49–006 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–475 

CAFE STANDARDS FOR PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES 

MAY 22, 2006.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. BARTON of Texas, from the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 5359] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 

the bill (H.R. 5359) to amend the automobile fuel economy provisions of title 49, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 

Transportation to set fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles based on one or more vehicle attributes, having considered 

the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 2 

Background and Need for Legislation .................................................................... 2 

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 3 

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 3 

Committee Votes ...................................................................................................... 4 

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 8 

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives .................................... 8 

New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures ............. 8 

Committee Cost Estimate ....................................................................................... 8 

Congressional Budget Office Estimate ................................................................... 8 

Federal Mandates Statement ................................................................................. 10 

Advisory Committee Statement .............................................................................. 10 

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 10 

Applicability to Legislative Branch ........................................................................ 10 

Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation ...................................................... 10 

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 11 

Dissenting Views ..................................................................................................... 13 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
2 

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 5359 is designed to provide the Secretary of Transportation 

with the authority to reform the fuel economy program for passenger automobiles based on one or more vehicle attributes related 

to fuel economy. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

In 1975, in response to the 1973–74 Arab oil embargo, Congress 

passed the ‘‘Energy Policy Conservation Act’’ (P.L. 94–163) which 

added an automobile efficiency title to the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act and established Corporate Average Fuel 

Economy (CAFE) standards for passenger cars and light trucks. 

The CAFE law requires each manufacturer selling vehicles in the 

United States to achieve a harmonically-averaged level of fuel economy, or miles per gallon (mpg), for all specified vehicles manufactured in a given model year (MY). The statute distinguishes passenger cars from light trucks and requires separate calculations for 

both. 

The Secretary of Transportation has delegated authority over the 

CAFE program to the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). By rule, NHTSA sets the 

CAFE standard for light trucks, which is currently at 22.2 for the 

2007 MY. The current standard for passenger cars is 27.5 mpg 

which is set by statute. 

In setting a CAFE standard, NHTSA must set standards at the ‘‘maximum feasible’’ level considering four factors: (1) technological 

feasibility; (2) economic practicability; (3) the effect of other standards on fuel economy; and (4) the need of the nation to conserve 

energy. NHTSA has also considered safety and the effects on employment in setting a maximum achievable CAFE standard. 

While NHTSA has clear authority to set CAFE standards for 

light trucks, its authority to set passenger car CAFE standards is 

more ambiguous. The passenger car CAFE standard is currently 

set in statute at 27.5 mpg (49 U.S.C. § 32902(b)). The statute provides that if NHTSA amends the standard above 27.5 mpg or below 

26.0 mpg, either Body of Congress may exercise a legislative veto 

to prevent the amended standard from becoming law. However, a 

U.S. Supreme Court case, INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), 

found the legislative veto to be unconstitutional. There is no severability clause contained in the Energy Policy Conservation Act of 

1975. Following the Chadha decision, NHTSA did not raise the fuel 

economy standards for passenger cars above 27.5 mpg or below 

26.0 mpg, so the issue of whether NHTSA has the statutory authority to amend the fuel economy standards for such vehicles has 

not been litigated. 

Today’s passenger car CAFE standard was set in statute at 27.5 

mpg in 1990. Passenger car standards were established for MY 

1978 (18 mpg); MY 1979 (19 mpg); MY 1980 (20 mpg); and for MY 

1985 and thereafter (27.5 mpg). For the post-1985 period, Congress 

provided for the continued application of the 27.5 mpg standard for 

passenger cars, but gave the Department of Transportation the authority to set higher or lower standards (not above 27.5 mpg or 

below 26.0 mpg), with both Bodies of Congress retaining the ability 

to ‘‘veto’’ the rulemaking. From 1986 through 1989, the passenger 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
3 

car standards were actually lowered because fuel prices fell along 

with consumer demand for vehicles with high fuel economy. 

In March 2006, NHTSA reformed the light truck CAFE program. 

