Puget Sound Clean Cities

 
 

Events & News

Upcoming Events | Coalition and Member Updates | Fuel, Vehicle and Technology News
Legislation and Regulation Updates | Activities in Other Regions
 Other News Sources | News Archive


News: Legislation and Regulation Updates

Sep. 2005
US
Congress passes Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005. Congress recently passed a national energy bill referred to as the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005. While the bill covers much more than just PSCCC’s work, the bill includes key provisions that affect the Coalition’s efforts. In brief, the key provisions related to PSCCC are that the bill:

  • authorizes $200 million for an advanced vehicle program to operate under the Clean Cities program to provide grants to state and local governments to acquire alternative fuel vehicles

  • authorizes $110 million per year for fiscal years 2005-9 to demonstrate advanced technologies for the production of alternative transportation biofuels

  • launches programs for hydrogen fuel-cell transit and school buses to demonstrate the technology

  • requires “dual-fueled” vehicles acquired under requirements of the EPAct of 1992 be operated on alternative fuels

  • requires a study to review vehicle purchase requirements under EPAct to ensure the program works more effectively in the future

  • includes provisions to establish a biodiesel engine testing program and require the Department of Energy to accelerate efforts to improve diesel combustion and after-treatment technologies for diesel-fueled vehicles

  • requires the establishment of a program to support deployment of idle reduction technologies as well as an advanced biofuels technology program

  • institutes a renewable fuel program that mandates minimum volumes of renewable fuels in the US starting with 4 billion gallons in 2006 and increasing to 7.5 billion in 2012

For good summaries of the bill, visit this Clean Cities' page or this West Coast Collaborative page. Stay tuned for more specifics on how all of the new programs will take shape. PSCCC intends to take advantage of all opportunities in the bill to improve the alternative fuel vehicle landscape in the Puget Sound region.

June 2004
Federal Energy Bill Under Discussion - Again
The Republican leadership in the House is seeking to pass an energy bill substantially similar to one passed by the House last fall. And to accompany this legislation, the House is working to pass several new energy-related bills. The stated Republican priority is to increase domestic energy production, with a particular focus on domestic petroleum production. Republican plans include provisions to open up public lands, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and coastal waters to energy exploration and provisions to streamline environmental regulations in order to develop energy resources more quickly. Republicans claim that the Bush-backed energy policies are necessary to create a cohesive energy policy and to protect the public against high fuel prices. Republicans further note that increasing energy production will create much needed jobs and improve the economy of the nation. Democrats agree that comprehensive energy policies are needed, but believe these policies need to be focused on reducing dependence on petroleum, both foreign and domestic, and should do more to promote renewable energy sources. The Democrats argue their policies are more sustainable and will also lead to jobs and economic growth. They also note that the Republican provisions weaken environmental laws and requirements for new oil-refining facilities and other energy projects. 

Many are questioning the revitalized House efforts, and the expenses involved, given that the measures are not expected to make it to the President and that the Senate has been stalled its version of the energy bill since late last year. House spokespersons say this is simply a political statement that the country needs a cohesive energy policy to protect the public against high fuel prices and is a means to push the Senate to move forward with its version of the energy bill. Critics say the maneuvers are an attempt to place the blame for high gas prices on Democrats, since the Democratic-controlled Senate is widely expected to vote against the new House energy package. A spokesman for Senate Democrat Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) has reportedly noted that if the Republican leaders of the House were serious about passing the energy bill, they would remove the liability waiver for MTBE manufacturers, which is the main reason behind the bipartisan opposition to passage of a federal energy package. 

More information is available through "All Things Considered" on National Public Radio:
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1958874 and
Grist Magazine: http://www.gristmagazine.com/muck/muck061504.asp?source=weekly

June 2004
California Working to Implement CO2 Standards for Autos
  The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is moving forward with plans to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from vehicles. The California legislature passed a law in 2002, the first law in the U.S. aimed at reducing greenhouse-gas emissions from automobiles as a means to address global climate change. The regulation now being crafted will put that law into effect by requiring automakers to cut CO2 emissions from their new vehicles by 30 percent, phasing in from 2009 to 2015. According to many experts, there is no current technology that directly reduces carbon dioxide and other gases linked to climate change. The only known means to cut these emissions from cars is to use less fuel. Thus, the regulations will have the side effect of requiring automakers to increase fuel economy. But the regulations face significant challenges. Automakers are concerned about logistical and engineering problems in complying with the regulations, as well as the costs. Environmentalists counter that compliance could be achieved through combinations of simple technologies and reduced horsepower, that technology as advanced as hybrid electric systems is not necessary. CARB estimates that vehicle costs could rise by about $1,000 by 2015, and that these costs would be offset through reduced fuel costs. Automakers are also threatening to sue over the regulations based on federal pre-emption, arguing that only the federal government has the authority to regulate fuel economy. CARB is adamant that the regulations are based on their authority to address air quality and are not fuel economy measures. However, another legal challenge could result from EPA's ruling that carbon dioxide is not an air pollutant. Without this classification, the authority of California to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles, and other sources, is being questioned. The regulatory and legislative review processes associated with the California CO2 regulations are expected to continue for at least another year. 

