Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Coalition of States File Suit Against the EPA Over Emission and Fuel Economy Changes

      It is getting a bit messy

    The past month has been quite strenuous on the relationship between the Environmental Protection Agency and the State of California. Back in April, EPA chief Scott Pruitt announced they would be rolling back the fuel-efficiency regulations set towards the end of President Obama's tenure. The EPA also announced that it was considering revoking California's waiver to set their own emission standards. A few days later, we reported that the officials from the White House, California, and automakers were trying to work out a possible emissions deal to prevent a legal fight. It seems those talks went nowhere as California along with sixteen other states and the District of Columbia have filed suit challenging the rollback.

    On Tuesday, the collation led by California filed a suit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia challenging the rollback. This group makes up 40 percent of the U.S. auto market.

    "The states joining today's lawsuit represent 140 million people who simply want cleaner and more efficient cars. This phalanx of states will defend the nation's clean car standards to boost gas mileage and curb toxic air pollution," said California Governor Jerry Brown in a statement.

    The suit alleges that the EPA decision to roll back the regulation lacked any scientific reason. The EPA is also accused of failing to follow its own regulations and violating the Clean Air Act.

    “This is California saying: You really want war? We’ll give you war. It’s a signal to the administration that they’re not going to get away with anything in this space,” said Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign to the New York Times.

    According to Reuters, the Department of Transportation has a draft proposal of the changes that is expected to be released to the public later this month. The draft would freeze emission requirements for vehicles at 2020 levels through 2026. The draft also asserts that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 bars California from imposing their own rules, even with the waiver. This proposal has already earned the ire of the public and various members of the U.S. Senate. One Senator, Tom Carper, D-Delaware obtained a copy of the proposal and sent a scathing letter to Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao and Pruitt. 

    “Such a proposal, if finalized, would harm U.S. national and economic security, undermine efforts to combat global warming pollution, create regulatory and manufacturing uncertainty for the automobile industry and unnecessary litigation, increase the amount of gasoline consumers would have to buy, and runs counter to statements that both of you have made to Members of Congress,” wrote Carper.

    There is a lot riding on this suit as it could possibly cause the U.S. to have two different emission regulations and automakers having to meet both of them.

    "Enough is enough. We're not looking to pick a fight with the Trump administration, but when the stakes are this high for our families' health and our economic prosperity, we have a responsibility to do what is necessary to defend them,"  said Xavier Becerra, California state attorney general. 

    Yesterday, the White House announced that it will be meeting with leaders of the major automakers next week. The meeting will be talking about the planned changes to the fuel efficiency rules. It is expected that automakers will be trying to push the Trump administration and California to agree to a national standard.

    Source: New York Times, Roadshow, Reuters, (2), U.S. Senate (Carper's Letter)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    What I don't understand is how California is the 6th largest economy in the world and they don't have coal mines and shale oil fracking, and they have high taxes, high regulation on pollution and guns, and legalized marijuna.    According to Fox News low taxes, fossil fuels and low regulation is the way to grow an economy.  🙄   Worked wonders for West Virginia, Kentucky and Mississippi. 

    Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now.  But California will win this lawsuit because of CARB and the fact that these rules were previously agreed to by auto makers.  And it wouldn't surprise me if California come 2030 bans sale of gasoline cars all together and then automakers have no choice but to go EV, because you can't ignore 40 million people in the richest state in the country.

    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    well, this is what they want people in.  or they will tax the living sht out of you.  there's reason the ridiculous fuel economy standards are there.  punish you either way.  comply and drive the crackerbox or pay through the but in taxes and fines if you want a truck or something.

    Sad thing is the Ecosport is such a pile of crap with poor mpg and no power

     

     

    image.png

    Edited by regfootball
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe instead of an Ecosport, seek superior alternatives.  As for California vs. Pruitt's EPA, expect CA to win in court.  The only way Pruitt wins is if ALL emissions regulations and CAFE standards are repealed by Congress, and apparently there is no appetite for doing either one.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The draft would freeze emission requirements for vehicles at 2020 levels through 2026.

