electric vehicles, making them accessible to 

more consumers. 

These kinds of breakthroughs are especially important 

in the transportation sector, which alone accounts for approximately two-thirds of the United States’ oil consumption and contributes to one-third of the Nation’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.2 After housing, transportation 

is the second biggest monthly expense for most American 

families.3 As the President said in his recent energy 

speech, ‘‘In an economy that relies so heavily on oil, rising 

prices at the pump affect everybody.’’ Emphasizing that 

‘‘there are no quick fixes,’’ the President outlined a portfolio of actions which, taken together, could cut U.S. oil imports by a third by 2025. 

The draft legislation being addressed today focuses on 

three areas: • Clean energy in the Federal sector • Energy efficiency in the industrial sector and 

building codes • Alternative fuel vehicles 

General comments are provided on each of these three 

areas, but the Department has no comments on the specific content of the legislation, as these bills are currently 

under review by the Administration. 

CLEAN ENERGY IN THE FEDERAL SECTOR

Constructing and operating Federal facilities in a sustainable manner has numerous well-documented benefits, 

including: • Saving taxpayer dollars through optimized lifecycle cost-effective actions; • Enhancing employee productivity through the provision of safe, healthy and environmentally appealing 

workplaces; • Reducing environmental impacts through decreased energy, water, and materials use; and • Moving the overall market conditions toward 

higher performance, through the Federal demand for 

sustainable facilities. 

These benefits are sizable, in part, due to the size of the 

Federal Government. The Federal Government is estimated to use about 1.6 percent of the Nation’s total enVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:32 Sep 10, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR072.XXX SR072

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

4http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/energy-and-environment. 

ergy, occupy nearly 500,000 buildings, operate more than 

600,000 vehicles, and purchase more than $500 billion per 

year in goods and services. 

The Federal government is making substantial progress 

toward its sustainability goals mandated in EPAct 2005, 

EISA 2007, and Executive Order 13514, signed by President Obama in October, 2009. For example, in FY 2010, 

the Federal Government reported a 15 percent decrease in 

site-delivered Btu per square foot compared with baseline 

year 2003. This meets the EISA statutory reduction goal 

for FY 2010. 

FY 2010 was also the highest level year to date for the 

use of Energy Savings Performance Contracting with these 

contacts totaling more than $560 million in investment in 

Federal facilities. This type of performance-based contracting is extremely important to meeting the Federal 

sustainability goals due to the pressures on Federal appropriations and increasing goals for reduced energy intensity, energy savings goals that increase to 30% by 2015. 

In FY 2010, Federal agencies also reported purchasing 

or producing renewable electric energy representing 5.2 

percent of the Federal Government’s electricity use, 

achieving the EPAct 2005 goal of five percent. This more 

than doubled renewable energy use as a percentage of 

total facility electricity use since 2003. The five percent 

goal remains in place until FY 2013, when it will increase 

to 7.5 percent under current statute. Not counted in this 

metric is the significant amount of non-electric renewable 

energy produced and purchased by the Government that 

displaces the need for additional electric generation. This 

includes thermal energy, such as solar hot water and space 

heating, geothermal energy, steam from biomass, and 

landfill methane. 

DOE is also making progress to improve the transparency of Federal building energy efficiency, as required 

under EISA 2007, Section 432. DOE expects to have a 

web-based system that provides information on the energy 

efficiency of metered buildings and on the cost-effective improvement opportunities that exist in Federal facilities 

publicly available by Fall 2011. 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE INDUSTRIAL SECTOR AND

BUILDING CODES

The Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act 

(S. 1000) outlines new provisions for building codes, appliance standards, and industrial energy efficiency among 

other areas. 