Between the 2008–2010 model years, light truck manufacturers 

may comply with the CAFE law under the preexisting CAFE program, or under the reformed program. Beginning in MY 2011, all 

light truck manufacturers must comply with the reformed CAFE 

program. Under the reformed CAFE program, fuel economy standards are restructured so that they are based on a measure of vehicle size called ‘‘footprint,’’ the product of multiplying a vehicle’s 

wheelbase by its track width. A target level of fuel economy is established for each one-tenth of a square foot increment in a vehicle’s footprint. This produces a continuous curve whereby each discrete vehicle model size is essentially given its own CAFE standard. As long as all models in a manufacturer’s fleet meet the harmonically averaged CAFE standard, it will be compliant with the 

law. 

The reformed CAFE program for light trucks will save nearly 

262 million barrels, or 11 billion gallons, of oil over the lifetime of 

the light trucks sold during 2008–2011 MYs. In fact, under the reformed CAFE program, some light trucks will have CAFE standards higher than the passenger car standard. 

The reform of the light truck rule has sparked debate about 

whether the passenger car CAFE system should be modeled on the 

‘‘continuous curve’’ reformed CAFE system NHTSA created for 

light trucks. NHTSA, however, has no authority to reform the passenger car program without a change in the statute. 

HEARINGS

The Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing on H.R. 

————, a Committee Print Authorizing the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration to Set Passenger Car Fuel Economy 

Standards on May 3, 2006. The Committee received testimony 

from: The Honorable Sherwood Boehlert, Member, U.S. House of 

Representatives; The Honorable Norman Mineta, Secretary, United 

States Department of Transportation; Mr. Frederick Webber, President, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers; The Honorable Philip 

R. Sharp, President, Resources for the Future; Dr. William Pizer, 

Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future; and Mr. Alan Reuther, 

Legislative Director, United Automobile Workers. 

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On Wednesday May 10, 2006, the Full Committee met in open 

markup session and ordered a Committee Print entitled to amend 

the automobile fuel economy provisions of title 49, United States 

Code, to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to set fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles based on one or more vehicle attributes, favorably reported to the House, amended, by a 

record vote of 28 yeas and 26 nays, a quorum being present. A request by Mr. Barton to allow a report to be filed on a bill to be introduced by Mr. Barton, and that the actions of the Committee be 

deemed as actions on that bill, was agreed to by unanimous consent. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
4 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes on the motion 

to report legislation and amendments thereto. The following are 

the recorded votes taken on amendments offered to the measure, 

including the names of those Members voting for and against. A 

motion by Mr. Barton to order the Committee Print reported to the 

House, amended, was agreed to by a record vote of 28 yeas and 26 

nays. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
5 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 5 here HR475.001
6 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 6 here HR475.002
7 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 7 here HR475.003
8 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee held a legislative hearing and 

made findings that are reflected in this report. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The goals and objectives of H.R. 5359 is to provide the Secretary 

of Transportation with the authority to reform the fuel economy 

program for passenger automobiles based on one or more vehicle 

attributes related to fuel economy. 

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX

EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 5359, a 

bill to amend the automobile fuel economy provisions of title 49, 

United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to 

set fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles based on one 

or more vehicle attributes, would result in no new or increased 

budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues. 

COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by 

the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate provided by 

the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974: U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, May 18, 2006. 

Hon. JOE BARTON, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5359, a bill to amend the 

automobile fuel economy provisions of title 49, United States Code, 

to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to set fuel economy 

standards for passenger automobiles based on one or more vehicle 

attributes. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Gregory Waring (for 

federal costs), Emily Schlect (for federal revenues), and Craig 

Cammarata (for the impact on the private sector). 

Sincerely, 

DONALD B. MARRON, Acting Director. 

Enclosure. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
9 

H.R. 5359—A bill to amend the automobile fuel economy provisions 

of title 49, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of 

Transportation to set fuel economy standards for passenger 

automobiles based on one or more vehicle attributes 

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5359 would have no significant impact on federal spending. Enacting the bill might lead 

to a change in federal revenues, but that would depend on future 

decisions by the Secretary of Transportation that CBO cannot predict. 

The Secretary of Transportation is currently authorized to set 

corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for cars and 

light trucks sold in the United States. H.R. 5359 would authorize 

the Secretary to set varying CAFE standards for cars based on size, 

class, or other characteristics that affect fuel consumption. Under 

current law, a single CAFE standard for cars applies to the average 

fuel efficiency of all cars sold by manufacturers, regardless of size 

or other characteristics. (The CAFE standards for light trucks were 

recently revised and are now based on vehicle size.) 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

within the Department of Transportation, administers the fuel 

economy program. Based on information from the agency, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5359 would have no significant impact on the agency’s workload. CBO cannot predict whether the Administration would develop a new CAFE standard under current 

law, under the bill, or both. In any event, we expect that NHTSA’s 

costs would not be affected significantly. 

