[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 3, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14680-14682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-8156]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
49 CFR Part 533
[Docket No. 94-20; Notice 4]
RIN 2127-AF16
Light Truck Average Fuel Economy Standard, Model Year 1998
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the average fuel economy standard
for light trucks manufactured in model year (MY) 1998. The issuance of
the standard is required by statute. Pursuant to section 330 of the
fiscal year (FY) 1996 DOT Appropriations Act, the light truck standard
for MY 1998 is 20.7 mpg.
DATES: The amendment is effective May 3, 1996. The standard applies to
the 1998 model year. Petitions for reconsideration must be submitted
within 45 days of publication.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should be submitted to:
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Otto G. Matheke, III, Office of
Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202-366-5263).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In December 1975, during the aftermath of the energy crisis created
by the oil embargo of 1973-74, Congress enacted the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act. Congress included a provision in that Act
establishing an automotive fuel economy regulatory program. That
provision added Title V, ``Improving Automotive Efficiency,'' to the
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act. Title V has been amended
and recodified without substantive change as Chapter 329 of Title 49 of
the United States Code. Chapter 329 provides for the issuance of
average fuel economy standards for passenger automobiles and
automobiles that are not passenger automobiles (light trucks).
Section 32902(a) of Chapter 329 states that the Secretary of
Transportation shall prescribe by regulation corporate average fuel
economy (CAFE) standards for light trucks for each model year. That
section also states that ``[e]ach standard shall be the maximum
feasible average fuel economy level that the Secretary decides the
manufacturers can achieve in that model year.'' (The Secretary has
delegated the authority to implement the automotive fuel economy
program to the Administrator of NHTSA. 49 CFR 1.50(f).) Section
32902(f) provides that in determining the maximum feasible average fuel
economy level, NHTSA shall consider four criteria: technological
feasibility, economic practicability, the effect of other motor vehicle
standards of the Government on fuel economy, and the need of the United
States to conserve energy. Pursuant to this authority, the agency has
set light truck CAFE standards through MY 1997. See 49 CFR 533.5(a).
The standard for MY 1997 is 20.7 mpg. 59 FR 16312 (April 6, 1994).
NHTSA began the process of establishing light truck CAFE standards
for model years after MY 1997 by publishing an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register. 59 FR 16324 (April
6, 1994). The ANPRM outlined the agency's intention to set standards
for some or all of model years 1998 to 2006.
Subsequent to reviewing the comments submitted in response to the
ANPRM, the agency decided to defer rulemaking for MY's 1999-2006. NHTSA
thereafter issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) limited to MY
1998, which proposed to set the light truck CAFE standard for that year
at 20.7 mpg. 61 FR 145 (January 3, 1996). On November 15, 1995, the
Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act
for Fiscal Year 1996 was enacted. Pub. L. 104-50. Section 330 of that
Act provides:
None of the funds in this Act shall be available to prepare,
propose, or promulgate any regulations * * * prescribing corporate
average fuel economy standards for automobiles * * * in any model
year that differs from standards promulgated for such automobiles
prior to enactment of this section.
Because light truck CAFE standards must be set no later than
eighteen months before the beginning of the model year in question, the
deadline for NHTSA to set the MY 1998 standard is approximately April
1, 1996. However, the agency cannot promulgate such a standard without
the expenditure of funds, and it may not spend any funds in violation
of the terms of section 330 of the FY 1996 Appropriations Act.
Therefore, to ascertain the limits of its authority to promulgate CAFE
standards during FY 1996, NHTSA must interpret the phrase ``differs
from standards promulgated for such automobiles prior to enactment of
this section.''
In the agency's view, the most compelling meaning of the phrase is
to preclude the expenditure of funds to adopt a CAFE standard for any
model year at any level other than the level of the CAFE standards
previously established for MY 1997; i.e., 20.7 mpg for light trucks and
27.5 mpg for passenger cars.
The agency examined the legislative history of section 330 to seek
additional insight into Congressional intent. Section 330 was reported
out of the House Committee on Appropriations in its enacted form as
part of H.R. 2002. The original Committee print of the House Report to
accompany H.R. 2002 stated, at page 112, that the section precluded
NHTSA from prescribing CAFE standards that ``differ from those
previously enacted:''
The Committee has adopted a general provision (Sec. 330) that
prohibits NHTSA or the Department from prescribing corporate average
fuel economy standards for automobiles that differ from those
previously enacted.