May 2004
Efforts Continue to Pass Federal Alternative Fuels Incentives
 
With the federal energy stalled, several efforts have been made to include alternative fuel tax incentives in various federal bills. The latest actions involve the Foreign Sales Corporation/Extraterritorial Income (FSC/ETI) or JOBS bill. The Senate-passed version includes many of the alternative fuel provisions included in the energy bill and supported by the alternative fuels industries and advocates. The House of Representatives left for the Memorial day recess without completing work on its version of the bill. The bill has not yet been completed because the House Republican leadership is looking at what other provisions should be added to the bill. Some of the provisions under consideration include the alternative fuels incentives. It is hoped that the entire House will vote on the bill by mid June. Many consider the FSC/ETI bill as the last chance to get the alternative fuel incentives passed into law this year. Those wishing to assist in efforts to pass these incentives are encouraged to contact their Members of Congress today and let them know that passage of the FSC/ETI with the energy tax package and alternative fuels incentives is very important. You can contact the district offices or the offices in Washington DC by phone or email with just a simple message of support. Contact information for Washington State Members can be found at the following links:
House of Representatives: http://clerk.house.gov/members/index.html
Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

March 2004
Alternative Fuel Incentives Stalled in State Legislature
Despite strong bipartisan support from across the state, several bills to provide incentives for alternative fuels and vehicles failed to pass the Washington State Legislature this year. The reason appears to be a combination of a short legislative session (only 60 days), confusion over the fiscal impacts of the bills, ongoing budget concerns, political issues unrelated to these bills, and a variety of other factors. These circumstances affected the majority of proposed legislation, with the Legislature passing very few bills this year. The alternative fuel bills would have provided incentives for the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles and the development of refueling stations, provided HOV lane access for alternative fuel vehicles, and eliminated the state fuel tax on alternative fuels purchased by school districts. Based on the substantial encouragement from numerous legislators, the Coalition will bring forth these and similar proposals again next session.

March 2004
Fuel Economy Incentives to Automakers Extended
The Bush administration plans to extend incentives which allow automakers to meet federal fuel economy requirements by producing vehicles capable of operating on ethanol and other alternative fuels. Congress originally enacted the incentives in 1998 as a means to increase the use of alternative fuels. But the program has been criticized as a failure because the majority of the vehicles produced are dual-fuel or bi-fuel vehicles which are operated on gasoline, not the ethanol or other alternative. Some estimates conclude that less than 1 percent of the vehicles actually use the alternative fuel. Under the program, 3.4 million dual-fuel ethanol capable vehicles have been produced, but there are currently only 182 fueling stations in the country that provide Ethanol-85 fuel, with most of these in the Midwest. Environmentalists are calling for canceling the incentives, which, they say, simply let the automakers produce more gas guzzlers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which administers the program, has indicated that extending the incentive is warranted in light of automakers recent efforts to increase the promotion of the vehicles.

March 2004
Federal Biodiesel Tax Incentives Now Included in Senate Transportation Bill
The Senate has included biodiesel and ethanol tax incentives in the transportation bill. The provisions contain minor improvements over those already included in the energy bill which has been stalled since late last year. Inclusion in the transportation bill could prove particularly beneficial, given the necessity of finalizing a transportation package soon. The House of Representatives has approved a four-month extension to the current transportation bill, allowing debate to continue over the next few months. Once the House passes its transportation bill, a Conference Committee will negotiate a final version of the bill. The full Senate is expected to take up the transportation debate soon. 

March 2004
New Federal Energy Bill Proposed By Senate
Senate Energy & Natural Resources Chairman Pete Domenici (R-NM) has introduced a new version of the federal Energy Bill (S. 2095). This pared-down version includes many of the alternative fuel incentives, including tax credits for vehicles and fuel stations, the green school bus program and the other provisions such as the changes to the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) mandates. The new bill does not contain the limited liability waiver for the gas additive methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), which was a significant factor in passage of the Energy Bill in the Senate. It appears that the House of Representative has concerns about this new version, with Majority Leader DeLay (R-TX) stating that the House does not want to re-open negotiations with the Senate and that the House is adamant that the bill include the limited liability waiver for MTBE. 

March 2004
DOE Issues Final Decision on Private and Local Government Fleet Mandates
On January 29, 2004, DOE published a final rule announcing its decision not to implement an AFV acquisition mandate for private and local government fleets. The final rule follows publication of DOE's draft rule in March 2003. The decision was based on DOE's determination that implementation of the fleet rule would not achieve EPAct's petroleum replacement fuel goals because it would not appreciably increase the percentage of transportation motor fuel that is alternative fuel or replacement fuels. The full basis for DOE's decision is set out in the final rule. This action concludes DOE' s consideration of whether to implement an AFV acquisition mandate for private and local government fleets. 

 

 


 

 

Puget Sound Clean Cities Coalition
1904 Third Avenue - Suite 105
Seattle, WA 98101
Tel: 206.689.4055 Fax: 206.343.7522

The Coalition is grateful to the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency for hosting this website.
Copyright © 2005 Puget Sound Clean Cities Coalition