If NHTSA chose to modify the CAFE standards for cars as authorized by the bill, the average fuel economy of new vehicles sold 

in the United States might rise above the levels already anticipated 

under current law. (Even without a change in law, average fuel 

economy will probably increase somewhat in response to higher 

fuel prices.) A change in the CAFE standards could affect fuel consumption, excise tax revenues, and penalties imposed on manufacturers for not complying with the standard. If the overall fuel economy of automobiles was increased above that which would be realized under current law, reductions in fuel usage would yield reduced excise taxes on motor fuels. However, some firms might find 

it preferable to pay penalties instead of complying with the higher 

fuel economy standards, which would increase revenues from penalties. In any case, any change in federal revenues would probably 

not occur for several years because it would take time for NHTSA 

to assess the options and adopt the new standards, and because 

changes in fuel economy standards in the past have been structured to provide automakers with time to adjust to the new standards. 

Fuel efficiency improvements can have substantial effects on excise taxes from motor fuels. For example, whether caused by a 

change in CAFE standards or rising fuel prices, an increase in the 

fuel efficiency of all new cars beginning in 2010 of one mile per gallon above the amount expected under current law could reduce excise tax revenues by $300 million a year by 2016. That amount 

would increase over time as consumers purchase new vehicles. Penalties that automakers pay for violations of CAFE standards have 

amounted to tens of millions of dollars in recent years. Thus, in 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
10 

most cases, CBO would expect a binding increase in CAFE standards to result in a net reduction of federal revenues. 

H.R. 5359 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no 

direct costs on state, local, or tribal governments. The bill could impose a private-sector mandate, as defined in UMRA, on manufacturers of passenger automobiles if the Secretary implements CAFE 

standards that are higher than what would have been imposed 

under current law. Because regulations to set any new standard 

have not been established and DOT’s plans, if any, to amend the 

CAFE standard under current law are unknown, CBO cannot determine whether the bill would result in new private-sector mandates. Therefore, CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate direct cost of complying with such private-sector mandates would exceed the annual threshold established by UMRA ($128 million in 

2006, adjusted annually for inflation). 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Gregory Waring (for 

federal costs), Emily Schlect (for federal revenues), and Craig 

Cammarata (for the impact on the private sector). This estimate 

was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 

3, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, and with the Indian tribes. 

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. CAFE standards for passenger automobiles 

Section 1(a)(1) amends subsection (c) of 49 U.S.C. § 32902 by giving the Secretary of Transportation the explicit authority to prescribe fuel economy regulations for passenger cars. If the Secretary 

does not prescribe regulations for any given model year, the standard for the preceding model year will apply for such model year 

and each model year thereafter. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
11 

Section 1(a)(2) requires the Department of Transportation to set 

the passenger car fuel economy standard at the ‘‘maximum feasible’’ average fuel economy level that the Secretary decides the 

manufacturers can achieve in that model year. Additionally, the 

Secretary may establish a standard based on one or more vehicle 

attributes related to fuel economy. The Committee is aware of the 

March 29, 2006 rule the Department of Transportation released regarding the fuel economy standards for light trucks. The Department adopted an approach for light trucks based on vehicle size, 

or footprint. This language is intended to give the Department the 

same authority to reform the fuel economy program for passenger 

cars. 

Section 1(b) makes the amendments made by section 1(a) effective upon enactment. The Secretary is directed to complete a rulemaking under its new authority no later than December 30, 2008. 

Such regulations must consider the standard automobile industry 

design and production processes. This Act only requires that the 

Department complete its rulemaking by 2008, but it does not require that it affect the very next model year. The design and production process in the automobile industry can range between 

three and seven years. The Committee expects that any new rule 

will be phased-in over a series of years and that new passenger car 

fuel economy standards will affect the 2013 model year. 