This language was modified somewhat in the final version of the
House report to accompany H.R. 2002, but repeated the command that CAFE
standards promulgated in FY 1996 should not ``differ from those
previously enacted.'' The report stated:
The Committee has adopted a general provision (Sec. 330) that
prohibits funds to be used to prepare, prescribe or promulgate
corporate average fuel economy standards for automobiles that differ
from those previously enacted. The limitation does not preclude the
Secretary of Transportation, in order to meet
[[Page 14681]]
lead time requirements of the law, from preparing, proposing and
issuing a CAFE standard for model year 1998 automobiles that is
identical to the CAFE standard for such automobiles for model year
1997.
H.R. Rep. 104-177, at 113.
The addition of the second sentence to this report language
suggests that the Committee wanted to clarify that, regardless of what
the maximum feasible average fuel economy level might be for MY 1998
light trucks, NHTSA was not precluded from setting the CAFE standard
for such automobiles at a level ``identical'' to the MY 1997 level of
20.7 mpg. There is no indication that the Committee intended to
authorize the MY 1998 light truck standard to be set at any other
level.
The next relevant item of legislative history is the remarks during
the House floor debate on H.R. 2002 by Congressman DeLay, who
originally offered this provision during consideration of the bill by
the Transportation Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.
Congressman DeLay began by describing the section as imposing ``a 1-
year freeze on the ability of NHTSA to increase the CAFE standards for
passenger cars and light trucks and vans.'' He added:
[I]t was my intent that NHTSA would withhold any further action
directed toward increasing CAFE standards, and that the CAFE
standards for light trucks and vans for the 1998 model year, which
must be issued during fiscal 1996 to meet industry's lead time
requirements, should be identical to the standard that is currently
in effect for those vehicles for the 1997 model year. This intent is
clearly stated in the committee report which accompanies the
legislation.
141 Cong. Rec. H7605 (daily ed. July 25, 1995) (emphasis supplied).
These comments, offered by the sponsor of the provision in
question, clearly reflect Congressman DeLay's intent that NHTSA should
set the MY 1998 light truck standard ``identical to'' the 20.7 mpg
level in effect for MY 1997, without regard to any determination the
agency might otherwise have reached with respect to the maximum
feasible average fuel economy level for MY 1998. His remarks also
characterize the Committee report as reflecting the same intent.
In its original consideration of H.R. 2002, the Senate deleted
section 330. See S. Rep. No. 104-126, at 145. However, the provision
was restored by the Conference Committee, which described its action as
follows:
Amendment No. 155: Restores House language deleted by the Senate
that prohibits the use of funds to prepare, propose or promulgate
any regulations that prescribe changes in the corporate average fuel
economy standards for automobiles.
H.R. Rep. 104-286, at 73.
Numerous courts have held that, compared to other items of
legislative history, the Conference Report is generally the most
authoritative source of Congressional intent. In this case, that report
unambiguously describes section 330 as prohibiting the use of FY 1996
funds to promulgate ``any regulations that prescribe changes'' in CAFE
standards.
As described above, each of the relevant items of legislative
history supports the agency's view that section 330 precludes NHTSA
from preparing, proposing, or issuing any CAFE standard that is not
identical to those previously established for MY 1997. Accordingly,
NHTSA is setting the MY 1998 light truck CAFE standard at the MY 1997
level of 20.7 mpg.
NHTSA recognizes that setting the MY 1998 standard at 20.7 mpg
without making a determination as to the maximum feasible average fuel
economy level for that model year could be inconsistent with the second
sentence of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 32902(a), which states that ``[e]ach [light
truck] standard shall be the maximum feasible average fuel economy
level that the Secretary decides the manufacturers can achieve in that
model year.''
However, the only other possible interpretation of the language
``differs from standards promulgated for such automobiles prior to
enactment of this section'' in section 330 is that NHTSA may issue CAFE
standards at a level equal to that of any previously promulgated
standard. Under this interpretation, during FY 1996 NHTSA would be able
to set the ``combined'' (i.e., two-wheel drive and four-wheel drive)
light truck CAFE standard for MY 1998 (and for future model years) at
one of 10 specific levels as follows (see 49 CFR 533.5(a)):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combined Standard (MPG) Model Years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.5.................................................... 1982
19.0.................................................... 1983
19.5.................................................... 1985
20.0.................................................... 1984, 1986,
1990
20.2.................................................... 1991, 1992
20.4.................................................... 1993
20.5.................................................... 1987, 1988,
1989, 1994
20.6.................................................... 1995
20.7.................................................... 1996, 1997
21.0.................................................... *1985
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*In model year 1985, the combined standard was originally promulgated as
21.0 mpg before it was amended to 19.5 mpg.
Similarly, under this interpretation, the agency would be
authorized to amend the passenger car CAFE standard to one of seven
specific levels, ranging from 18.0 mpg to 27.0 mpg, but to no points in
between. See 49 CFR 531.5(a).
