The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of American Trucking Associations vs. Browner. The case examines the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulation-setting process for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). By next summer, the Supreme Court is expected to judge whether the EPA overstepped its constitutional boundaries while setting new standards for soot and smog in 1997. The court is also set to decide whether the EPA must weigh in costs to industry - and not just people's health - when setting NAAQS.
A new report issued by the George C. Marshall Institute claims that the Clinton administration has used flawed computer models to assess the impacts of global warming. The report, titled Climate Models and the National Assessment, makes a reference to the administration's draft national assessment of the domestic impact of global climate change. The White House released the controversial draft National Assessment Synthesis Team (NAST) report for public comment earlier this year. The NAST report concludes that climate change could have drastic impacts on agriculture and human health in certain areas of the United States. In criticizing the NAST report, the Marshall Institute report claims the NAST document “will not be able to provide policymakers and the public with useful information on climate change because of its reliance on flawed computer models.”
The EPA has filed a motion with a federal court signaling an apparent breakdown in talks between the EPA and diesel engine makers over possible modifications to a landmark 1998 Clean Air Act settlement signed by the agency and the industry. In motions filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the EPA requested a “status conference” with the court to discuss what issues may result in further litigation over the landmark 1998 settlement. The agency hopes to finalize the rule soon.
The White House succeeded in holding off an effort by House Republicans to expand restrictions on the Clinton administration for developing policies to combat global warming. Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich., was able to continue to include the same language from previous years in the 2001 spending bills. The language bars the EPA and other agencies from spending funds to develop “rules, policies or decrees” to implement the global warming treaty prior to Senate ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. During the 2001 budgeting process, House Republicans attempted to broaden the prohibition to also cover non- regulatory actions such as programs or initiatives.
The American Lung Association (ALA), along with about 20 other environmental and public interest groups, sent a letter to the EPA claiming that automobile manufacturers and dealers should not be allowed to inspect a car's on-board diagnostic (OBD) system — as allowed for in the agency's latest proposal to integrate OBD checks into existing automobile inspection and maintenance programs. OBD is a computerized system first required to be in all automobile fleets for model year 1996 and newer vehicles. The system will alert the driver if there are such problems as emissions failures with the owner's vehicle. The driver will be alerted by an illuminated MIL light on the dashboard. Under the current EPA proposal, owners could take their cars to automobile manufacturers or to affiliated dealers to pinpoint the exact cause of a possible OBD alarm. In the letter, ALA stated that manufacturers and dealers “may have an incentive to cheat” if they are allowed to inspect OBDs because the data from such inspections could force “potentially costly (and embarrassing) recalls.” This would be a “classic example of the fox guarding the hen house,” where automobile dealers and manufacturers would enjoy an “unprecedented level of self-policing,” the letter said. “ASA supports allowing owners to have their vehicle's OBD system checked anywhere, especially in the aftermarket,” said Bob Redding, ASA's Washington, D.C., representative. “Unfortunately, the aftermarket cannot repair a vehicle without the proper information. Currently, some of that information is either unavailable or inaccessible to the aftermarket from the manufacturers.”
|
Rate This Article:
|
AutoInc. Magazine ® Vol. XLIX, January 2001
E-mail: asainfo@asashop.org, Web Site: http://www.asashop.org
Copyright © 2001 Automotive Service Association (ASA). All rights reserved.