II 109th CONGRESS 1st Session S. 836 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES April 18, 2005 Ms. Cantwell introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works A BILL To require accurate fuel economy testing procedures.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Fuel Economy Truth in Labeling Act.

2.

Findings

Congress finds the following: (1)

Current method inaccurate

The Environmental Protection Agency’s current method for estimating fuel economy is flawed and does not take into account the changes in driving conditions that have taken place over the past 30 years. As a result, the Environmental Protection Agency’s tests overestimate fuel economy by up to 30 percent, and Environmental Protection Agency window sticker information overestimates fuel economy by 10 percent or more. (2)

Underestimating highway speeds

The Environmental Protection Agency highway cycle assumes an average speed of 48 miles per hour (referred to in this section as mph) and a top speed of 60 mph. Many State highway speed limits are set at or above 65 mph. Government data indicates that fuel economy can drop by 17 percent for modern vehicles that drive at 70 mph instead of 55 mph. Even at 65 mph, fuel economy can drop by nearly 10 percent compared to driving at 55 mph. (3)

Assuming very gentle acceleration and braking

The maximum acceleration rate in the Environmental Protection Agency test cycles is 3.3 mph per second, about the same as going from zero to 60 mph in about 18 seconds. The average new car or truck can accelerate nearly twice as fast. While most consumers don’t use all the power in their vehicle, the Environmental Protection Agency data shows that people accelerate as fast as 15 mph per second, nearly 5 times the Environmental Protection Agency tests. In 1996 the Environmental Protection Agency established a new driving cycle (US06) that includes tougher acceleration and deceleration and higher speeds, but this cycle is not used for fuel economy purposes. (4)

Neglecting the wide range of outdoor temperatures experienced in the real world

The Environmental Protection Agency tests are performed between 68 and 86 degrees Fahrenheit. Most States frequently experience weather conditions outside this range and fuel economy can be significantly affected as a result. (5)

Failing to reflect the use of air conditioning

Fuel economy tests are run with the air conditioning off, while over 99 percent of all cars and trucks come with air conditioning. In 1996 the Environmental Protection Agency established a new driving cycle (SC03) that included air conditioning, but this cycle is not used for fuel economy purposes. (6)

Overestimating trip lengths

The Environmental Protection Act city test cycle is 7.5 miles long. The Environmental Protection Agency’s own data indicate that average trip lengths may be only 5 miles long, with typical trips as short as 2.5 miles. Shorter trips often mean lower fuel economy because the engine does not have time to warm up and operate efficiently. (7)

Fuel consumption

Fuels used for engine certification tests are artificial in that they are highly refined, and not equivalent to the fuel consumed during the life of a vehicle. Use of reference diesel and gasoline fuels while desirable from the standpoint of engineering design, optimization, and test repeatability, understate emissions and overstate fuel economy experienced by a vehicle in actual use. Current technology that improves commercially available fuel at or near the point of use is excluded from consideration by engine manufacturers as original or optional equipment due to lack of need to represent engine performance on anything other than reference fuels. While allowing use of reference fuels for certification purposes, the Environmental Protection Agency should consider requiring manufacturers to post fuel economy realized on commercially available fuel.

3.

Updated fuel economy testing procedures

(a)

In general

The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, shall revise the test procedures set forth in sections 600.209–85 and 600.209–95 of the Agency's regulations (40 C.F.R. 600.209–85 and 600.209–95) to take into consideration current factors that may affect vehicle fuel economy, including— (1)higher speed limits; (2)faster acceleration rates; (3)variations in temperature; (4)the use of air conditioning; (5)shorter city test cycle lengths; and (6)the use of other fuel depleting features. (b)

Rulemaking deadlines

(1)

Initial

Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall initiate a rulemaking procedure to revise the test procedures described in subsection (a). (2)

Final rule

Not later than 18 months after initiating a rulemaking procedure under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall promulgate a final rule containing the revised test procedures.