Such an interpretation, however, could also conflict with the
``maximum feasible'' provision of 49 U.S.C. Sec. 32902(a) because the
maximum feasible level calculated by NHTSA under the criteria it has
traditionally applied might not be identical to one of the previously
promulgated standards. Moreover, those previously promulgated standards
include 21.0 mpg, a level in excess of the MY 1997 standard, which
would clearly contravene the intent, expressed in every item of
relevant legislative history, to ``freeze'' NHTSA's ability to increase
the CAFE standards above the MY 1997 level of 20.7 mpg.
Finally, it is inherently illogical to assume that Congress
intended to limit so arbitrarily the possible levels at which NHTSA can
set future CAFE standards; i.e., that previously promulgated standards
of 20.0 mpg, 20.2 mpg, or 20.4 mpg are permissible, but 20.1 mpg and
20.3 mpg are not permissible, even if one of them were determined to be
the maximum feasible level. In contrast, the interpretation adopted by
the agency in this notice is logical in the context of the
Appropriations Act restrictions. ``Freezing'' the MY 1998 standard at
20.7 mpg comports with Congressman DeLay's declaration that ``[t]he
purpose of Section 330 is to establish a pause in this rulemaking
process, to give the Congress an opportunity to review the CAFE
program,'' 141 Cong. Rec. H7605 (daily ed. July 25, 1995), and the
expectation that the established standard for MY 1997 of 20.7 mpg would
not be an unreasonable level for the industry to achieve in MY 1998.
The agency is of course aware that repeals by implication of
substantive statutory provisions are generally disfavored, particularly
where the claimed repeal rests upon language in an appropriations act.
However, as demonstrated above, both of the theoretically plausible
textual readings of the 1996 DOT Appropriations Act language could
conflict with the ``maximum feasible'' requirement, so the agency must
choose the one which is most consistent with the legislative intent
expressed in the legislative history.
Further, under the present circumstances, where issuance of a light
truck standard at a level other than 20.7 mpg is prohibited by a recent
Act of Congress, the only other alternative would be to decline to
issue any light truck standard at all for MY 1998. That course of
action would also constitute a ``repeal'' of the statutory duty set
forth in the first sentence of section 32902(a)
[[Page 14682]]
to issue annual light truck CAFE standards. It would also do more
violence to the statutory scheme of Chapter 329 than the establishment
of a 20.7 mpg standard for MY 1998. Finally, failure to set any
standard would conflict with Congress's express direction in the House
Committee report that NHTSA not be precluded ``from preparing,
proposing and issuing a CAFE standard for model year 1998 automobiles
that is identical to the CAFE standard for such automobiles for model
year 1997.''
II. Impact Analyses
A. Economic Impacts
The agency has not prepared a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis
because of the restrictions imposed by Section 330 of the FY 1996 DOT
Appropriations Act. The rule was reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget under Executive Order 12866 and is considered significant
under the Department's regulatory procedures.
B. Environmental Impacts
NHTSA has not conducted an evaluation of the impacts of this action
under the National Environmental Policy Act. There is no requirement
for such an evaluation where Congress has eliminated the agency's
discretion by precluding any action other than the one announced in
this notice.
C. Impacts on Small Entities
NHTSA has not conducted an evaluation of this action pursuant to
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As Congress has eliminated the agency's
discretion by precluding any action other than the one taken in this
notice, such an evaluation is unnecessary. Past evaluations indicate,
however, that few, if any, light truck manufacturers would have been
classified as a ``small business'' under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.
D. Impact of Federalism
This action has been not been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. The
preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not required where Congress
has precluded any action other than the one published in this notice.
As a historical matter, prior light truck standards have not had
sufficient Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
E. Department of Energy Review
In accordance with section 49 U.S.C. Sec. 32902(j), NHTSA submitted
this final rule to the Department of Energy for review. That Department
made no unaccommodated comments.
III. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the agency is establishing a combined
average fuel economy standard for non-passenger automobiles (light
trucks) for MY 1998 at 20.7 mpg.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 533
49 CFR Part 533
Energy conservation, Motor vehicles.
PART 533--[AMENDED]
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Part 533 is amended as
follows:
1. The authority citation for part 533 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32902; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.
2. Section 533.5(a) is amended by revising Table IV to read as
follows:
Sec. 533.5 Requirements.
* * * * *
Table IV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model year Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996......................................................... 20.7
1997......................................................... 20.7
1998......................................................... 20.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Issued On: March 29, 1996.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-8156 Filed 3-29-96; 3:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
