EPA and NHTSA defend including trailers in emissions/fuel standards
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is defending its decision to include trailers in the Clean Air Act’s emissions and fuel standards while the Truck Trailer Manufacturers Associations should be exempt because trailers are not vehicles.
On April 21, EPA and NHTSA filed counterarguments to the Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association’s appeal in a D.C. federal court. The association argues that trailers should be exempt from federal emissions and fuel standards established by the Clean Air Act because they are not technically vehicles that consume fuel and emit greenhouse gases.
Three main points are being argued: First, whether NHTSA was authorized to include trailers in fuel standards. Second, whether the EPA was authorized to include trailers in emissions standards. Lastly, whether both standards are void if just one agency is found to lack authorization to include trailers.
Are trailers considered vehicles under NHTSA fuel standards?
The association is arguing that NHTSA’s fuel efficiency standards exempt trailers since it applies to “vehicles” in the regulation. Since trailers do not consume fuel, the association argues, they cannot be included.
NHTSA acknowledges that the statute does not explicitly mention trailers. The Clean Air Act did authorize NHTSA to create fuel efficiency improvement program for commercial medium- and heavy-duty on-highway vehicles. Since the statute was ambiguous in its definition of “vehicle,” NHTSA claims it has the authority to define the word within the meaning of the statute. The agency referred to the Oxford English Dictionary.
“A ‘vehicle’ is a ‘conveyance, a form of transport,’ in particular, ‘a means of conveyance or transport on land, having wheels, runners or the like,” NHTSA stated in its reply. “That term reasonably can be read to encompass a broad variety of vehicle subtypes, including trailers, which are rated to carry loads within the weight rating specified by the statute’s definition of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, and are designed primarily for commercial, on-highway hauling of property.”
Furthermore, previous regulations included trailers when defining a vehicle. For example, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act directs the Secretary of Transportation to publicize safety standards for “motor vehicles,” which the act defines as any “vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways.”
Regarding fuel consumption, NHTSA states a trailer’s diesel consumption is within its role as a tractor-trailer as a whole.
“Although only the tractor portion of this articulated vehicle itself consumes fuel, it cannot ‘fulfill the function of the vehicle’ on its own, because it cannot haul cargo unless a trailer is attached,” NHTSA states. “Substantial evidence supports the conclusion that the design and performance of these attached trailers have a significant effect on fuel consumption of tractor-trailers.”
If Congress meant to exclude trailers, NHTSA argues, it would have chosen appropriate language. One provision directs NHTSA to regulate passenger automobiles and non-passenger automobiles. “Automobiles” are specifically defined as a subtype of vehicle “that is propelled by fuel, or by alternative fuel, manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways and rated at less than 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.” However, Congress used the broader term “vehicle,” which does not include the additional fuel-based limitation in the definition of “automobile.”
Are tractor-trailers considered vehicles under EPA greenhouse gas emissions standards?
The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association turns around and makes the same argument on the EPA side of the regulations. The act directs EPA to establish emission standards for new “motor vehicles” to be met by manufacturers.
In its interpretation, the EPA determined that a tractor-trailers are motor vehicles because the combination is both “self-propelled” and “designed for transporting persons or property on a street or highway,” as defined by Congress.
“If the driver of a tractor-trailer turns on the ignition and hits the accelerator, the entire vehicle propels down the highway, its 18 or so wheels spinning in unison and its cargo transported,” the EPA states in its reply.
In its own rulemaking comments, the association acknowledges as much:
“The trailer is not a motor vehicle under (Clean Air Act) statute until it is connected … At connection, the combination could then be said to meet the definition for ‘new motor vehicle.’”
“The association focuses its argument on the fact that a trailer—before connection to a tractor—is not yet part of a ‘self-propelled’ motor vehicle,” the EPA argues. “But that distinction does not prove the association’s argument.”
Assuming that a trailer is one half of a complete vehicle, the trailer portion can reduce the complete vehicles emissions.
Even if the tractor half generates exhaust emissions, the trailer design significantly impacts the volume of those emissions.
Lastly, the association points out that a “motor vehicle” is an “automobile, automobile truck, automobile wagon, motorcycle, or any other self-propelled vehicle designed for running on land but not on rails,” as defined by federal criminal code. However, the EPA claims the criminal code serves a completely different purpose. Therefore, its definition is irrelevant to the purpose of the Clean Air Act.
“Trailers are not some relatively minor component installed onto a tractor-trailer, such as a wheel or headlight,” the EPA argues. “Trailers are instead an entire, complete section of a tractor-trailer—one-half of the vehicle. Greenhouse-gas emissions attributable to additional drag from hauling the trailer constitute approximately one third of the tractor-trailer’s total emissions, and there are feasible technologies available to reduce these emissions.”
What if just one agency overstepped its authority?
The Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association is arguing both agencies are wrong about their respective definition of a vehicle. However, it also claims only one needs to be wrong to throw out the whole regulation. That is because the fuel efficiency standards and emissions standards are dependent on each other.
Essentially, the EPA and NHTSA claim they can have it both ways.
EPA’s emissions standards intersect with NHTSA’s fuel efficiency standards. Both claim that “any rule that limits tailpipe (greenhouse gas) emissions is effectively identical to a rule that limits fuel consumption,” and vice versa. So if one agency is within its right to include trailers, logically, the same would be true for the other.
On the other hand, the agencies also claim independence in their regulations. Therefore, if the court rules that one agency cannot include trailers, it does not necessarily invalidate the other agency’s regulation.
EPA requires flatbeds to use both rolling resistance tires and automatic tire inflation systems or have a pressure monitoring system. NHTSA has an identical requirement. However, the agencies claim this does not prove dependency.
“In the absence of EPA’s emissions standards, manufacturers of flatbed trailers can adopt automatic tire inflation systems or tire pressure monitoring systems in order to comply with NHTSA’s fuel efficiency standards,” the agencies explain. “And likewise, in the absence of NHTSA’s fuel efficiency standards, manufacturers could comply with EPA’s emissions standards in the exact same manner.”
Responding to all claims of identical standards, both agencies argue that a joint regulation is “part of their longstanding effort to ensure that manufacturers could ‘avoid unnecessarily duplicative testing and compliance burdens.’”
Related stories:
Related News
