Automakers Didn't Even Waste a Full Business Day Asking New EPA Head for Relief

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s former attorney general, was sworn in to his new role as Environmental Protection Agency administrator late Friday following a 52-46 Senate vote earlier in the day.

While it isn’t known what Pruitt did over the weekend, it’s safe to say that members of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers spent at least part of that downtime drafting a letter, likely mirroring one they’ve already sent to President Donald Trump.

The group, representing 12 automakers that build 77 percent of the light-duty vehicles sold in the U.S., wants action on lowering the industry’s fuel economy and emissions targets. Urgent action, ideally. Now that there’s been a change at the top, the group feels that it might finally get its wish.

Officially, the alliance wants the EPA to reopen a midterm review of federal corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards — a process that was ended a year early when the EPA decided, with days remaining before Trump’s inauguration, to keep the Obama administration’s 2025 targets. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration hasn’t yet issued its recommendation.

According to Automotive News, the alliance waited out the weekend and President’s Day before delivering a letter to Pruitt yesterday.

In it, the group blasted the EPA’s past decision to end the review, calling it “the product of egregious procedural and substantive defects.” The decision was “riddled with indefensible assumptions, inadequate analysis and a failure to engage with contrary evidence,” the alliance added.

The EPA is reportedly reviewing the letter. While the agency expects to receive a number of executive orders from the president, there has been no word on what action, if any, could be taken to relax auto industry regulations. Pruitt told the Senate that he would review the Obama-era policies.

In recent months, the alliance, as well as the CEOs of various automakers, have expressed concern about how CAFE targets could impact their business and the cost of vehicles. The midterm review found that automakers had made decent headway towards the 2025 goal. Still, the alliance has stood firm, stating recently that 1 million jobs are threatened by the regulations.

After Pruitt’s confirmation as EPA head, the alliance issued a release stating:

The Administrator has a keen understanding of how compliance with the government fuel economy/greenhouse gas program depends on what consumers buy, not what automakers produce. That’s why standards must also reflect market realities.

We remain convinced the best way to advance our shared goals for the environment, safety, consumer affordability and manufacturing jobs is to reinstate the data-driven review — under the originally promised schedule.

[Image: General Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 50 comments
  • Ckb Ckb on Feb 22, 2017

    "1 million jobs are threatened" I can't imagine the shock of the AAM when after years of rigorous analysis, test cases, and market simulations the report spit out that exactly 1,000,000.00 jobs would be "threatened". They must have been really worried that people might think they just pulled a big scary number out of their ass. Anyway, kudos to the brave new administration's unlimited distribution of easy buttons. Its obvious 'merica can't do anything that sounds hard anymore.

    • Art Vandelay Art Vandelay on Feb 23, 2017

      Except the foreign makers are by in large on the same page. I think it needs to at least be reviewed given the politics behind how those standards were locked in while the moving truck was parked at the White House. And you talk about easy? Cars are the low hanging fruit with regard to curbing fossil fuel. You pass a law and it is someone else's problem to figure it out. If you are serious about curbing their use you have to look at things like power generation and air travel too. That first one in particular is challenging to the Government because municipal governments are tied up in power generation so it can't just be passed off to a private entity that is already in the governments pocket and their is very real job loss tied to moving away from fuels like coal with which the government will have to deal with.

  • Stingray65 Stingray65 on Feb 23, 2017

    Just as an example of what CAFE has done. Most recent BMWs have an electric water pump to take the mechanical pump load off the engine to tweak out a few extra tenths of an MPG in the CAFE tests. These pumps cost between $600 to $1000 installed and are not a DIY job, and it is common to need a replacement at about 60,000 miles. I remember changing the mechanical water pump on my BMW 2002 at about 100,000 miles, easy DIY job and the pump was less the $50. Without CAFE, BMW would never make such a change, because the gas savings from the electric pump will never be high enough to pay for the higher pump cost.

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
  • Buickman I like it!
  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
  • Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
Next