Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

Floor Speech

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - December 18, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, over the past 7 years, I have labored to increase the fuel economy standards of our cars and light truck fleets, and am gratified that the day has finally come where the fruits of my labor will be realized. Over 7 years, there are countless individuals, Members of Congress, environmental, consumer, and religious organizations who have labored alongside me--these people are too numerous to mention. I thank all of them for their important contributions. But I would also like to thank several in particular.

First, former Congressman Sherwood Boehlert, R-NY, who for six years was my partner in the House, advocating tirelessly, often against the wishes of his party's leadership, to move this issue forward. Second, Dan Becker, an environmental consultant, who has made raising fuel economy standards his life's work and who worked with my office in the trenches back when the trenches were a very lonely place to be! Finally, Securing America's Future Energy and the Energy Security Leadership Council, who brought together retired military officials and corporate CEOs to highlight the national and economic security dangers associated with our growing dependence on imported oil, and who played a critical role in developing more widespread support for these provisions.

As the principal House proponent of the fuel economy Title in this legislation, I also wish to briefly discuss several of its provisions in order to more fully explain the statutory language and to provide context for what we are accomplishing with this historic energy bill.

Section 3 of the bill states: ``Except to the extent expressly provided in this Act, or in an amendment made by this Act, nothing in this Act or an amendment made by this act supersedes, limits the authority or responsibility conferred by, or authorizes any violation of any provision of law (including a regulation), including any energy or environmental law or regulation.''

The laws and regulations referred to in section 3 include, but are not limited to, the Clean Air Act and any regulations promulgated under Clean Air Act authority. It is the intent of Congress to fully preserve existing federal and State authority under the Clean Air Act.

In addition, Congress does not intend, by including provisions in Title I of the bill that reform and alter the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to increase fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles, non-passenger automobiles, work trucks, and medium and heavy duty trucks, to in any way supersede or limit the authority and/or responsibility conferred by sections 177, 202, and 209 of the Clean Air Act. For section 202 of the Clean Air Act, this includes but is not limited to the authority and responsibility affirmed by the Supreme Court's April 2, 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, No. 05-1120. For sections 177 and 209 of the Clean Air Act, this includes but is not limited to the authority affirmed by the September 12, 2007 decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont in Green Mountain Chrysler Dodge Jeep et al. v. Crombie et al., No. 2:05-cv-302, and the December 11, 2007 decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in Central Valley Chrysler-Jeep, Inc. et al. v. Goldstone, et al., No. 1:04-cv-06663-AWIGSA.

Although Senators LEVIN, INOUYE and FEINSTEIN, in a December 13, 2007 colloquy, agreed that it was the ``intent of this bill that any regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency be consistent with the direction of Congress in this legislation and regulations issued by the Department of Transportation to implement this legislation,'' in fact this legislation includes no statutory requirement that would compel the Environmental Protection Agency to adopt regulations that are consistent with those promulgated by the Department of Transportation. I would also note that in a subsequent colloquy, Senator INOUYE stated that ``the DOT and the EPA have separate missions that should be executed fully and responsibly,'' and Senator FEINSTEIN stated that ``Importantly, the separate authority and responsibility of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate vehicle greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act is in no manner affected by this legislation as plainly provided for in Section 3 of the bill addressing the relationship of H.R. 6 to other laws.''

Title I of the bill addresses CAFE standards. Section 102(a) would require that the fleet of new passenger and non-passenger vehicles made for sale in model year 2020 reach a fleet-wide fuel economy average of at least 35 miles per gallon, regardless of shifts in the market or any other consideration. While fuel economy standards for each of model years 2011-2019 are expected to be the maximum feasible standard, this section does not allow the Department of Transportation, DOT, to set a fleet-wide average of lower than 35 miles per gallon for model year 2020 under any circumstances. In addition, if the maximum feasible level for model year 2020 is higher than 35 miles per gallon due to technological progress and/or other factors, Congress intends to require DOT to set standards at the maximum feasible level.

It is also the intent of this section to require DOT to set interim standards between 2011 and 2019 to make rapid and consistent annual progress towards achieving the 35 mpg minimum by 2020. In asking for ``ratable'' progress, the intent of Congress is to seek relatively consistent proportional increases in fuel economy standards each year, such that no single year through 2020 should experience a significantly higher increase than the previous year.

Section 104 addresses credit trading among and within automakers' vehicle fleets and is intended to increase flexibility for automakers, but it is the intent of Congress that any trading not in any way reduce the oil savings achieved by the standards set for any year under this title.

Section 105 is intended to provide added information for consumers, but is not intended to in any way interfere with or diminish EPA labeling authority. Congress intends that DOT work closely with EPA in fulfilling the requirements of this section.

Section 106 is intended to clarify that Title I does not impact fuel economy standards or the standard-setting process for vehicles manufactured before model year 2011. This section is not intended to codify, or otherwise support or reject, any standards applying before model year 2011 , and is not intended to reverse, supersede, overrule, or in any way limit the November 15, 2007 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, No. 06-71891.

Section 109 makes modifications to the cap on the credits allowed to manufacturers making dual-fuel vehicles to ensure that the dual-fuel vehicle credit program is phased out and is fully and permanently eliminated by 2020 and thereafter.

I urge the Secretary to pay careful heed to the intent and spirit of these provisions in carrying out the provisions of this Title, so that we achieve this legislation's goals of increasing the fuel efficiency of our cars, SUVs, and other vehicles.

Source