Energy-conserving appliance standards are one of the 

significant steps the Administration has taken to save energy in homes and businesses nationwide, and pave the 

way toward a clean energy future for our country.4 Since 

January 2009, the Department of Energy has finalized 

new efficiency standards for more than twenty household 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

5http://www.energy.gov/news/9582.htm 

6See, for example: McKinsey and Company (2007). Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

How Much at What Cost? (http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/suca/cost-effectiveness.pdf) and Lazard Associates. Feb. 2009. Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis Version 3.0. 7http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/about/pdfs/itp_program_fact_sheet.pdf. 

and commercial products, which are projected to cumulatively save consumers between $250 billion and $300 billion over the next 20 years.5 These standards can provide 

an immediate and economically responsible way to increase the nation’s energy security while protecting the environment. Improvements in energy efficiency can be made 

today to yield significant near-term and long-term economic and environmental benefits for the nation.6

In 2007, Congress recognized the importance of negotiated consensus standards, amending the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act (EPCA) to allow for an expedited 

rulemaking process in the event a representative group of 

stakeholders could reach agreement. Several DOE rules 

currently under development and review overlap with the 

proposed consensus standards. Although the agency cannot 

presuppose the level of the final standards, it is seriously 

considering these consensus recommendations. The agency’s preliminary analyses accompanying the proposed rules 

for these standards suggest that the potential net benefits 

from these recommended levels could yield tens of billions 

of dollars in fuel savings and lower greenhouse gas emissions. 

U.S. industry accounts for about one-third of U.S. energy 

use while contributing to about 12% of U.S. Gross Domestic Product.7 Improving industrial energy efficiency will result in saving money and enhancing U.S. competitiveness 

in the world’s manufacturing sector. By partnering with 

the private sector, DOE has already managed to save more 

than 9.3 quadrillion Btu of energy and reduced carbon 

emissions by over 206 million metric tons. 

Supply chain energy efforts can make an important contribution to overall industrial efficiency and the competitive position of domestic suppliers. Analysis suggests that 

a large part of the carbon footprint for many consumer 

products can be attributed to the supply chain—from raw 

materials, transport, and packaging to the energy consumed in manufacturing processes—on the order of 40 to 

60 percent. DOE and the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) both have existing initiatives that address supply 

chain efficiency, such as Save Energy Now® at DOE and 

ENERGY STAR. For example, through its national Save 

Energy Now® initiative, DOE encourages manufacturing 

companies to engage their supply chains in energy and 

carbon management, while at EPA, ENERGY STAR has 

engaged whole industries to support their customers and 

supply chains in building effective energy management 

programs. Specifically, DOE and EPA develop processes 

and resources to assist companies in promoting energy 

management to their industrial suppliers and customers. 

Save Energy Now® LEADER Companies make a voluntary 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

commitment to reduce their energy intensity by 25 percent 

in 10 years. Many of these companies are interested in improving the efficiency of their supply chains as well. ENERGY STAR boasts a growing group of corporations that 

have used ENERGY STAR to influence key suppliers to effectively manage energy. 

DOE is also working with Superior Energy Performance 

(SEP), a voluntary certification program helping to provide 

industrial facilities with a roadmap for achieving continual 

improvement in energy efficiency while maintaining competitiveness. A central element of SEP is implementation 

of the International Organization for Standardization 

(ISO) 50001 energy management standard, with additional 

requirements to achieve and document energy intensity 

improvements. DOE is working through SEP to bring ISO 

50001 to the U.S. Upon its publication this American National Standards Institute-accredited program is anticipated to provide companies with a framework for fostering 

energy efficiency at the plant level and a consistent methodology for measuring and validating energy efficiency and 

intensity improvements. This new framework has the opportunity to be an important tool to integrate into supply 

chain efforts. 

ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES

Few technologies hold greater promise for reducing our 

dependence on oil than alternative fuel vehicles. The Administration has set a goal to have the United States become the first country with a million electric vehicles on 

the road. Meeting this goal will help the United States become a leader in the clean energy economy, while capitalizing on the ingenuity of American industry. Manufacturing products needed for the clean energy economy will 

generate long term economic strength in the U.S., creating 

jobs across the country while reducing air pollution and 

greenhouse gas emissions. The Administration supports 

the goal of utilizing alternative fuel technologies to break 

our dependence on oil and to move toward a clean energy 

future. The DOE looks forward to working with Congress 

to achieve these objectives. 

