Today were here to discuss the stake owners at the national Highway Safety administration in the Greenhouse Gas emission standards this program was established by congress in 1975. The goals are to improve fuel economy and secure the Nations Energy and independence. It has undergone changes and modifications both because of political and economic forces. Lesson ten years ago the pa was said to incentivize more efficient vehicles to use less fuel and Carbon Dioxide. States have enacted standards with respect to automobile omissions. This has created a complicated regulatory scheme. Improving efficiency and Energy Independence are important. Realworld fashion data must have an impact on the farreaching economy. The Previous Administration announced an attempt to create a National Standard to Work Together to avoid conflicting regulations. Whatever progress has been made epa issued a final determination for model year 2022 and 2025 is appropriate. They took the actions out clearly undermining the earlier pledge. Automobile makers potentially found themselves in a position compliant with one program but out of compliance with another. This harms our economy, workers and consumers. The industry has 100,000 ohioans. The hallmark of the industry is to innovate built cars. But outdated government regulations get in the way. Its a rare event for policymakers in washingtonettero make consumer demands. Washington stands in the way it creates confusion with conflicting roles. My constituents know what vehicles work best for the Family Budget they change over time. Also, there is a risk the cost associated with federal and states standards could choose them to choose older cars without the benefits of safety technology. Must remain the guiding principle. Were starting to turn the corner after many challenging years. Its disheartening. Im interested in hearing about the experience to navigate the trip this tricky terrain and what can be done to help support consumers across the country. I think our witnesses for being here. I yelled to the gentle lady from tennessee. Thank you. I appreciate that you have called this hearing. Studies have shown the higher Purchase Price of cars under stricter cafe under the 20, 25 standards would eliminate consumers from buying new cars. Between 3. 114. 9 million American Consumers that would fall out of the new car marketplace. This is where theres tension to talk about. When is something counterproductive . Tennessee we have a lot of auto manufacturers. Whether with nissan, toyota, volkswagen or gm it doesnt matter. They want realistic standards, they want something that they can meet the expectation of American Consumers and deliver a product that is first of all safe. The consumers are going to be safe these automobiles. I think the chairman for the hearing. I think its time t whats realistic, achievable and what will deliver safe product for the american consumer. Thank you. The chair recognizes subcommittee Ranking Member, the gentle lady from illinois for five minutes. Thank you. Cafe and Greenhouse Gas emission standards are critical tools to improve fuel economy. The cafe program was born out of the Energy Crisis in the 70s. Those are now helping us address greater threat of the changing climate. Strong standards have a more immediate consequence. Big savings at the pump. The midterm evaluations in january the Environmental Protection agency estimated 202s emission standards will save 92 billion over the lifetime. Industry not each one together. Industry criticize the standards as too costly. That criticism is not supported by the fact. Its not only technologically feasible is gone to 200 since 2012 the last time we held this hearing in september 2016 john german testified quote during the course of my 40 year career initial cost estimates for complying with the missions have consistently been overstated. Nevertheless, standards face resistance. Often here for companies to call for greater uncertainty more time to recall the rules. What are the automakers do . Theyre all too happy to comply. The matter how they want to explain the decision the end result is clear. Dirtier, less efficient vehicles. Calls dust further efforts to weaken the standard. I dont know why they be so close to strong standards when automakers are promising energyefficient autonomous vehicles. I think compliance should be easy as we discuss the standards Public Health hangs in the balance. We need to continue the progress toward greater fuel efficiency and lower Greenhouse Gas emissions. I now yield. Thank you. The pas standards for lack of vehicles are winwin. Theyre good for consumers who save money at the pump over the lifetime of the vehicles. Figure for the environment. The reduce emissions for the transportation sector, the only sector in which it has grown worse over the past 15 years. And go for the american workers. They spark development, Many Companies understand it and support epa standards. Even companies critical of the standards are shifting response to consumer demand. Im disappointed with the Trump Administration decision to revisit the standards from 2022 2025. Its clear their intent to weakening the progress weve made so far. So im going to introduce a bill, the standards are written in 2012 with the support of Auto Industry. My legislation maintains the