Don't "grade" fuel labels
Thursday, December 09, 2010
U.S. Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-OH) and Rep. Dale E. Kildee
(D-MI), Co-Chair of the Congressional Automotive Caucus, are urging
the EPA and Department of Transportation to stick with fuel
efficiency labels that highlight miles-per-gallon on stickers found
on the windows of new vehicles.
The two sent a bipartisan letter signed by 53 House Members to the
EPA and Department of Transportation (DOT).
LaTourette said a 2007 law says the EPA and DOT have to come up
with newly designed fuel economy labels for new vehicles, which he
supports. However, he thinks the EPA has taken the task too
far, and the emphasis will no longer be on miles per gallon in the
city and highway, but instead on "some loopy new green curve
they've devised where cars are graded from A+ to D based on fuel
economy and greenhouse gas levels."
LaTourette said he prefers a label option that focuses on fuel
efficiency and miles per gallon, noting that most Americans are
keenly aware of fuel costs.
"I don't know anyone who will be lured into buying a plug-in
electric car that gets the equivalent of 100 mpg because of a large
A+ sticker on the side window that will be removed shortly after
leaving the lot," LaTourette said. "Those who live in planet
reality might need a minivan or SUV to haul around four kids in
child and booster seats, and have room for luggage and a family
dog. Thanks to the EPA, they'll be lucky to find a vehicle
that gets a C. I rate this plan ho, ho, ho, Green Crazy."
Kildee said the departments recently proposed two options for
new labels, one of which prominently displays customary miles per
gallon information, while the other employs letter grades which
arbitrarily reserve the highest grades for a very narrow range of
vehicles and penalize many others with mediocre grades.
"For years, consumers have relied on miles per gallon labeling
to help them purchase the car or truck that is right for them.
Changing this system to a letter grade would cause consumer
confusion and tip the scales unfairly against many fuel efficient
SUVs and trucks, relegating them to a C or C+ grade," Kildee
said. "I urge the DOT and the EPA to maintain prominent miles
per gallon information on fuel efficiency labels to give consumers
the information they need to make smart purchasing decisions on
their automobiles."
The proposed labels can be viewed at http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/label.htm.
The text of the letter is below:
December 8, 2010
Lisa Jackson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
Ray LaHood, Secretary
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Administrator Jackson and Secretary LaHood:
We are writing regarding the Environmental Protection Agency's and
the Department of Transportation's proposed redesign of fuel
economy labels, as required by the Energy Independence and Security
Act (EISA) of 2007.
As you know, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
(EISA) mandated that the DOT issue a rulemaking implementing this
law. On September 23, both EPA and DOT issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking.
The proposed rule presents two primary label options. Label
1 minimizes miles per gallon (mpg), an objective measure of the
fuel economy performance of a vehicle, in favor of a prominently
displayed subjective "letter grade". In contrast, Label
2 focuses on the mpg metric and implements the other information
Congress required under EISA. Consumers are very familiar
with the mpg metric and rely on it when purchasing a new motor
vehicle.
Additionally, unlike the mpg metric, the proposed grading system
is biased in favor of certain types of vehicles. The
"A" and "A+" categories are reserved for a very narrow range of
vehicles, i.e., battery electric vehicles and plug-in
hybrids. However, a fuel efficient, clean diesel vehicle
would be penalized with a low or mediocre grade.
Similarly, most fuel efficient SUVs and pickup trucks would rate no
higher than a "C+".
We hope you will agree that it is essential for consumers to have
clear and concise information about the fuel economy performance of
their vehicle. However, Label 1 marginalizes the most
important piece of information on the fuel economy sticker, namely
the fuel economy of the vehicle. Moreover, Label 1 unfairly
promotes certain vehicles over others.
We believe that Label 2 better serves the needs of the consumer by
continuing to prominently display the mpg of the vehicle, and is
consistent with the statutory intent of EISA. Although the deadline
for public comment has passed, we appreciate your agencies allowing
us to submit this letter for the public record.
Sincerely,
Rep. Dale E. Kildee and Rep. Steve LaTourette
Others on the letter: Rep. Ed Whitfield, Rep. G.K.
Butterfield, Rep. Spencer Bachus, Rep. Sue Myrick, Rep. James
Sensenbrenner, Rep. Gary Peters, Rep. Betty Sutton, Rep. John D.
Dingell, Rep. Donald Manzullo, Rep. John Campbell, Rep. Todd Akin,
Rep. John Barrow, Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, Rep. Marsha Blackburn,
Rep. Sander Levin, Rep. Mike Simpson, Rep. Geoff Davis, Rep. Lee
Terry, Rep. Mike Rogers, Rep. Candice S. Miller, Rep. Charles A.
Gonzalez, Rep. Patrick J. Tiberi, Rep. Brett Guthrie, Rep. Phil
Gingrey, Rep. John Sullivan, Rep. Scott Garrett, Rep. Elton
Gallegly, Rep. Jim Matheson, Rep. Tim Holden, Rep. Sam Graves, Rep.
Mike Ross, Rep. Robert Aderholt, Rep. Greg Walden, Rep. Mary
Bono Mack, Rep. Andre Carson, Rep. Tim Ryan, Rep. Bennie Thompson,
Rep. Cliff Stearns, Rep. Joseph R. Pitts, Rep. Dave
Camp, Rep. Steve Scalise, Rep. Bob Latta, Rep. Ralph Hall,
Rep. Tim Murphy, Rep. Lamar Smith, Rep. Dan Lungren, Rep. Dan
Burton, Rep. Judy Biggert, Rep. Dave Loebsack, Rep. Mark Schauer,
and Rep. Bruce Braley.