Under current law, the CAFE statute contains a ‘‘two-fleet rule’’

for passenger cars. A vehicle, irrespective of who manufacturers the 

passenger car, is considered as part of the ‘‘domestic fleet’’ if 75% 

or more of the cost of the content is U.S., Canadian, or Mexican in 

origin. If not, it is considered an import vehicle. 

Section 1(c) requires the Administrator of the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to conduct a study on the 

two-fleet requirement of separate fuel economy calculations for 

automobiles manufactured domestically and not domestically as required by 49 U.S.C. 32904(b). The study shall: (1) assess the effects 

of such requirement on employment within the automobile industry 

in the United States; (2) assess the effects of such requirement on 

overall passenger automobile fuel economy; (3) determine the degree to which such requirement encourages manufacturers to alter 

their automobiles in order to meet automobile fuel efficiency standards for both domestic and foreign manufactured automobiles; (4) 

examine the effect of requirements of the North American Free 

Trade Agreement on the operation of such requirement; (5) determine whether such requirement has resulted in additional costs to 

automobile consumers; and (6) determine whether such requirement has promoted increased manufacturing of smaller, more fuelefficient cars in the United States. Not later than 180 days after 

the date of enactment, NHTSA must transmit a report to Congress 

and to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as 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): 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
12 

SECTION 32902 OF TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE 

§ 32902. Average fuel economy standards 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

ø(c) AMENDING PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE STANDARDS.—(1) Subject 

to paragraph (2) of this subsection, the Secretary of Transportation 

may prescribe regulations amending the standard under subsection 

(b) of this section for a model year to a level that the Secretary decides is the maximum feasible average fuel economy level for that 

model year. Section 553 of title 5 applies to a proceeding to amend 

the standard. However, any interested person may make an oral 

presentation and a transcript shall be taken of that presentation. 

ø(2) If an amendment increases the standard above 27.5 miles a 

gallon or decreases the standard below 26.0 miles a gallon, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit the amendment to Congress. 

The procedures of section 551 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6421) apply to an amendment, except that the 

15 calendar days referred to in section 551(c) and (d) of the Act (42 

U.S.C. 6421(c), (d)) are deemed to be 60 calendar days, and the 5 

calendar days referred to in section 551(f)(4)(A) of the Act (42 

U.S.C. 6421(f)(4)(A)) are deemed to be 20 calendar days. If either 

House of Congress disapproves the amendment under those procedures, the amendment does not take effect.¿ 

(c) AMENDING PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE STANDARDS.—

(1) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Transportation may prescribe regulations amending the standard under subsection (b) 

of this section for a model year. If the Secretary does not prescribe regulations under this subsection for a given model year, 

the standard in effect for the preceding model year shall apply 

to such model year and each model year thereafter. 

(2) MAXIMUM FEASIBLE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY.—The standard prescribed under this subsection shall be the maximum feasible average fuel economy level that the Secretary decides the 

manufacturers can achieve in that model year. In amending 

such standard for a model year, the Secretary, consistent with 

the Secretary’s authority under this section for prescribing 

standards, may establish a standard based on one or more vehicle attributes related to fuel economy. 

* * * * * * * 

(g) REQUIREMENTS FOR OTHER AMENDMENTS.—(1) * * * 

(2) When the Secretary of Transportation prescribes an amendment under this section that makes an average fuel economy 

standard more stringent, the Secretary shall prescribe the amendment ø(and submit the amendment to Congress when required 

under subsection (c)(2) of this section)¿ at least 18 months before 

the beginning of the model year to which the amendment applies. 

* * * * * * * 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
(13) 

DISSENTING VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES JOHN D. DINGELL, HENRY A. WAXMAN, EDWARD J. MARKEY, RICK 

BOUCHER, EDOLPHUS TOWNS, FRANK PALLONE, JR., 

SHERROD BROWN, BART GORDON, BOBBY L. RUSH, ANNA 

G. ESHOO, BART STUPAK, ELIOT L. ENGEL, ALBERT R. 

WYNN, GENE GREEN, TED STRICKLAND, DIANA DEGETTE, 

LOIS CAPPS, MICHAEL F. DOYLE, TOM ALLEN, JIM DAVIS, 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, HILDA L. SOLIS, CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, JAY INSLEE, TAMMY BALDWIN, AND MIKE ROSS 

This is a flawed bill that has resulted from a flawed legislative 

process. All 26 Democratic Members of the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce voted against the Committee Print. It delegates 

vague and over-broad authority to the Secretary of Transportation, 

the consequences of which are not fully understood. By deviating 

from fleet-wide averaging, it may result in a rollback of existing environmental regulation and may undermine existing incentives for 

manufacturers to produce small cars in the United States. Moreover, there is no question that the Committee Print will not reduce 

gas prices in the near-term. 