promise to American People. They cost less at the pump. Better at the thank you, i yield back. The gentle lady yields back. I recognize the chairman of the subcommittee for five minutes for an Opening Statement. Before could i get 15 seconds to point of personal privilege. Thank you two pictures i want to identify, this is a tweet i got from my colleague in texas was not paying attention. Talking about the next streak will put that up i thank you for collecting the record and starting a new streak. We saw your tweet earlier. I know my colleagues because of mr. Olson and how he asked. So, thank you very much. The gentleman is recognized. One of the costliest regulation is one we will address today that targets fuel efficiency for cars and trucks. We estimate cars in excess of 200 billion much of which will show up in higher sticker prices for newer vehicles. Although they claim savings for lower fuel costs, we know its based upon inaccurate projections another assumptions that are proving to be off the mark. Its time to review to see if there good deal for consumers or they can be improved upon. Fortunately they contain the socalled midterm evaluation. Theyre finalized in 2012 and have stricter standards out to 2025. For this reason will revisit it way through the process to see if standards for model years 2022 2025 need to be adjusted. In 2016 we looked at midterm evaluation to make a final determination by april 2018. After the election they accelerated it and rush it out the door last january. This concluded that standards are fine and dont need to be changed. The good news is they found the process to be unacceptable. Is reopen the midterm evaluation with the original deadline. The agency might proceed to a rulemaking to change targets. Part of the hearing is to get input for those who make cars and trucks and those who sell them about their contributions and what they would like to see come out of the process. Stakes are high, there higher for consumers. The average price of a new vehicle has risen to 35000. They are contributor to the increase. Epa estimated price increases by 2025. The real number might be higher. The biggest sticker shock might be in the vehicles that matter most. A tired appraiser smart car might be fine for some but many of my constituents the family says vehicles or trucks for work. These larger vehicles might take the largest hit. We need to make sure they maintain choice and affordability. In addition we need to evaluate if we have a uniform set of rules for the nation. Since the 70s national Highway Safety administration had exclusive authorities. The Obama Administration decided the epa in California Resources board should do so. We have three agencies regulating the same thing. Not surprisingly there are discrepancies. Looking ahead we need to ask if we want three agencies involved in the fuel economy and why we gave california so much more power than other states. Whats best for the consumer. Vehicle purchases are second only to home purchases. I hope this strengthens our understanding to make these regulations as consumer friendly as possible. Thank you. We now recognize the environment subcommittee Ranking Member the gentleman from new york. Thank you to our witnesses for holding the hearing. This is corporate average standards they played a Critical Role in saving consumers money at the pump and reducing carbon pollution. Standards were established in 75 to reduce our nations reliance on foreign oil. Since 2009 the sortant in our nation suffered to address climate change. Of Greenhouse Gases. According to the inventory light duty vehicles accounted for nearly 60 of the admissions and 16. 5 of total domestic emissions in 2015. Those serious efforts the current standards are estimated to lead to the reduction of emissions by 6 billion metric tons in addition, standards are estimated to save 1. 7 trillion at the pump for vehicles produced in 2011 and 2025. Come along way since the 1930s. For the past four decades the program has evolved to give automakers greater flexibility. Today manufactures are not forced, each manufacturer has a fleetwide standard that reflects the vehicles to make customers demands. Since her last hearing, it is seen major changes that epa. As part of the agreement between obama and the Auto Industry epa agreed to conduct a midterm evaluation. With assumptions made were still accurate and reasonable. Last summer epa began its Midterm Review. They examined factors about the Public Record on the appropriateness of great skin standards. Along with the California Air resources board, epa issued a july Technical Assessment report and sought Public Comment. They also wanted Public Comment on the proposed determination from 2022 2025. The Technical Assessment provide a robust and conclusive record. Standards can be met at lower cost than originally estimated. The current estimate is average per vehicle cost of 875 to meet the standards. This is lower than the initial estimate of 1100 which epa found reasonable in the 2012 rule. And much lower than consumers can expect to save at the pump. In january Gina Mccarthy issued a final determination the target should remain in place. I believe that was the correct decision. Despite the record established, the administrator announced his decision to reopen the Midterm Review. We clean