DOE’s Vehicle Technologies Program is helping the Nation lead the way in alternative fuel vehicle innovation. 

DOE has helped reduce the cost of PHEV Lithium Ion batteries to $650 per kilowatt-hour, a 35% reduction from the 

2008 baseline of $1,000 per kilowatt-hour. This is making 

oil alternatives competitive in general while specifically increasing U.S. competitiveness in the global market. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the Department of Energy thanks the 

Subcommittee for the opportunity to comment on these 

proposed initiatives. We look forward to working with Congress to develop strong, effective clean energy policy to ensure U.S. leadership on these global issues and in the 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

clean energy economy. I am happy to answer any questions Committee Members may have. 

STATEMENT OF JONATHAN SILVER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF

THE LOAN PROGRAMS OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Bingaman, Ranking Member Murkowski, and 

members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity 

to testify today. My name is Jonathan Silver, and I am the 

Executive Director of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) 

Loan Programs Office (LPO). DOE’s loan programs provide 

critical support for the nation’s commercial deployment of 

clean energy technologies, and the jobs and economic 

growth that come with them. I welcome the opportunity to 

discuss the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing 

(ATVM) Loan Program with you and to highlight our significant accomplishments. 

BACKGROUND OF THE ATVM LOAN PROGRAM

As you know, the Loan Programs Office administers 

three separate programs: the ATVM Loan Program and 

the Title XVII Section 1703 and Section 1705 loan guarantee programs. The ATVM Loan Program was established 

by Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security 

Act of 2007, and provides direct loans to support the manufacturing of advanced technology vehicles and qualifying 

components in the United States. As noted by GAO in 

their most recent report, although the authorizing statute 

does not specifically identify goals for the Program, ATVM 

Program staff have established clear goals and performance metrics to measure the program’s success. In achieving these goals, the Program helps create next-generation 

jobs in the automotive and component manufacturing industries. 

The Program provides loans to automobile and automobile parts manufacturers for the cost of reequipping, expanding, or establishing manufacturing facilities in the 

United States to produce advanced technology vehicles or 

qualified components, and for associated engineering integration costs. In 2010, Section 136 was amended to include 

ultra-efficient vehicles within the definition of advanced 

technology vehicles. 

The FY 2009 Continuing Resolution (CR), which was enacted on September 30, 2008, appropriated $7.5 billion in 

credit subsidy to support up to $25 billion in loans under 

the ATVM Loan program. The FY 2009 CR also provided 

DOE with $10 million to administer the Program. On November 5, 2008, DOE issued the Interim Final Rule for the 

Program. DOE accomplished this effort in approximately 

half of the 60-day timeframe mandated by Congress. The 

program began receiving applications on December 2, 

2008. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

The ATVM Program has received numerous applications 

from both automobile original equipment manufacturers 

(OEMs) and component manufacturers. 

VALUE OF ATVM LOAN PROGRAM

ATVM funding has played a critical role in the development of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles by providing 

long-term capital when private financing was not available. It is important to remember that the ATVM Loan 

Program is not a grant program; loans must be repaid. We 

review projects on a competitive basis, and we do not fund 

every eligible project. We ensure that the loans we support 

meet our statutory requirement of having a reasonable 

prospect of repayment. Every project that receives financing must first go through a rigorous financial, legal and 

technical review process—similar to, and in some ways 

more comprehensive than, what a private sector lender 

would conduct—before a single dollar of taxpayer money is 

put to work. 

Moreover, the programs can efficiently and effectively leverage government resources to spur private-sector investment. The financing provided by the loan programs is ‘‘additive.’’ It is intended to finance projects that—because 

they would have difficulty accessing conventional debt 

markets—might otherwise not get built. A relatively small 

amount of appropriated credit subsidy can support large 

amounts of new private sector investment. When a loan is 

fully repaid, the nation will have benefited from the 

incentivized private sector investment at relatively little 

cost to taxpayers. 

The potential benefits of the Program are great. In addition to improvements in fuel economy, ATVM Loan Program projects promote economic growth and job creation. 

