Order Code RL33982
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE):
A Comparison of Selected Legislation in
the 110th Congress
May 1, 2007
Brent D. Yacobucci
Specialist in Energy Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Robert Bamberger
Specialist in Energy Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

---

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE):
A Comparison of Selected Legislation in
the 110th Congress
Summary
The rise in crude oil and gasoline prices since the winter of 2006 has renewed
the focus on U.S. fuel consumption in the transportation sector. Wider concerns over
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change have contributed to interest in reducing
fossil fuel consumption and improving the efficiency of the U.S. transportation
sector. Possible changes to the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)
standards are one policy option to address the issue.
CAFE standards are fleetwide fuel economy averages that manufacturers must
meet each model year. Currently, separate CAFE standards are established for
passenger cars and light trucks, which include sport utility vehicles (SUVs), vans,
and pickup trucks. Several bills have been introduced in the 110th Congress to
modify the CAFE program. Provisions vary from bill to bill but include increasing
the CAFE standards for all vehicles; changing fuel economy testing procedures to
make them more accurate, and probably more conservative, measurements of
consumer-experienced on-road fuel economy; and granting the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) broader authority to implement the CAFE
program.
This report provides a side-by-side comparison of several bills in the 110th
Congress addressing passenger vehicle fuel economy in general and the CAFE
program specifically. The report covers CAFE-related Senate and House bills. The
bills are compared on various policy options including, but not limited to, the types
of provisions identified above. The report also compares provisions in bills that
would establish greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars outside of the
CAFE structure. Such emissions standards would likely also have the effect of
increasing fuel economy.
One issue in the CAFE debate over the years has been whether Congress should
set CAFE standards or delegate that authority exclusively to NHTSA. For passenger
cars, the original EPCA legislation established specific targets for model year (MY)
1978 and MY1985, and required that the Secretary of Transportation set standards
for the interim years. Some of the current proposals would also set specific targets
in the future; others would require annual improvements in CAFE by some specified
percentage. In some instances, both approaches are used. Those proposals would
establish a mandated CAFE by a certain date and require subsequent annual
percentage increases. Some bills would also require NHTSA to set the maximum
feasible interim standards.

---

Contents
Background: Establishment of the CAFE Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Recent CAFE Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Policy Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Policy Options Within CAFE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Combined Passenger Car/Light Truck Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Mandated Numeric Increase in CAFE Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Mandated Percentage Increase in CAFE Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Regulatory Flexibility/Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Expanded Considerations for Maximum Feasible Fuel Economy . . . . . 3
Attribute-Based Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Changes in Test Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Credit Trading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Bush Administration Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Non-CAFE Policy Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Comparison of Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
List of Tables
Table 1. Comparison of Senate CAFE Bills in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Table 2. Comparison of House CAFE Bills in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Table 3. Comparison of Bills To Establish Automobile Greenhouse Gas
Standards in the 110th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

---

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE):
A Comparison of Selected Legislation
in the 110th Congress
The rise in crude oil and gasoline prices since the winter of 2006 has renewed
the focus on U.S. fuel consumption in the transportation sector. Wider concerns over
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change have contributed to interest in reducing
fossil fuel consumption and improving the efficiency of the U.S. transportation
sector. Among the various policy options to address the issue are changes to the
federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.1 CAFE refers to the
average miles per gallon used by a manufacturer’s entire fleet of cars or light trucks
in a given model year.
Various bills in the 110th Congress would modify the CAFE program to increase
fuel economy standards for all vehicles, heighten the stringency of testing procedures,
and/or grant the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) broader
authority to implement the program.
Background: Establishment of the CAFE Standards
The Arab oil embargo of 1973-1974 and the subsequent tripling in the price of
crude oil brought into sharp focus the fuel inefficiency of U.S. automobiles. New car
fleet fuel economy had declined from 14.8 miles per gallon (mpg) in model year
(MY) 1967 to 12.9 mpg in 1974. In the search for ways to reduce dependence on
imported oil, automobiles were an obvious target. The Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA, P.L. 94-163) established CAFE standards for passenger
cars for MY1978. The CAFE standards called for an eventual doubling in new car
fleet fuel economy. EPCA also granted NHTSA the authority to establish CAFE
standards for other classes of vehicles, including light-duty trucks.2 NHTSA
established fuel economy standards for light trucks, beginning in MY1979. For
passenger cars, the current standard is 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg) for MY2007. For
light trucks, the standard is 22.2 mpg for MY2007.
Under EPCA, the Secretary of Transportation has the discretion to adjust the
passenger car standard within a range from 26.0 to 27.5 mpg. Any increase above
27.5 mpg or below 26.0 mpg requires the Secretary to issue an amendment to the
standards. That amendment would be in force unless either chamber of Congress
1 For more information on CAFE, see CRS Report RL33413, Automobile and Light Truck
Fuel Economy: The CAFE Standards, by Brent D. Yacobucci and Robert Bamberger.
2 Light-duty trucks include most sport utility vehicles (SUVs), vans, and pickups.