standards would be bad for consumers, the environment and american competitiveness. I have tremendous faith in the manufactures. No doubt they will meet these goals. The evidence is clear that Technology Adoption rates have occurred more quickly. Last year janet mccabe testified before the committee the more than 100 individual model year 2016 vehicle versions meeting 2020 standards for later. As automakers continue to innovate multiple Technology Pathways including existing off the shelf technologies will allow them to achieve 20222025 standards. Thank you to the chairs for the join hearing thank you to our witnesses for being here. These are important programs. I yield back. The chair recognizes the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from oregon for five minutes. Good morning. Todays hearings talks about the duplicate of Government Programs and increase costs and decrease choices for consumers. Talking about fuel economy standards and the Environmental Protection agency. Has been charged with implementing standards since 1978, the obama era epa developed its own standard in 2009. To coordinate these requirements the Obama Administration created the National Program. That failed in its attempt to develop a single National Standard which creates barriers to innovation and growth. Under the current scheme its possible automakers could find themselves in compliance with one federal standard but running afoul of another. Even though the administration told this committee during the hearing they would Work Together to avoid this. Weve seen activity that undermines the program and works against the promise. Under the midterm evaluation schedule they were to jointly issue their respective coordination on the standards. This is supposed to happen in april of 2018. However epa abandoned this commitment and rush through the final determination without coordination just seven days before President Trump was sworn in. I look forward to receiving an update. We want to know how the schemes impact consumers to learn about better ways these standards are met without unnecessary paperwork that serve only to drive up costs. Has constructed these programs will raise the average price biomes 3000. That will price Many Americans out of the new car market. Although the goals are important we must not forget that we do have a real impact on consumers across the country. The Government Works best when it offers clear solutions. Programs that overlap or conflict its our job to make sure laws in the implementation advance Public Policy goals. I think our witnesses for participating today. The American People deserves a government to remove barriers. I look forward to your testimony. If the other member wants a balance my time i will youll back. The gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes the Ranking Member the gentleman from new jersey for five minutes. Thank you. A little over a year ago we held a hearing produced by the national highway transportation and Safety Administration in the California Resources board. That formed the basis for the agencys decision to move forward with light duty standards from 2022 in 2025. Other things need to improve, the Trump Administration is moving to weaken these. They complied with the request to open the Midterm Review and reconsider the target for lightduty vehicles equivalent to 51. 4 miles per gallon. This could lead to a weakening of the standard. If the oil industry is to remain competitive we have to reject efforts to move backwards. These contribute greatly to the ongoing threat of climate change. We must meet these goals, air pollution and Carbon Emissions are significant. The Fastest Growing markets are in asia, india and china. These are the same questions where they have chronic poor air quality several countries including britain, france, china have Ambitious Goals to eliminate the sales of diesel cars in the next few decades. The Auto Industry says they cant meet those goals by 2025 but efforts to seek harmonization through credits and credit banking only serve to undermine the goals set by the Obama Administration. The oil industry has received a sizable advantage in a delay and increases for violations filed last year. Industry must find ways to continue their investment particularly those that dont rely fossil fuel for power. The goals are ambitious but achievable. They will deliver benefits to consumers and make the nation more energy secure. The play a critical record in the lowering omissions and improve air quality and Public Health. Technology is to produce they must be produced and marketed with the same level of resources used to market the large sportutility vehicles currently being pushed by industry. There is no justification that will benefit and the american manufacturers that will reap the benefits. It i dont know if anybody wants my time so i will youll back. Thank you. This concludes our Opening Statements. The chair will remind members that pursuant to the rules Opening Statements will made part of the record. We think the witnesses for being here today to testify. Today some witnesses will have five minutes followed by a round of questions. Our Witness Panel includes the president ceo of alliance automobile manufacturers. On behalf of the National Automobile dealers association, doctor dave cook, senio