They create construction and permanent operating jobs in 

manufacturing communities where job growth has long 

been stagnant. In addition, these projects contribute to the 

build-out of the domestic supply chain and manufacturing 

base that we will need to ‘‘win’’ the clean energy future. 

To date, DOE has issued five ATVM loans totaling $8.3 

billion. These funds will support advanced vehicle projects 

in nine states and the companies supported estimate these 

projects will preserve or create almost 38,000 manufacturing or permanent jobs. The Program also provides substantial support to the US automotive supply chain. According to information received from the companies, more 

than 65 percent of the parts for Fisker’s Karma vehicle are 

expected to come from US manufacturers, and the VPG facility alone is estimated to support approximately 800 

sales, service, parts and supplier professionals. In an economic downturn that threatened the entire domestic auto 

industry, the Program helped re-establish US leadership 

across multiple automotive technologies including plug-in, 

high-efficiency gasoline, and natural gas vehicles. 

ATVM loans support three of the world’s first electric 

car factories in Delaware, Tennessee and California, as 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

well as the only factory-built light-duty vehicle to date that 

meets or exceeds accessibility guidelines of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act. In total, our projects will save approximately 282 million gallons of gasoline annually— 

roughly the same as removing 545,000 passenger vehicles 

from the roads. 

S. 1000 AND S. 1001

The Administration is continuing to review these bills 

and does not have a position on them at this time. My 

comments will be limited to Section 202 of S. 1000 and 

Sections 101 and 102 of S. 1001 as they address issues 

that would fall under the Loan Program Office at the Department of Energy. 

S. 1000 would expand Title XVII to finance energy efficiency upgrades to existing buildings. The new program 

would target certain building types, including commercial, 

industrial, municipal, university, school, and hospital facilities. The President’s 2012 budget requests $100 million 

for loan guarantee subsidy costs to support up to $2 billion 

in loan guarantees for energy efficiency retrofits of universities, schools, and hospitals. However, as noted above the 

Administration is continuing to review the specifics of this 

bill. 

S. 1001 would add two new categories of vehicles to 

those now eligible for a loan under the ATVM Program. 

Vehicles currently eligible for ATVM loans include certain 

light duty and ultra-efficient vehicles. The proposed bill 

would add medium and heavy-duty trucks, bus and rail vehicles, as well as alternative fuel vehicles. These vehicles 

would need to satisfy certain loan eligibility requirements 

set out in the proposed bill, including reducing the consumption of conventional motor fuel. The proposed bill 

would also expand the scope of components that are eligible for a loan under the ATVM program. 

The bill would also amend the Title XVII loan guarantee 

program to include, as part of the 1703 program’s mandate, the reduction of oil imports through alternative fuel 

projects. It would also make projects that produce and distribute alternative fuel and advanced biofuels eligible for 

1703 loan guarantees. 

ADDRESSING THE GAO FINDINGS

As you are aware, the U.S. Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) completed its audit of the ATVM Loan Program in February of this year. The stated objectives of the 

audit were to (1) identify the steps DOE has taken to implement the ATVM loan program, (2) examine the ATVM 

program’s progress in awarding loans, (3) assess how the 

program is overseeing the loans, and (4) evaluate the extent to which DOE can assess its progress toward meeting 

program goals. The auditors made only two recommendations: (i) that the Program accelerate its efforts to engage 

the engineering expertise needed for effective technical 

oversight of loan recipients, and (ii) that the Program deVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:40 Sep 10, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR072.XXX SR072

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

velop sufficient, quantifiable performance measures for its 

three program goals. 

The GAO report noted that DOE had taken numerous 

steps to successfully implement the ATVM Program. In addition to setting out Program goals for increasing U.S. fuel 

economy as a whole, advancing U.S. automotive technology, and protecting taxpayers’ financial interests, the 

Program also established rigorous technical, financial, and 

environmental eligibility requirements for applicants. 

The GAO also acknowledged that the Program has successfully set procedures for overseeing the financial and 

technical performance of borrowers, but asserted that it 

did not engage engineering expertise in a timely matter for 

certain projects that need additional technical oversight. 