Process 

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held no hearings 

and did not consider any legislative proposals in open markup. The 

Committee held one hearing on May 3, 2006, the first hearing on 

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards in over a decade. Six witnesses testified with divergent views on how best to reform the system that regulates the fuel economy of automobiles, 

and the official record of the hearing remains open for additional 

information. While high gasoline prices have brought about a rush 

of legislation to the House floor, all witnesses at the hearing, including the Secretary of Transportation, agreed that legislation increasing CAFE standards will not affect gas prices in the nearterm. The Committee did not receive any expert testimony supporting the bill, nor did it have the benefit of the Administration’s 

views. The Department of Transportation did submit its own different legislative proposal a few hours prior to the Committee’s 

consideration of the Committee Print. 

Authority to increase passenger car CAFE standards 

The Secretary of Transportation is already authorized under 

Title 49 U.S. Code Section 32902(c) to increase passenger automobile fuel economy standards above 27.5 miles per gallon or below 

26.0 miles per gallon. In response to a question from Chairman 

Barton, Secretary Mineta stated, ‘‘there is no question that we 

have authority to set the stringency of the CAFE standard, in other 

words, the miles per gallon.’’ Consequently, the primary purpose of 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
14 

the Committee Print is to grant the Department authority to reform the CAFE system for passenger automobiles. 

Over-broad and vague delegation of authority 

The Committee Print includes different legislative language authorizing the reform of CAFE for passenger automobiles than the 

statutory authority the Secretary used to reform CAFE for non-passenger automobiles. The discrepancy was not explained, and it is 

not clear what the consequences of the new language may be. The 

Committee Print authorizes the Secretary to set a standard based 

on one or more vehicle attributes related to fuel economy. Few elements of a motor vehicle are not related to vehicle fuel economy. 

In response to questions from Rep. Dingell, committee counsel conceded that an attribute could include fuel type, external ornamentation, number of doors, the type of tires, and numerous other features. 

Fleet-wide averaging 

By permitting the Secretary to set standards based upon one or 

more vehicle attributes, the current system requiring manufacturers to satisfy an overall fleet-wide average could be eliminated. 

Without fleet-wide averaging, the separate foreign and domestic 

fleet requirements would no longer require manufacturers to 

produce small vehicles domestically. In a May 10, 2006, letter opposing the Committee Print, the United Automobile Workers 

(UAW) states that ‘‘the legislation would directly threaten the jobs 

of tens of thousands of American workers employed in plants that 

assemble or produce parts for small cars.’’ The lack of a fleet-wide 

average could also decrease the overall fuel economy of vehicles 

sold in the United States. The UAW notes, ‘‘auto companies could 

simply up-weight or up-size their vehicles, yet still satisfy lower 

overall CAFE requirement for larger vehicles. In our judgment, 

Congress should not give its blessing to any overhaul of the CAFE 

system that could hurt fuel economy, the environment and our nation’s energy security.’’

CAFE requirement for foreign and domestic fleets 

All Democratic Members of the Committee present at the time of 

the vote voted against an amendment offered by Rep. Stearns to 

re-evaluate the requirement that manufacturers comply with CAFE 

standards separately for vehicles produced domestically and overseas. Efforts to undermine the distinction between foreign and domestic fleets, or the requirement that manufacturers comply with 

a fleet-wide average, could reduce domestic production of small vehicles and reduce overall fuel economy of our vehicles. This would 

be a negative result for American manufacturing, American workers, and the environment. 

Conclusion 

This hastily crafted bill will do nothing to reduce gasoline prices, 

grants over-broad authority to the Secretary of Transportation, 

may result in poorer fuel economy for passenger vehicles, and 

threatens American jobs. It should be defeated. 