---

CRS-2
disapproves. However, this one-House veto could be judged to be unconstitutional.3
The Secretary has much broader discretion with respect to setting light truck fuel
economy standards (referred to in the regulations as “non-passenger automobiles”).
This includes the authority to establish different standards for different classifications
of these vehicles.
Recent CAFE Regulations
In April 2006, NHTSA promulgated new CAFE rules for light trucks. After
MY2007, light truck manufacturers may voluntarily comply with a new “reformed”
standard based on the size of each specific manufacturer’s vehicles. Starting in
MY2011, all light truck makers will be subject to the reformed standards, which
NHTSA estimates will be equivalent to about 24.0 mpg under the old system. EPCA
gives NHTSA the authority to modify the light truck standards as it sees fit, including
setting standards based on vehicle attributes (in this case, size). EPCA does not grant
similar flexibility in application of the passenger car standard.
Policy Options
Policy Options Within CAFE
Several bills would amend the current CAFE program to increase CAFE
standards, change testing procedures, and/or grant NHTSA broader regulatory
discretion. CRS analyzed the 12 CAFE-related bills with regard to several key policy
options:
! combined passenger car/light truck standards,
! mandated numeric increase in CAFE standards,
! mandated percentage increase in CAFE standards,
! regulatory flexibility/authority,
! expanded considerations for maximum feasible fuel economy,
! attribute-based standards,
! changes in test procedure,
! credit trading, and
! other key provisions.
None of these policy options is mutually exclusive, and any or all options could be
adopted together. Each of these options is discussed below.
Combined Passenger Car/Light Truck Standards. One criticism of the
current CAFE program is its separate treatment of light trucks and passenger cars.
When EPCA was first enacted, most light trucks were used solely as work vehicles,
and they constituted a relatively small percentage of the light-duty vehicle fleet.
3 For more information see CRS Report RS22132, Legislative Vetoes After Chadha, by
Louis Fisher.