First, because of their technical expertise, the Program 

leverages staff in DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy (EERE) to determine whether applicants and proposed projects meet the Program’s technical 

eligibility criteria. EERE performs most of the technical 

eligibility analysis for the ATVM Loan Program, and uses 

a model from the Argonne National Laboratory to analyze 

certain applicant-provided technical data. Second, as we 

related in our response to the GAO report, the ATVM Loan 

Program—consistent with its procedures—has regularly 

engaged both internal and external expertise to help oversee borrowers’ compliance with the loans’ technical requirements. In addition to experienced engineers on staff, 

we have—contracted with the country’s leading independent engineering firms to ensure that the projects are 

being delivered as agreed. These large, private sector firms 

have decades of experience in monitoring and overseeing 

complex vehicle and technology projects—and thousands of 

specialized experts. 

We also disagree with GAO’s recommendations on the 

appropriate phase to begin close technical scrutiny of certain large projects. GAO suggested, for example, a detailed 

review of the engineering integration stage, which is typically software-based design, scheduling, and logistics. A 

formal engineering assessment at this very preliminary 

stage would increase transaction costs but would not yield 

insights that would increase effectiveness of the ATVM 

program. 

For every project supported by ATVM loans, DOE utilizes engineering expertise on a regular basis during vehicle assembly and component manufacturing facility construction. Given the wide variation in ATVM projects, 

however, it is neither possible nor prudent to subject them 

all to an identical engineering review. The Program tailors 

the review for each project to deploy engineering expertise 

when and where it is most needed in order to achieve the 

highest confidence in the quality of the project and its ability to repay the loan. 

Additionally, the Loan Program’s Portfolio Management 

Division continuously monitors both a borrower’s adherence to the technical specifications in its approved busiVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:40 Sep 10, 2011 Jkt 099010 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR072.XXX SR072

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

ness plan, and its financial performance relative to the 

terms and conditions of the loan agreement. Program engineers attend quarterly progress meetings with the borrowers and participate in on-site inspections of assembly 

plants and construction sites. Financial covenants are specifically crafted to provide timely warnings to DOE prior to 

a borrower developing financial issues that may impact the 

project. This level of attention gives DOE the ability to 

closely monitor both the technical performance and financial health of each borrower for the life of the loan. 

The Department also disagrees with GAO’s second stated concern, that the Program has not developed sufficiently robust performance metrics. To support this position, GAO expressed concern that external auditors reported instances in which three of the four borrowers did 

not spend funds as required. The Program has been successful in verifying that loan funds are spent by the borrowers as intended by the ATVM Loan Program. As GAO 

reported, the ATVM program uses external auditors to 

oversee borrowers’ financial performance. Out of $3.5 billion in loan disbursements over fifteen months, DOE’s 

auditors have identified less than $1 million in total funds 

that were problematic. The largest of the overages, in dollars, represented less than 1/100th of one percent of the 

relevant loan. Each problem that has been identified was 

corrected immediately, and procedures were quickly put in 

place to ensure that the errors did not occur again. 

GAO also recommended that the ATVM Loan Program 

develop quantifiable performance measures for ATVM Program goals. DOE believes that the ATVM Loan Program 

has established clear performance measures and operated 

in a manner consistent with its authorizing statute and 

implementing regulations. DOE believes the analyses suggested by GAO go well beyond the statutory requirement 

set out under Section 136. 

CONCLUSION

In the past two years, the ATVM loan program has 

shown great success. We are making a meaningful contribution to our national clean energy goals while creating 

new and permanent jobs. We will continue to administer 

all of the DOE loan programs, including the ATVM program, in the most effective and efficient way possible— 

while appropriately protecting taxpayer funds. 

