Alfa’s first SUV: the Stelvio
BMW Group to introduce Mobileye REM in new models starting in 2018; crowdsourced data for autonomous driving

Auto Alliance urges EPA to withdraw premature Final Determination on light-duty GHG regulations, resume Midterm Evaluation process with NHTSA

The Auto Alliance has sent a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt requesting that the US Environmental Protection Agency withdraw the Final Determination on the Appropriateness of the Model Year 2022-2025 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards under the Midterm Evaluation which EPA announced on 13 January 2017. (Earlier post.)

It its letter, the Alliance argues that by rushing to issue the Final Determination (which maintains the current GHG standards as defined through 2025) in January 2017, EPA abrogated its commitment to a robust Midterm Evaluation of the standards in coordination with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is conducting its own midterm review of the fuel economy standards through 2025. Furthermore, the Alliance argues, EPA never published the final rules in the Federal Register. The Alliance is not arguing for a rollback of standards; instead, it is arguing for a resumption of the original Midterm Evaluation timetable (to which NHTSA appears to be adhering), that would result in findings by April 2018.

This request by the Alliance echoes a similar, earlier request by Global Automakers, the trade association representing the US divisions of 12 international automakers (Aston Martin, Ferrari, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia, Maserati, McLaren, Nissan, Subaru, Suzuki and Toyota). (Earlier post.)

The Auto Alliance represents 77% of all car and light truck sales in the United States, including the BMW Group, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Company, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen Group of America and Volvo Car USA.

Background. In 2009, EPA issued an Endangerment Finding that vehicle greenhouse gas emissions contribute to climate change, and thus threaten public health and welfare. In 2012, EPA and NHTSA set joint greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards over a decade in advance for MY 2022-2025.

This was notable for several reasons, one being the new standards on greenhouse gas emissions, the other being that no agency had yet set emission standards so far into the future.

Because of the obvious uncertainties this entailed, EPA and NHTSA agreed to a Midterm Evaluation that would review the standards by April 2018. The agencies at the time said that the review would be collaborative, and developed in tandem. Both indicated that they would note complete a proposed rulemaking until mid-2017 at the earliest.

According to the Alliance, which supported the rulemaking with the proviso of the Midterm Evaluation, the auto industry commissioned a number of studies assessing the MY 2022-205 standards and the EPA processes that it intended to add to the administrative record as part of the collaborative Midterm Evaluation process this year.

However, in November 2016, EPA issued a proposed determination maintaining the current standards without modification. EPA issued the determination without coordination with NHTSA. Thence, EPA issued the Final Determination 14 days after the comment period (which was only 24 days and spanning the holiday period) closed.

The Final Determination is the product of egregious procedural and substantive defects and EPA should withdraw it. In EPA’s rush to promulgate the Final Determination before the new administration took office, EPA bypassed required procedures, failing for instance to provide an adequate period for meaningful notice and comment.

The Final Determination asserts that there was no need for more time because the Proposed Determination did not include much new material. But that contention is belied by EPA’s acknowledgement that the Proposed Determination adjusted a number of EPA assumptions in response to commenters who pointed out errors at earlier stages. The industry also had an unacceptably short period to try to ascertain why EPA rejected so many of its objections. These procedural defects are significant irrespective of whether the Final Determination constitutes rulemaking or adjudication.

EPA’s unilateral annoncement of its Final Determination also constitutes a failure to harmonize its greenhouse gas emissions standards with NHTSA’s fuel-economy standards, contrary to the letter and intent of EPA’s own regulations. NHTSA has not yet reached a determination on its fuel economy standards and continues its Midterm Evaluation activities.

EPA’s failure to act in coordination with NHTSA also casts serious doubt on the legitimacy of EPA’s data and conclusions, given the substantial discrepancies between EPA’s and NHTSA’s analysis of the technologies and the costs associated with the MY 2022-2025 standards.

…The Alliance is not asking EPA to make a different Final Determination at this time. All we are asking is that EPA withdraw the Final Determination and resume the Midterm Evaluation, in conjunction with NHTSA, consistent with the timetable embodied in EPA’s own regulations.

—Alliance letter to Administrator Pruitt


Account Deleted

The intentions of the old auto industry are quite clear. They want to make more money selling cheaper more polluting cars and they will knowingly kill more people doing so. Their talk about sustainability is just talk or fake marketing to make people feel better while they keep pursuing a whole different agenda.

The facts are that Toyota made less than 1000 zero pollution FCV vehicles in 2016. VW made less than 17,000 BEVs, Ford and GM each made less than 15,000 BEVs and Chrysler made less than 10,000 BEVs. For comparison Tesla made 75,000 BEVs. The Nissan/Renault alliance made nearly 100,000 BEVs.

I have lots of praise for the Trump administration in other regards but his pick of a known more-pollution-lobbyist to head the EPA that is supposed to protect the society from the most perverse desires of businesses with no moral sense is a catastrophe for the USA and the American people. They will pay the price with sharp increases in premature death and diseases caused by more pollution from coming generations of gassers and diesels cars.

We need companies like Tesla more than ever to save this planet from self-destruction.


This looks like a political move by the EPA. Why did they react and position final regulation by going it alone with premature action and not maintain the current agreement/process? Answer: because they didn't care of the quality of regulation and knew full well the regs would probably be withdrawn, thus give political ammo to political agencies. To much of dishonest strategy is going on within our taxpayer paid institutions.

Brent Jatko

@Trees: My guess is that Democrats were relying on Republicans to possess a trace of social conscience and not confirm committed EPA foe Scott Pruitt to head the EPA.

The move failed because Republicans have no such conscience.


In line with the rest of the American Last policies. China has more wind and solar, and will have many more, and better BEV's. Europe and Africa will have a higher percentage of renewable energy. Hopefully, this will allow Tesla to establish itself as a true competitor in the auto industry.


Don't support or buy. Shame on:

Aston Martin, Ferrari, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Kia, Maserati, McLaren, Nissan, Subaru, Suzuki and Toyota,including the BMW Group, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Company, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen Group of America and Volvo Car USA.

I guess that leaves Tesla and shank's pony on their own.

The comments to this entry are closed.