17-08-2012

Court decision on E15 puts consumers at risk

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) responded today to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia's split decision to dismiss a petition from AFPM and other industry groups challenging the Environmental Protection Agency's E15 waiver. The waiver authorizes a 50 percent increase in the amount of ethanol in gasoline for newer-model year motor vehicles.

The petition asserted that EPA overstepped its authority under the Clean Air Act when it granted partial waivers to allow the use of E15 in certain engines, including vehicles model year 2001 and newer. Objective tests have shown that E15 causes engine damage in certain vehicles and therefore should not be an approved fuel under the Clean Air Act that can be sold in the general gasoline supply.

Unfortunately, the court did not reach the merits of AFPM's challenge and instead dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, holding that the petitioners did not have standing.

"The Court's ruling upholds EPA's irresponsible decision that puts consumers at risk. AFPM members want to ensure that all fuels sold into commerce are safe for consumers, effective and reliable, but today's decision confounds our ability to do so. Vehicle testing has confirmed that E-15 damages certain engines. In fact, vehicle manufacturers have begun to include warnings on their gas caps that E15 could void vehicle warranties. This decision will harm every American who owns a car, truck or small engine equipment," said AFPM President Charles T. Drevna.

AFPM and a number of other industry groups have repeatedly raised concerns with the use of E15. Studies have shown that E15 causes engine damage to passenger vehicles, boats and outdoor power equipment, creating safety, liability and warranty issues.

Drevna continued, "In its rush to force E15 on the market, EPA neglected to conduct the necessary testing to ensure the safety of American consumers. Political science and the advancement of one industry should never be placed ahead of real science and consumer welfare."