Thank you again for inviting me here today. I look forward to responding to your questions. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

1001, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 

printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005 

Public Law 109–58, as amended 

AN ACT To ensure jobs for our future with secure, affordable, and reliable energy. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—VEHICLES AND FUEL 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle D—Miscellaneous 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 756. REDUCTION OF ENGINE IDLING. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

* * * * * * * 

(5) IDLE REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY.—The term ‘‘idle reduction 

technology’’ means an advanced truck stop electrification system, auxiliary power unit, or other technology that— 

(A) is used to reduce long-duration idling; øand¿ 

(B) allows for the main drive engine or auxiliary refrigeration engine to be shut downø.¿ and; 

(C) uses an alternative fuel to reduce consumption of conventional fuel and environmental emissions. 

* * * * * * * 

(b) IDLE REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY BENEFITS, PROGRAMS, AND

STUDIES.— 

* * * * * * * 

(4) IDLE REDUCTION AND ENERGY CONSERVATION DEPLOYMENT

PROGRAM.— 

(A) ESTABLISHMENT.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in 

consultation with the Secretary of Transportation 

shall, through the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

SmartWay Transport Partnership, establish a program 

to support deployment of idle reduction and energy 

conservation technologies. 

(ii) PRIORITY.—The Administrator shall give priority 

to the deployment of idle reduction and energy conservation technologies based on the costs and beneficial effects on air quality and ability to lessen the 

emission of criteria air pollutants. 

(B) FUNDING.— 

(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are 

authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator to 

carry out subparagraph (A) for the purpose of reducing 

extended idling from heavy-duty vehicles $19,500,000 

for fiscal year 2006, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, 

and $45,000,000 for øfiscal year 2008¿ each of fiscal 

years 2008 through 2016. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

(ii) LOCOMOTIVES.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the administrator to carry out subparagraph (A) for the purpose of reducing extended idling 

from locomotives $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, 

$15,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, and $20,000,000 for 

øfiscal year 2008¿ each of fiscal years 2008 through 

2016. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE XVII—INCENTIVES FOR INNOVATIVE 

TECHNOLOGIES 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 1703. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make guarantees under 

this section only for projects that— 

(1) avoid, reduce, or sequester air pollutants or anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases; and 

(2) employ new or significantly improved technologies as 

compared to commercial technologies in service in the United 

States at the time the guarantee is issued. 

* * * * * * * 

(11) Infrastructure for provision and distribution of alternative fuels. 

* * * * * * * 

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007 

Public Law 110–140, as amended 

AN ACT To move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to 

increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on 

and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—ENERGY SECURITY THROUGH 

IMPROVED VEHICLE FUEL ECONOMY 

* * * * * * * 

Subtitle B—Improved Vehicle Technology 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 136. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES MANUFACTURING INCENTIVE PROGRAM. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VEHICLE.—The term ‘‘advanced 

technology vehicle’’ ømeans an ultra efficient vehicle or a light 

duty vehicle that meets—¿ means— 

(A) an ultra efficient vehicle or a light duty vehicle that 

meets— 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

ø(A)¿ (i) the Bin 5 Tier II emission standard established 

in regulations issued by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under section 202(i) of the Clean 

Air Act (42U.S.C. 7521(i)), or a lower-numbered Bin emission standard; 

ø(B)¿ (ii) any new emission standard in effect for fine 

particulate matter prescribed by the Administrator under 

that Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.); and 

ø(C)¿ (iii) at least 125 percent of the average base year 

combined fuel economy for vehicles with substantially 

similar attributes ø.¿; 

(B) a vehicle (such as a medium-duty or heavy-duty work 

truck, bus, or rail transit vehicle) that— 

(i) is used on a public street, road, highway, or 

transitway; 

(ii) meets each applicable emission standard that is 

established as of the date of the application; and 

(iii) will reduce consumption of conventional motor 

fuel by 25 percent or more, as compared to existing surface transportation technologies that perform a similar 

function, unless the Secretary determines that— 

(I) the percentage is not achievable for a vehicle 

type or class; and 

(II) an alternative percentage for that vehicle 

type or class will result in substantial reductions 

in motor fuel consumption within the United 

States. 