JOHN D. DINGELL. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
15 

HENRY A. WAXMAN. EDWARD J. MARKEY. RICK BOUCHER. EDOLPHUS TOWNS. FRANK PALLONE, Jr. 

SHERROD BROWN. BART GORDON. BOBBY L. RUSH. ANNA G. ESHOO. BART STUPAK. ELIOT L. ENGEL. ALBERT R. WYNN. 

GENE GREEN. 

TED STRICKLAND. 

DIANA DEGETTE. 

LOIS CAPPS. 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE. 

TOM ALLEN. JIM DAVIS. 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY. 

HILDA L. SOLIS. CHARLES A. GONZALEZ. JAY INSLEE. TAMMY BALDWIN. MIKE ROSS. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
(16) 

ADDITIONAL DISSENTING VIEWS OF CONGRESSMAN 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, OTHERS 

There is nothing in this bill that will result in higher fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles. In fact, by allowing the 

Department of Transportation to set ‘‘attribute-based’’ standards in 

the absence of a minimum fleet-wide average fuel economy, this bill 

may actually result in lower fuel economy standards. This is because manufacturers will only be required to ensure that each 

model they manufacture meets the fuel economy standard required 

for its attribute-based class. If the manufacturer chooses to alter 

the composition of its fleet (i.e. to produce more models with attributes that are required to meet lower fuel economy standards), 

then its fleet-wide fuel economy performance could actually be 

lower than the 27.5 miles per gallon standard it is required to 

achieve under current law. 

The Markey amendment, which failed on a 36–17 vote, would 

have ensured that the average fleet-wide fuel economy for cars and 

light trucks would reach 33 miles per gallon after model year 2015, 

and would have ensured that each manufacturer’s foreign and domestic fleets separately meet that average minimum requirement. 

The Markey amendment CAFE goal is consistent with the 2001 

report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) entitled ‘‘Effectiveness and Impact of CAFE Standards.’’ During the only hearing 

the Committee held on this issue, the Secretary of Transportation 

also expressed his interest in this important report, saying that he 

intended to study it going forward. While it is encouraging that the 

Administration is interested in this report, it is unacceptable that 

they would offer it up now as an excuse not to set a strong CAFE 

standard, 5 years after the report was issued. 

The NAS report forms the technical basis for the Markey amendment, and should provide confidence that reaching a 33 mpg standard using today’s technologies is both feasible and economic. The 

NAS analysis developed 3 different ‘technology paths’ (see Chapter 

3, in particular pages 35–39) that could be used to improve the fuel 

economy of passenger cars and light trucks. All technology paths 

assumed $1.50/gallon of gas, the cost of available technologies at 

the time, and all assumed a 5% weight increase as a result of the 

addition of new CAFE and/or safety technology. Obviously, these 

assumptions yield conservative estimates of achievable increases to 

CAFE standards because the much higher cost of gas would imply 

that more technologies would now be cost-effective by comparison, 

and in addition, because more technologies have presumably been 

developed in the past 5 years since the analysis was performed. 

The NAS report lists numerous technologies which could be incorporated for each size class of vehicle and for each technology 

pathway. The fuel economy improvements deemed possible for each 

of the second technology pathway technologies add up to a range 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING
17 

of achievable fuel economy improvement of 34–65.5%. Using the 

lower bound of this range, or a 34% improvement in CAFE standards, one arrives at a new achievable CAFE standard of 33 miles 

per gallon. 

This is the basis for the amendment, and for H.R. 3762, the 

Boehlert-Markey CAFE bill. It is based on the most conservative 

interpretation of the middle-of-the-road technology pathway described by the NAS in 2001. Clearly, we can do much better than 

this. Passage of the Markey amendment would have guaranteed 

that we do not do worse. 

Had the Markey amendment been adopted, it would have ensured an oil savings of 500,000 barrels per day (an amount equal 

to what the United States currently imports from Iraq) by 2015, 

and an oil savings of 2.1 million barrels per day by 2025. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. 

LOIS CAPPS. 

JAY INSLEE. 

DIANA DEGETTE. HENRY A. WAXMAN. 

THOMAS H. ALLEN. 

TAMMY BALDWIN. ELIOT L. ENGEL. FRANK PALLONE, Jr. 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY. ANNA G. ESHOO. 

Æ 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with HEARING