---

CRS-3
Since that time, light trucks, which include sport utility vehicles (SUVs) and vans,
are used more and more as passenger vehicles. Currently, light trucks make up
roughly half of the new light-duty vehicle market. As a consequence, some argue that
the distinction between the two fleets should be eliminated. Critics also allege that
specifications for some car-like vehicle models may have been designed purposefully
to qualify those vehicles for the lower mpg standard that applies to the light truck
fleet.
Mandated Numeric Increase in CAFE Standards. Some analysts argue
that price volatility in oil markets sends inconsistent signals to prospective new car
purchasers, and that the only way to avoid these mixed signals would be to mandate
higher CAFE standards. Some legislative proposals would require NHTSA to
establish new CAFE standards set at a fixed mpg target in a given year. Various
proposals would mandate increased standards for passenger cars, light trucks, or
both.
Mandated Percentage Increase in CAFE Standards. While some bills
would mandate an increase in the CAFE standards to specified levels, others would
require NHTSA to set rules to increase fuel economy by a set percentage every year.
In most cases, the bills mandate an annual CAFE increase of 4% from the previous
year. The bills vary on whether the increase would cover passenger cars, light trucks,
or both.
Regulatory Flexibility/Authority. As was mentioned above, NHTSA
currently has limited authority to modify the specific mpg target or the general design
of passenger car CAFE standards. Some legislative proposals would significantly
broaden NHTSA’s authority to amend the program, including allowing NHTSA to
set higher passenger car standards than EPCA currently allows. Currently, any
increase above 27.5 mpg or below 26.0 mpg requires the Secretary to issue an
amendment to the standards. That amendment is to be in force unless either chamber
of Congress disapproves.
Other proposals would allow NHTSA to extend the current single-year
compliance period to multiyear periods. Such a proposal, for example, might allow
NHTSA to require manufacturers to meet a set CAFE average for MY2011 through
MY2013, instead of requiring that the CAFE average be achieved in each model year.
Expanded Considerations for Maximum Feasible Fuel Economy.
Current law requires NHTSA to consider various factors in determining “maximum
feasible average fuel economy.” NHTSA must consider “technological feasibility,
economic practicability, the effect of other motor vehicle standards of the
government on fuel economy, and the need of the United States to conserve energy.”4
Some of the bills would add a further dimension, “cost-effectiveness,” and stipulate
weighing of several factors in assessing the cost-effectiveness of any proposed
changes in the standards. Among these factors are value to consumers, economic
security, national security, foreign policy, and the impact of oil use on various other
national policy concerns.
4 49 U.S.C. 32902(f)

---

CRS-4
Attribute-Based Standards. As noted above, NHTSA has established size-
based CAFE standards for light trucks but does not have similar authority for
passenger cars. Some proposals would either require or allow NHTSA to establish
multiple levels of passenger car CAFE standards for a given model year. The levels
could be based on a variety of vehicle attributes, including size and/or weight.
Changes in Test Procedures. According to the National Research Council,
the CAFE test procedures significantly overestimate the fuel economy of passenger
vehicles.5 One criticism of the test procedures is that highway drivers travel at
significantly higher speeds than the test’s 60-mile-per-hour maximum. Another
criticism is that the reported test measurements do not factor in the use of air
conditioning and other accessories that increase fuel consumption. Some proposals
would require NHTSA to update the tests to better reflect actual in-use fuel economy.
If such a change were made to the test procedures while keeping the CAFE targets
constant, it could have the effect of raising the CAFE mandate significantly without
any change in the normal regulatory process established by EPCA.
Credit Trading. For each model year, automakers must meet separate CAFE
targets for three new vehicle fleets: domestically produced passenger cars, imported
passenger cars, and light trucks. In any year that a manufacturer exceeds the CAFE
standard for one of these given fleets, that manufacturer may “bank” credits for use
in meeting future year requirements. Conversely, in any year that the manufacturer
comes up short, it may “borrow” credits from an anticipated surplus in future years.
Under the current CAFE program, banked or borrowed credits may be used only for
the fleet in which they originated. For example, if an automaker generates credits for
its fleet of imported passenger cars, those credits may not be applied to its fleets of
domestic cars or light trucks. Similarly, automakers may not trade credits with other
automakers. However, some of the legislative proposals would allow a manufacturer
to move credits between fleets and/or trade credits with another manufacturer.
Bush Administration Proposal
In his 2007 State of the Union address, President Bush outlined a goal of
reducing gasoline6 consumption by 20% from projected levels in 2017. Of that 20%
reduction, the President proposed that 15% come from the increased use of renewable
and alternative fuels, and that 5% come from increased vehicle fuel efficiency. It has
been estimated that an annual 4% increase in CAFE standards would lead to a 5%
reduction in projected gasoline consumption in 2017. The Bush Administration has
not proposed legislation that would mandate an increase in CAFE standards.
5 National Research Council, Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy
(CAFE) Standards, Washington (2002), p. 16.
6 Gasoline is only one part of oil consumption (albeit the largest), and thus a 20% reduction
in gasoline consumption translates to a smaller reduction in overall petroleum consumption.