* * * * * * * 

(3) ENGINEERING INTEGRATION COSTS.—The term ‘‘engineering integration costs’’ includes the cost of engineering tasks relating to— 

(A) incorporating qualifying components into the design 

of advanced technology vehicles; and 

(B) designing tooling and øequipment and¿ equipment 

developing manufacturing processes and material suppliers and manufacturing process equipment for production 

facilities that produce qualifying components or advanced 

technology vehicles. 

ø(4) QUALIFYING COMPONENTS.—The term ‘‘qualifying components’’ means components that the Secretary determines to 

be— 

ø(A) designed for advanced technology vehicles; and 

ø(B) installed for the purpose of meeting the performance requirements of advanced technology vehicles.¿ 

(4) QUALIFYING COMPONENTS.—The term ‘‘qualifying components’’ means components, systems, or groups of subsystems 

that the Secretary determines— 

(A) to be designed to improve fuel economy or otherwise 

substantially reduce consumption of conventional motor 

fuel; or 

(B) to contribute measurably to the overall improved fuel 

use of an advanced technology vehicle, including idle reduction technologies. 

* * * * * * * 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

(b) ADVANCED VEHICLES MANUFACTURING FACILITY.—The Secretary shall provide facility funding awards under this section øto 

automobile¿ to advanced technology vehicle manufacturers, ultra efficient vehicle manufacturers, and component suppliers to pay not 

more than 30 percent of the cost of— 

(1) reequipping, expanding, or establishing a manufacturing 

facility in the United States to produce— 

* * * * * * * 

(d) DIRECT LOAN PROGRAM.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after December 19, 2007, 

and subject to the availability of appropriated funds, the Secretary 

shall carry out a program to provide øa total of not more than 

$25,000,000,000 in¿ loans to eligible individuals and entities (as 

determined by the Secretary) for the costs of activities described in 

subsection (b) of this section. The loans shall be made through the 

Federal Financing Bank, with the full faith and credit of the 

United States Government on the principal and interest. The full 

credit subsidy shall be paid by the Secretary using appropriated 

funds. 

* * * * * * * 

(h) SET ASIDE FOR SMALL øAUTOMOBILE¿ ADVANCED TECH- NOLOGY VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS AND COMPONENT SUPPLIERS.— (1) DEFINITION OF COVERED FIRM.—In this subsection, the 

term ‘‘covered firm’’ means a firm that— 

(A) employs less than 500 individuals; and 

(B) manufactures ultra efficient vehicles, øautomobiles¿ 

advanced technology vehicles, or components of advanced 

technology vehicles øautomobiles¿. (2) SET ASIDE.—Of the amount of funds that are used to provide awards for each fiscal year under subsection (b) of this 

section, the Secretary shall use not less than 10 percent to provide awards to covered firms or consortia led by a covered firm. 

(i) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years 2008 through ø2012¿ 2016. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE 23—HIGHWAYS 

CHAPTER 1—FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 166. HOV FACILITIES. 

(b) EXCEPTIONS.— 

* * * * * * * 

(5) LOW EMISSION AND ENERGY-EFFICIENT VEHICLES.— 

(A) INHERENTLY LOW EMISSION VEHICLE.—øBefore September 30, 2009, the State¿ The State agency may allow 

vehicles that are certified as inherently low-emission vehicles pursuant to section 88.311–93 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or successor regulations), and are labeled 

in accordance with section 88.312–93 of such title (or successor regulations), to use the HOV facility if the agency 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

establishes procedures for enforcing the restrictions on the 

use of the facility by the vehicles. 

(B) OTHER LOW EMISSION AND ENERGY-EFFICIENT VEHI- CLES.—øBefore September 30, 2009, the State¿ The State 

agency may allow vehicles certified as low emission and 

energy-efficient vehicles under subsection (e), and labeled 

in accordance with subsection (e), to use the HOV facility 

if the operators of the vehicles pay a toll charged by the 

agency for use of the facility and the agency— 

(i) establishes a program that addresses the selection of vehicles under this paragraph; and 

(ii) establishes procedures for enforcing the restrictions on the use of the facility by the vehicles. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS