[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42556-42557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20797]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Labeling Requirements for Alternative Fuels and Alternative
Fueled Vehicles
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Grant of Partial Exemption from the Commission's Alternative
Fuels and Alternative Fueled Vehicles Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission has granted the petition of the Ford Motor
Company (``Ford'') requesting permission to use an alternative fueled
vehicle (``AFV'') label in California that differs from the AFV label
specified in the Commission's rule concerning Labeling Requirements for
Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fueled Vehicles (``Rule''). Pursuant
to Rule 1.26 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, and Commission
grants, for good cause, the requested relief without a notice and
comment period because the Commission finds that such a procedure is
unnecessary to protect the public interest in this case.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 7, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Neil Blickman, Attorney, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Division of Enforcement, Sixth Street and Pennsylvania
Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Part A--Background Information
On May 19, 1995, the Commission published the Alternative Fuels and
Alternative Fueled Vehicles Rule in the Federal Register (60 FR 26926).
The Rule, in pertinent part, established labeling requirements for new
covered AFVs. The labels disclose specific cost and benefit information
to enable consumers to make reasonable purchasing choices and
comparisons. The labeling requirements for new covered AFVs became
effective November 20, 1995.
Section 309.20 of the Rule provides that before offering a new
covered AFV for acquisition to consumers, manufacturers must affix on a
visible surface of each such vehicle a new vehicle label consisting of
three parts. Part one must disclose objective information about the
estimated cruising range and environmental impact of the particular
AFV. Part two must disclose and explain specific factors consumers
should consider before buying an AFV. Part three must list specific
toll-free telephone numbers for consumers who want to call the Federal
government for more information about AFVs. Section 309.20 of the Rule
further states that no marks or information other than that specified
by the Rule may appear on the label.
With respect to environmental impact, the labels must tell
consumers whether or not the vehicle has met an Environmental
Protection Agency (``EPA'') emission certification standard and, if so,
what standard. If a vehicle has been certified, that fact must be noted
with a mark in a box on the label, and a caret must be inserted above
the standard the vehicle has been certified to meet. The graphic on the
label depicts seven EPA emissions standards in increasing order of
stringency.
For several years, EPA has promulgated emissions classification
standards as part of its Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, which
establishes pollution limits for ``criteria air pollutants'' (i.e.,
hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate
matter). Each of these pollutants is released into the air from an
automobile's tailpipe as exhaust. In addition, hydrocarbons in vapor
form also are released due to the evaporation of fuel and during
refueling. The standards apply to new motor vehicles manufactured in
specified model years.
[[Page 42557]]
After manufacturers submit appropriate test reports and data, the EPA
Administrator issues a ``certificate of conformity'' to those vehicle
manufacturers demonstrating compliance with the applicable emissions
standards.
Pursuant to its authority under the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments,\1\ EPA began issuing stricter emission standards for each
model year as a way of reducing levels of the criteria air pollutants.
One set of standards, the Tier 1 standards, was phased in beginning
with the 1994 model year. The second set of standards establishes five
stricter standards as part of a new ``clean-fuel vehicles'' program.\2\
To qualify as a clean-fuel vehicle, a vehicle must meet one of five
sets of increasingly stringent standards. The standards are
denominated, in increasing order of stringency, TLEV (``Transitional
Low Emission Vehicle''), LEV (``Low Emission Vehicle''), ULEV (``Ultra
Low Emission Vehicle''), ILEV (``Inherently Low Emission Vehicle''),
and ZEV (``Zero Emission Vehicle''). Disclosures regarding both sets of
EPA emission standards are required on the Rule's labels for new
covered AFVs because the Commission determined that information
concerning EPA emission certification levels provides a simple way of
comparing different AFVs and, therefore, is useful to consumers
considering AFV acquisitions.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399 (1990).
\2\ See 40 CFR 88 (1996).
\3\ 60 FR 26926, 26946 (May 19, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part B--Ford's Proposal
In 1996, after the Commission promulgated its Rule, the State of
California Air Resources Board (``CARB'') established a stringent
emission standard denominated SULEV (``Super Ultra Low Emission
Vehicle''). Although EPA has not amended its regulations to adopt this
standard, according to staff at EPA and CARB, an AFV in California
certified as meeting the requirements of the CARB SULEV standard is
certified to a stricter emissions standard than a ULEV plus ILEV
certified vehicle.\4\ Furthermore, a vehicle certified to a SULEV plus
ILEV standard is certified to a stricter emissions standard than a
SULEV certified vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ According to EPA, a vehicle certified as meeting the
requirements to both the ULEV and ILEV standards has lower combined
exhaust and evaporative emission than an ILEV certified vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The California LEV program requires Ford to sell a specified
percentage of vehicles that are certified to the LEV and ULEV
standards. By certifying vehicles to the SULEV standard, however, Ford
receives additional vehicle credits to comply with this program. Ford
is in the process of certifying AFVs in California to the CARB SULEV
emission standard and the EPA ILEV emission standard. Ford wishes to
disclose to consumers in California information indicating that an AFV
has been certified to the CARB SULEV emission standard. The problem
Ford has encountered is that the Commission's AFV label provides no
means of conveying such information because the SULEV emission standard
did not exist at the time the Rule was promulgated, and, therefore, is
not included as a disclosure on the Commission's AFV label.
Ford, therefore, petitioned the Commission to permit it to use an
AFV label, in California only, that differs in two respects from the
AFV label described in section 309.20 of the Rule: \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Ford is a manufacturer of AFVs covered by the Rule. See 16
CFR 309.1(f) and 309.1(r).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) To convey accurate information to consumers in California, Ford
requested permission to add a check-box to the label with accompanying
text that reads, ``This vehicle meets the California Air Resources
Board emission standard noted below.''
(2) For applicable new covered vehicles, Ford also requested
permission to add ``SULEV'' and ``SULEV + ILEV'' disclosures to the
list of emissions standards on the AFV label, between the ``ULEV +
ILEV'' and ``ZEV'' standards.
Ford asserted that granting its petition will provide additional
useful information to consumers considering AFV acquisitions in
California, and will permit it to demonstrate to consumers in that
state the technological advances it has made in producing cleaner,
lower-emitting vehicles.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Commission previously has granted similar requests
without notice and comment procedures. See Fuel Rating Rule
(formerly Octane Rule) exemptions granted to Sunoco in 1979 (44 FR
33740) and in 1990 (55 FR 1871); to Gilbarco, Inc. in 1988 (53 FR
29277); to Gilbarco on behalf of Exxon in 1989 (54 FR 14072); to
Dresser Industries, Inc. on behalf of several gasoline refiners in
1991 (56 FR 26821); to the Bennett Pump Co. on behalf of Wesco Oil
Co. in 1993 (58 FR 64406); and to Gilbarco on behalf of several
gasoline refiners in 1995 (60 FR 57584).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined that including the CARB SULEV
emission standard on labels in California for new covered AFVs, in the
format proposed by Ford, is appropriate, feasible, and consistent with
the Rule's intent. In issuing the Rule, the Commission concluded that
requiring disclosure of emission certification standards is appropriate
and would be useful to consumers. The Commission noted further that
incorporating environmental considerations into national energy policy
was a key goal of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPA 92''),\7\
pursuant to which the Rule was promulgated, and improving the
environment was a principal purpose of that statute. EPA 92 gives
special attention to the fact that the environmental performance of
alternative fuels differs, and that those differences need to be
explained to consumers.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Pub. L. 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776 (1992).
\8\ 60 FR 26926, 26946.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Commission's view, granting Ford's petition to permit it to
include the SULEV emission standard on AFV labels will provide
additional comparative information regarding alternative fuels that
will be helpful to consumers in California considering AFV acquisitions
(e.g., fleet operators as well as environmentally concerned consumers).
Specifically, because AFVs are certified to a specific emission
standard, disclosure of the SULEV certification level will provide a
simple and even more useful way of comparing different AFVs in
California. Disclosure of additional objective data such as the SULEV
certification level also will benefit consumers in California
attempting to evaluate competitive advertising and marketing claims
regarding any AFV's environmental performance.
In addition, the Commission has determined that the AFV labeling
approach proposed by Ford offers a clear, conspicuous, and easily
readable disclosure to consumers of all Rule-required information and
complies with the intent of the regulation. Furthermore, granting the
AFV label variances requested will not adversely affect the public
interest or result in any consumer injury, but rather will provide
additional useful information to consumers while accommodating a
technological development in the industry. Therefore, the Commission is
granting Ford permission to use its proposed AFV label on new covered
AFVs, provided that Ford uses its modified AFV label only in the State
of California, and complies with the Rule's AFV label specifications in
all other respects.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-20797 Filed 8-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M