---

CRS-5
On February 6, 2007, NHTSA submitted draft legislation to the House Energy
and Commerce Committee on the Bush Administration’s CAFE proposal.7 The
Administration’s proposal would not require an increase in fuel economy standards
but would grant NHTSA broader regulatory authority. The draft would allow
NHTSA to establish attribute-based standards for passenger cars and would allow for
CAFE credit trading.
Non-CAFE Policy Options
In addition to bills modifying the CAFE program, several other bills have been
introduced that would likely increase vehicle fuel economy through other measures.
For example, several bills requiring reductions in carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gas emissions have been introduced. Of those bills, two would require
per-mile emissions reductions from passenger vehicles. While such emissions
standards would not technically constitute a change in fuel economy standards,
automakers and others contend that there is no way other than fuel economy increases
to reduce automobile greenhouse gas emissions.8
Comparison of Legislation
Of the 14 CAFE bills compared, the eight Senate bills are compared in Table
1 and the four House bills are compared in Table 2. The two bills to control
greenhouse gas emissions from passenger cars are compared in Table 3.
7 As of February 22, 2007, no Member has sponsored and introduced the Administration’s
proposal.
8 For more information on climate change bills, see CRS Report RL33486, Climate Change:
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Bills in the 110th Congress, by Larry Parker and Brent D.
Yacobucci.

---

CRS-6
Table 1. Comparison of Senate CAFE Bills in the 110th Congress
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Bill Title
National Fuels
Improved Passenger
Renewable Energy,
Ten-in-Ten Fuel
Fuel Economy
Security and Fuel
Fuel Efficiency
Initiative
Automobile Fuel
Fuel Reduction, and
Economy Act
Reform Act
Efficiency (SAFE)
Energy Act of 2007
Economy Act of
Economic
Energy Act of 2007
2007
Stabilization and
EnHancement Act
of 2007
Combined
Passenger car and
No provision.
No provision.
Passenger car and
Passenger car and
No provision.
No provision.
Passenger
light truck
light truck
light truck
Car/Light
standards combined
standards combined
standards combined
Truck
starting in MY2012.
starting in MY2013.
starting in MY2013.
Standards
[Sec. 106(a)(3)]
[Sec. 2]
[Sec. 4]
Expands definition
Expands definition
of “automobile” to
of “passenger
include all vehicles
automobile” to
of up to 10,000
include all vehicles
pounds. [Sec. 105]
of up to 10,000
pounds designed to
carry less than 10
passengers. [Sec.3]

---

CRS-7
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Mandated
27.5 mpg for
40 mpg for
No provision.
35 mpg for
27.5 mpg for
No provision.
No provision.
Numeric
combined fleets by
passenger cars only
combined fleets by
combined fleets by
Increase in
MY2013. [Sec.
by MY2017.
MY2019. [Sec. 2]
MY2013. [Sec. 4]
CAFE
106(a)3)]
During interim
Standards
years, the Secretary
Interim MY2010
of Transportation
standards of 29.5
must set standards
mpg for passenger
for each individual
cars and 25.5 mpg
manufacturer at
for light trucks.
maximum feasible
[Sec. 2]
level. [Sec. 101]

---

CRS-8
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Mandated
For MY2010
An annual, fixed
No provision.
No provision.
Same as S. 162
For MY2013
Starting in
Percentage
through MY2012,
percentage increase
[Sec. 4]
through MY2030,
MY2013, requires
Increase in
requires a 4%
is specifically
requires a
that CAFE standard
CAFE
annual increase in
prohibited. [Sec.
mandatory annual
for each class of
Standards
passenger car fuel
101]
fuel economy
vehicles be
economy. [Sec.
increases of 4% for
increased by 4%
106(a)(3)]
each class of
over the previous
vehicles. [Sec. 102]
model year’s
Starting in
standard. [Sec. 3]
MY2013,
establishes a
mandatory annual
fuel economy
increase of 4% for
passenger cars and
light trucks
combined. [Sec.
106(a)(3)]

---

CRS-9
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Regulatory
NHTSA may set
NHTSA is
No provision.
NHTSA is given
NHTSA may set
NHTSA may set
NHTSA may set
Flexibility/
lower standards for
authorized to
broader authority to
lower standards for
lower standards for
lower standards for
Authority
a model year if the
establish multiyear
increase passenger
a model year if the
a model year if the
a model year if the
targets are not
compliance periods
car fuel economy
targets are not
targets are not
targets are not
technologically
instead of the
without
technologically
technologically
technologically
achievable, would
current single-year
congressional
achievable, would
achievable, would
achievable, would
lead to reductions in
compliance period.
approval. [Sec. 3]
lead to reductions in
lead to reductions in
lead to reductions in
vehicle safety, or
[Sec. 101]
vehicle safety, or
vehicle safety, or
vehicle safety, or
are not cost-
NHTSA may set
are not cost-
are not cost-
are not cost-
effective. [Sec.
Standards may be
different CAFE
effective. [Sec. 4]
effective. [Sec. 102]
effective. [Sec. 3]
106(a)(3)]
set individually for
targets for different
different classes of
manufacturers, but
NHTSA may
Standards may be
a manufacturer’s
in any given year
establish multiyear
set individually for
fleet of passenger
each manufacturer
compliance periods
different classes of
automobiles. [Sec.
must achieve a
(up to four years).
automobiles. [Sec.
101]
minimum average
[Sec. 5]
106(a)(3)]
of 92% of the
industry-wide
NHTSA may set
NHTSA is
CAFE target. [Sec.
different CAFE
authorized to
2]
targets for different
establish multiyear
manufacturers, but
compliance periods
in any given year
(up to four years)
each manufacturer
instead of the
must achieve a
current single-year
minimum average
compliance period.
of 92% of the
[Sec. 107]
industry-wide
target. [Sec. 4]

---

CRS-10
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Expanded
Cost-effectiveness
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Substantially
Substantially
Substantially
Consider-
is added to the list
similar to S. 162.
similar to S. 162.
similar to S. 162.
ations for
of factors for
Maximum
NHTSA to consider
Feasible
in determining
Fuel
maximum feasible
Economy
fuel economy.
Cost-effectiveness
would be measured
relative to several
criteria, including
value to consumers,
economic security,
national security,
foreign policy, and
the impact of oil
use on various other
national policy
concerns. [Sec.
106(a)(3)]
Attribute-
Starting in
NHTSA is given
No provision.
No provision.
Starting in
No provision.
No provision.
Based
MY2012, NHTSA
authority to
MY2013, NHTSA
Standards
is given authority to
establish attribute-
is given authority to
establish standards
based standards.
establish attribute-
based on vehicle
[Sec. 101]
based standards.
attributes such as
[Sec. 4]
size and/or weight.
[Sec. 106(a)(3)]

---

CRS-11
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Changes in
No provision.
No provision.
Requires NHTSA to
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Test
test vehicles for
Procedures
CAFE using
amended test
procedures
established by the
Environmental
Protection Agency
on December 27,
2006, for fuel
economy labeling.
[Sec. 201]

---

CRS-12
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Credit
Starting in
Greenhouse gas
No provision.
Manufacturers may
Before MY2013,
No provision.
No provision.
Trading
MY2012,
credits registered
trade credits
manufacturers are
manufacturers may
with a national
between fleets and
allowed to trade
trade credits with
registry may be
with other
credits with other
other
purchased by
manufacturers.
manufacturers for
manufacturers.
manufacturers and
[Sec. 9]
the same fleet (e.g.
However, credits
applied to fleet fuel
domestic passenger
may not be traded
economy results
cars). Starting in
between domestic
after MY2010.
MY2013,
and import fleets
However, credits
manufacturers may
(including domestic
purchased through
trade credits with
and imported light
the registry cannot
other manufacturers
trucks). In the
offset more than
across all fleets.
absence of such
10% of the fuel
However, in the
credits, each fleet
economy standard.
absence of such
must achieve at
[Sec. 102, 201]
credits, each fleet
least 92% of the
must achieve at
overall CAFE
least 92% of the
target. [Sec. 107]
overall CAFE
target. [Sec. 5]

