California’s ability to set its own, stricter environmental and emissions standards — the basis for the state’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule and possibly the Advanced Clean Fleets rule — was upheld Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The case, Ohio v. EPA, had a host of plaintiffs, including 16 states other than Ohio and a group of oil-focused trade groups such as the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers and the National Association of Convenience Stores.
Friend-of-the-court briefs from the trucking industry included filings from the Independent Owner-Operator Drivers Association and the Western States Trucking Association (WSTA). The 17 states that were plaintiffs in the case are dominated by Republicans.
Clean Cars rule at the center of legal action
At issue is a waiver granted in California to implement the Advanced Clean Cars rule. The request was first submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency in 2005, and Tuesday’s court ruling revisits repeated waiver denials followed by approvals, depending on which party was in the White House. The ping pong ball finally landed on the resignation of the Biden administration. which led to the filing of the lawsuit in 2022.
The suing states “argue that by granting the waiver only to California, the EPA violated a constitutional requirement that the federal government treat states equally with respect to their sovereignty,” the court wrote, summarizing the basic argument.
But “fuel whistleblowers,” as the court referred to the trade groups, do not have the right to “raise their legal claim.” And states do not have the right to raise a “preemption claim,” the court said, noting that although both groups of plaintiffs sought to limit or limit California’s granting of waivers so that it could impose stricter environmental regulations than those mandated by the federal government. they came to it from different arguments.
The court ruled that the states had standing to file a constitutional challenge to the EPA waiver, but rejected their argument that the Constitution would not allow a waiver to be granted to a single state.
“Federal regulations continue to serve as the basis for emissions regulations, but California may seek to establish its own more stringent regulatory program on top of these federal requirements,” the court said. He noted that there are limitations on what the state can do, but said they were not exceeded by California’s advanced clean car rule.
For their part, the trade groups argued that the waiver hurts them financially because of the zero-emissions and low-emissions mandates in the state’s Clean Car Act. But the court said the fuel applicants and the states have not shown how an appeals court ruling blocking the waiver would “redress” the harm they say will result from California’s law.
In a statement issued after the decision was released, the Environmental Defense Fund said California has received more than 75 waivers from the EPA over 57 years.
Impact on the Clean Trucks and Clean Fleets rules
The decision could affect the trucking industry in the state through any potential impact on California’s two key regulations in the sector.
California’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule, which targets companies that build and sell trucks in California, has been granted a waiver by the EPA. His WSTA challenge was put on hold until late 2023 by the same court that ruled Ohio v. EPA while the outcome of the current case makes its way through the courts. The court also said late last year, putting the WSTA case on hold, that it was waiting to resolve a similar case, Texas vs. EPA, which was heard before a different panel of the same court and is still awaiting decision.
The state approved the Advanced Clean Fleets rule — which targets fleet truck purchases to supplement mandates for OEMs in the Clean Trucks rule — without an EPA waiver, arguing it wasn’t needed. But after the California Trucking Association filed suit against the Clean Fleets rule, the state asked the EPA for a waiver that has so far not been granted.
The California Air Resources Board also put on hold several provisions of the law that were set to take effect Jan. 1, including a ban on listing any internal combustion engine drain trucks on the state’s drain registry. Despite this, there has been a modest increase in zero-emission vehicles serving the Port of Long Beach.
More articles by John Kingston
Rerouting trucks and ships away from Baltimore: What early data shows
Teamsters, Anheuser Busch sign new 5-year contract
First for Werner: Small group of workers vote for unionization