    “Such a proposal, if finalized, would harm U.S. national and economic security, undermine efforts to combat global warming pollution,

     create regulatory and manufacturing uncertainty for the automobile industry and unnecessary litigation, increase the amount of gasoline consumers would have to buy, and runs counter to statements that both of you have made to Members of Congress,” wrote Carper.

    Guess we're doing all those things right now; why'd they wait to sue?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest Scottzilla

    Posted

    11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    What I don't understand is how California is the 6th largest economy in the world and they don't have coal mines and shale oil fracking, and they have high taxes, high regulation on pollution and guns, and legalized marijuna.    According to Fox News low taxes, fossil fuels and low regulation is the way to grow an economy.  🙄   Worked wonders for West Virginia, Kentucky and Mississippi. 

    Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now.  But California will win this lawsuit because of CARB and the fact that these rules were previously agreed to by auto makers.  And it wouldn't surprise me if California come 2030 bans sale of gasoline cars all together and then automakers have no choice but to go EV, because you can't ignore 40 million people in the richest state in the country.

    So California was always high tax, and high regulation?

    you know CA is losing population and is fiscally unsound right? Why don't you compare CA to TX or Fl nstead of picking on WV? Which has always been poor.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    California paid $405 billion in taxes to the federal government in 2015, they are what drives the federal government, only 2 other states even topped $200 million (Texas and NY).

    And besides the economic influence, CARB was around before EPA, so CARB can do what ever it wants, CA won't change their rules, and in court California will beat the EPA.

    I think we should get rid of CAFE all together and raise federal gas taxes another 25-50 cents, and put that money into the crumbling roads we have.  

    • Like 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Sure, with the highest population, your going to see the highest revenues. But CA was only #9 on median income in 2015.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      At FCA, amid the backdrop of a proposed merger and its subsequent collapse,  a lawsuit has been filed by Reid Bigland, head of the RAM brand and CEO of FCA Canada alleging that FCA has retaliated against Bigland for cooperating in a Federal prob of FCA's sales reporting process. 
      Bigland joined Chrysler in 2006 and in turn took over the reigns of Alfa Romeo, Maserati, and Dodge, eventually serving as CEO of FCA Canada.  The lawsuit filed Wednesday accuses FCA of retaliation for not taking the fall for the sales reporting prob.  Bigland claims his compensation has fallen by more than 90% and that the sales reporting process under scrutiny was one that he inherited. 
      The probe of FCA's sales reporting started after two dealerships in Illinois filed a lawsuit alleging they were offered cash in return for reporting falsely inflated sales numbers. From that lawsuit, FCA was forced to recount and re-report its previous sales reports.  The Security and Exchange Commission continued its investigation and Bigland cooperated. 
      Bigland's position is that the sales reporting methods existed well before he assumed his roles, and he did nothing to change the reporting process already in place.  Bigland claims that the SEC tried to settle with some admission of wrong-doing by the company and Bigland. Bigland declined to admit wrong doing and later sent a letter detailing the sales reporting practices to the SEC.
      Bigland sold his shares in the company in 2018 and he claims that FCA is withholding bonuses to pay for SEC fines if and when they come. 
      For FCA's part they say via Detroit News:
      We'll have more information as it comes out. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      At FCA, amid the backdrop of a proposed merger and its subsequent collapse,  a lawsuit has been filed by Reid Bigland, head of the RAM brand and CEO of FCA Canada alleging that FCA has retaliated against Bigland for cooperating in a Federal prob of FCA's sales reporting process. 
      Bigland joined Chrysler in 2006 and in turn took over the reigns of Alfa Romeo, Maserati, and Dodge, eventually serving as CEO of FCA Canada.  The lawsuit filed Wednesday accuses FCA of retaliation for not taking the fall for the sales reporting prob.  Bigland claims his compensation has fallen by more than 90% and that the sales reporting process under scrutiny was one that he inherited. 
      The probe of FCA's sales reporting started after two dealerships in Illinois filed a lawsuit alleging they were offered cash in return for reporting falsely inflated sales numbers. From that lawsuit, FCA was forced to recount and re-report its previous sales reports.  The Security and Exchange Commission continued its investigation and Bigland cooperated. 
      Bigland's position is that the sales reporting methods existed well before he assumed his roles, and he did nothing to change the reporting process already in place.  Bigland claims that the SEC tried to settle with some admission of wrong-doing by the company and Bigland. Bigland declined to admit wrong doing and later sent a letter detailing the sales reporting practices to the SEC.
      Bigland sold his shares in the company in 2018 and he claims that FCA is withholding bonuses to pay for SEC fines if and when they come. 
      For FCA's part they say via Detroit News:
      We'll have more information as it comes out. 
    • By dfelt
      The Trump Administration and the EPA officials have scrapped all further talks with California and canceled the $929 million in federal funds for a California high-speed rail project.
      California's Governor has responded that this is in response to California leading a 16 state coalition challenge to President Trump's national emergency to take funds from the defense department and apply it to building a wall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.
      California has already filed suit to block the Trump administration proposal to roll back federal fuel economy targets for 2022-2025.
      CARB Chair Mary Nichols is on record that they are willing to work with the auto industry in giving more flexibility to comply with the greenhouse gas limits. This came as the White house administration instructed the EPA to break off talks before Christmas and have not responded to any suggested areas of compromise by California and the 19 states they are representing nor the auto industry suggestions for compromise.
      While FCA declined to comment, GM and the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers did not respond to a request for comment. Ford has stated they are very disappointed in the failure of continued talks. Joe Hinrichs, Ford's president of global operations said in a statement: "The auto industry needs regulatory certainty, not protracted litigation."
      The auto industry is on record as opposing freezing the emissions / fuel efficiency standards to 2020 levels but also want relief from the roughly 5 percent annual carbon reduction targets for all vehicle classes fuel efficiency.
    • By dfelt
      The Trump Administration and the EPA officials have scrapped all further talks with California and canceled the $929 million in federal funds for a California high-speed rail project.
      California's Governor has responded that this is in response to California leading a 16 state coalition challenge to President Trump's national emergency to take funds from the defense department and apply it to building a wall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean.
      California has already filed suit to block the Trump administration proposal to roll back federal fuel economy targets for 2022-2025.
      CARB Chair Mary Nichols is on record that they are willing to work with the auto industry in giving more flexibility to comply with the greenhouse gas limits. This came as the White house administration instructed the EPA to break off talks before Christmas and have not responded to any suggested areas of compromise by California and the 19 states they are representing nor the auto industry suggestions for compromise.
      While FCA declined to comment, GM and the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers did not respond to a request for comment. Ford has stated they are very disappointed in the failure of continued talks. Joe Hinrichs, Ford's president of global operations said in a statement: "The auto industry needs regulatory certainty, not protracted litigation."
      The auto industry is on record as opposing freezing the emissions / fuel efficiency standards to 2020 levels but also want relief from the roughly 5 percent annual carbon reduction targets for all vehicle classes fuel efficiency.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford is launching an investigation into its own emissions and fuel economy certification process according to a statement released by the company.  The issue was brought to light back in September when a number of employees reported concerns through Ford's internal Speak Up channel.
      The concern surrounds Road Load, a vehicle-specific resistance level used in dynamometer testing. Too much or too little resistance will alter the results of the emissions and fuel economy. Road load is determined through engineering estimates that are then validated on the track.  Ford is evaluating changes to the road load determination process.
      The company is quick to point out that none of the potential concerns involve the use of defeat devices and that no determination has been made on the need to restate Ford's fuel economy or emissions labels. 
      Ford has hired an outside firm to conduct an investigation into Ford's current processes and has shared their findings with both the EPA and CARB.
      The first vehicle to be re-evaluated is the 2019 Ford Ranger with others to follow.
  • Posts

  • Social Stream

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...