---

CRS-13
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Other Key
No provision.
The Secretary of
No provision.
Starting in
No provision.
Existing incentives
Broadens authority
CAFE-
Transportation may
MY2014,
within the CAFE
of NHTSA to
Related
not set standards
automakers must
program for the
establish standards
Provisions
that impose
install devices to
production of dual-
for a broader
“marginal costs that
provide real-time
fuel and flexible
population of
exceed marginal
and cumulative fuel
fuel vehicles are
vehicles, including
benefits.” [Sec.
economy data that
eliminated. [Sec.
vehicles with gross
101]
will enable drivers
102(b)]
vehicle weight of
to operate their
10,000-26,000
A “national registry
vehicles to use fuel
Requires NHTSA to
pounds. [Sec. 2]
system” for
more efficiently.
set fuel economy
voluntary
[Sec. 7]
standards for
Establishes that 4-
greenhouse gas
medium-duty
wheel drive is
trading would be
In order to reduce
vehicles (vehicles
neither necessary
established. The
the likelihood of
with a gross weight
nor sufficient to
Secretary of
death or injury from
between 10,000 and
qualify vehicle as a
Transportation,
accidents, NHTSA
26,000 pounds).
light-duty truck.
working with the
is required to
[Sec. 102(a)]
[Sec. 2]
Department of
develop vehicle
Commerce, will
ratings and
Beginning in
determine the
standards to reduce
MY2012, existing
equivalency
damage by
incentives within
between fuel
improving
the CAFE program
economy
compatibility of
for the production
improvements and
large and small
of dual-fuel and
greenhouse gas
vehicles in frontal-
flexible fuel
reductions. [Sec.
and side-impacts.
vehicles are
201]
[Sec. 6]
eliminated. [Sec. 3]

---

CRS-14
S. 162 (Lugar)
S. 183 (Stevens)
S. 298
S. 357 (Feinstein)
S. 767 / S. 768
S. 875 (Lugar)
S. 1118 (Dorgan)
(Murkowski)
(Obama)
Other Key
This is a broad bill
No provision.
Establishes grants
Requires the
S. 768 also
This is a broad bill
From MY2012-
Non-CAFE
that also: mandates
for various energy
Environmental
modifies existing
that also: modifies
2022,
Provisions
the production of
technologies;
Protection Agency
tax credits for
the existing hybrid
manufacturers must
flexible fuel
requires the use of
to establish a
hybrid vehicles and
vehicle purchase
produce not less
vehicles; mandates
more efficient
program to label
establishes a
tax credit and
than 10% more
the installation of
automobile tires;
new vehicles’
manufacturer tax
establishes a tax
dual-fueled vehicles
E85 (85% ethanol
expands tax credits
expected lifetime
credit for advanced
credit for fuel-
than in the
and 15% gasoline)
for electricity
greenhouse gas
technology
efficient vehicles;
preceding model
pumps at gasoline
produced from
emissions. [Sec. 11]
vehicles.
establishes a
year. [Sec. 3]
stations; modifies
renewable energy.
manufacturer’s tax
existing tax credits
credit for advanced
for alcohol fuels
technology
and hybrid vehicles;
vehicles; modifies
establishes a
the existing
manufacturer’s tax
mandate for
credit for advanced
renewable fuels;
technology
promotes renewable
vehicles; promotes
fuel infrastructure;
the re-refining of
mandates the
used oil.
production of
alternative fuel
vehicles; limits oil
exploration in
certain areas.

---

CRS-15
Table 2. Comparison of House CAFE Bills in the 110th Congress
H.R. 656 (Reichert)
H.R. 1133 (Berkley)
H.R. 1500 (DeFazio)
H.R. 1506 (Markey)
Bill Title or Purpose
To require higher standards of
Freedom through Renewable
Gasoline Price Stabilization Act
Fuel Economy Reform Act
automobile fuel efficiency with
Energy Expansion (FREE) Act
of 2007
the goal of reducing the amount
of oil used for fuel by
automobiles in the United States
by 10 percent beginning in 2017,
and for other purposes.
Combined Passenger
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Expands definition of
Car/Light Truck
“automobile” to include all
Standards
vehicles of up to 10,000 pounds.
[Sec. 3] However, legislation
maintains distinctions between
passenger automobiles and light-
duty trucks through MY2011.
Mandated Numeric
33 mpg by MY2017; interim
33 mpg by MY2016; interim
37 mpg by MY2018 and 40 mpg
Mandates “a projected level of
Increase in CAFE
standards would be set by
standards would be set by
by MY2023; interim standards
average fuel economy” of at least
Standards
Secretary of Transportation
Secretary of Transportation
would be set by Secretary of
27.5 mpg for vehicles up to
beginning in MY2010 to reach
beginning in MY2010 to reach
Transportation beginning in
10,000 pounds beginning in
the mandated target. [Sec. 1]
the mandated target. [Sec. 8]
MY2010 to reach the mandated
MY2012, and 35 mpg in
target. [Sec. 9]
MY2018.

---

CRS-16
H.R. 656 (Reichert)
H.R. 1133 (Berkley)
H.R. 1500 (DeFazio)
H.R. 1506 (Markey)
Mandated Percentage
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Requires that current 27.5 mpg
Increase in CAFE
standard for passenger
Standards
automobiles be increased 4%
each year for MY2009-MY2011.
[Sec. 4] Beginning with
MY2012, calculated fuel
economy of a manufacturer’s
model year fleet may not be less
than 92% of the fleetwide fuel
economy average projected for
that manufacturer by the
Secretary of Transportation. [Sec.
4]
Regulatory Flexibility/
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
NHTSA may set lower standards
Authority
for a model year if the targets are
not technologically achievable,
would lead to reductions in
vehicle safety, or are not cost-
effective. [Sec. 4]

---

CRS-17
H.R. 656 (Reichert)
H.R. 1133 (Berkley)
H.R. 1500 (DeFazio)
H.R. 1506 (Markey)
Expanded Considerations
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Cost-effectiveness is added to the
for Maximum Feasible
list of factors for NHTSA to
Fuel Economy
consider in determining
maximum feasible fuel economy.
Cost-effectiveness would be
measured relative to several
criteria, including value to
consumers, economic security,
national security, foreign policy,
and the impact of oil use on
various other national policy
concerns. [Sec. 4(a)(3)]
Attribute-Based Standards
Authorizes Secretary to establish
No provision.
Authorizes Secretary to establish
Extends flexibility to Secretary to
size-based standards for different
size-based standards for different
establish attribute-based
classes of vehicles. [Sec. 1]
classes of vehicles. [Sec. 9]
standards (including size) for
different classes of vehicles, or in
the form of a mathematical
function. [Sec. 4]

---

CRS-18
H.R. 656 (Reichert)
H.R. 1133 (Berkley)
H.R. 1500 (DeFazio)
H.R. 1506 (Markey)
Changes in Test
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
Requires joint report from the
Procedures
Departments of Transportation
and Energy, and the
Environmental Protection
Agency that, in part, assesses the
accuracy of CAFE test
procedures used to measure fuel
economy, and to “identify any
additional factors or methods
that” would contribute to the
tests’ more accurately reflecting
in-use fuel economy. [Sec. 4]
Credit Trading
Authorizes Secretary to establish
No provision.
No provision.
No provision.
a credit trading program. [Sec. 2]

---

CRS-19
H.R. 656 (Reichert)
H.R. 1133 (Berkley)
H.R. 1500 (DeFazio)
H.R. 1506 (Markey)
Other Key CAFE-Related
Preamble states that the bill’s
Advises Secretary that interim
Advises Secretary that interim
Act is not intended to “limit,
Provisions
intention is to de facto reduce the
standards not only reach
standards not only reach
constrain, supersede, or expand”
amount of oil used in
mandated 33 mpg by MY2016,
mandated goals, but maximize
authorities for prescribing motor
automobiles by 10% beginning in
but maximize retention of jobs in
retention of jobs in the sector,
vehicle safety standards. [Sec. 5]
2017.
the sector, and not degrade safety
and not degrade safety of
of automobiles. [Sec. 8]
automobiles. [Sec. 9]
Advises Secretary that interim
standards not only reach
Requires Executive Branch
mandated 33 mpg by MY2016,
agencies to improve the average
but also must maximize retention
fuel economy of new vehicles in
of jobs in the sector, and not
each vehicle class by 3 mph by
degrade safety of automobiles.
MY2011, and 6 mpg by MY2014
[Sec. 1]
over a baseline calculated for all
vehicles in the MY2008 fleet for
each vehicle class. [Sec. 10]
Other Key Non-CAFE
No provision
This is a broad bill that also
This is a broad bill that also
No provision
Provisions
includes provisions relating to
includes provisions on several
nuclear energy, offshore leases,
matters such as petroleum
repeal of certain tax subsidies
industry concentration, the
and extension of certain tax
Strategic Petroleum Reserve,
credits, renewable portfolio
minimum inventory levels.
standard, and other matters.

---

CRS-20
Table 3. Comparison of Bills To Establish Automobile Greenhouse Gas Standards in the 110th Congress
S. 309 (Sanders)
S. 485 (Kerry)
Bill Title
Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act
Global Warming Reduction Act of 2007
Greenhouse Gas
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator is required
The EPA Administrator is required to establish regulations for reducing
(GHG) Emission
to establish regulations starting in MY2016 requiring the average fleet
greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles at least as stringent as
Standard
greenhouse gas emissions be less than 205 grams per mile for passenger
those adopted by the California Air Resources board on September 23-
cars and 332 grams per mile for light trucks. [Sec. 707] (This greenhouse
24, 2004. Those regulations cap greenhouse gas emissions at 205 grams
gas standard is roughly equivalent to an MY2016 CAFE standard of 42
per mile for passenger cars and 332 grams per mile for light trucks by
mpg for passenger cars and 26 mpg for light trucks.)
2016. [Sec. 704] (This is roughly equivalent to an MY2016 CAFE
standard of 42 mpg for passenger cars and 26 mpg for light trucks.)
Other Key CAFE-
Requires greenhouse gas emissions standards for medium- and heavy-
No provision.
Related Provisions
duty trucks.
Other Key Non-
Caps greenhouse gas emissions on an economy-wide basis beginning in
Caps greenhouse gas emissions on an economy-wide basis beginning in
CAFE Provisions
2010. Emissions are capped at 20% of their 1990 levels in the year
2010. Emissions are capped at 38% of their 1990 levels in 2050. The
2050. The EPA has the discretion to employ a market-based allowance
allowance trading system includes an allocation scheme that requires an
trading program or any combination of cost-effective emission reduction
unspecified percentage of allowances to be auctioned. The bill also
strategies. The bill also includes mandatory greenhouse gas emission
includes a new energy efficiency performance standard. The bill would
standards for new powerplants, along with a new energy efficiency
establish a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), increase biofuel
performance standard. The bill would establish a renewable portfolio
mandates under the Renewable Fuels Standard, and mandate new
standard (RPS) and a new low-carbon generation requirement and
infrastructure for biofuels. Finally, the bill expands and extends existing
trading program.
tax incentives for alternative fuels and advanced technology vehicles,
and establishes a manufacturer tax credit for advanced technology
vehicle investment.

---