Description: Challenge to EPA "no action assurance" memorandum that provided assurance that EPA would not enforce greenhouse gas emission and fuel efficiency standards against small manufacturers of glider kits and vehicles.
-
Environmental Defense Fund v. EPA
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 08/22/2018 Order Download Motion to dismiss granted. D.C. Circuit Dismissed “Moot” Challenges to EPA’s Withdrawn “No Action Assurance” for Small Manufacturers of Glider Vehicles. The D.C. Circuit dismissed proceedings challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) now-withdrawn “No Action Assurance” memorandum in which EPA provided assurance that it would not enforce its greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for trucks against small manufacturers of “glider” vehicles and kits. The D.C. Circuit said the challenges were moot. The D.C. Circuit said that although “voluntary cessation of challenged activity does not moot a case,” EPA’s voluntary conduct mooted the case both because EPA said it would not provide any other no action assurance and also because the D.C. Circuit would not be able to provide any meaningful relief concerning penalties that could be imposed in potential enforcement proceedings concerning glider vehicle production while the No Action Assurance memorandum was in effect. The states and environmental groups challenging the memorandum had urged the D.C. Circuit not to dismiss on mootness grounds. The environmental groups characterized the memorandum’s withdrawal as “a shortcut by which EPA has tried to avoid judicial scrutiny of a fatally flawed agency action.” They argued that EPA had not acknowledged the illegality of the memorandum or committed to enforcing the current standards. The state petitioners argued that the challenges would not be moot at least until the 60-day period for challenging the withdrawal had passed. 08/09/2018 Reply Download Reply filed in support of respondents' motion to dismiss. 08/03/2018 Reply Download Organizational petitioners filed reply in support of motion for summary disposition and response in opposition to motion to dismiss. 08/03/2018 Reply Download State petitioners filed opposition to motion to dismiss and reply in support of summary disposition. 07/30/2018 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss and opposition to petitioners motion for stay or summary disposition filed by defendants. 07/26/2018 Memorandum Download Memorandum sent by EPA Administrator to Assistant Administrator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation. EPA Withdrew “No Action Assurance” for Small Manufacturers of Glider Vehicles and Kits After Environmental Groups and States Filed Lawsuits. On July 18, 2018, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals granted environmental groups’ request for an administrative stay of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) “no action assurance” memorandum that provided assurance that EPA would not seek to enforce its greenhouse gas emissions and fuel efficiency standards for trucks against small manufacturers of “glider” vehicles and kits. Eight days later and after a coalition of states filed an emergency motion for summary vacatur or a stay pending judicial review, EPA withdrew the no action assurance. A glider is a “truck that utilizes a previously owned powertrain (including the engine, the transmission, and usually the rear axle) but which has new body parts.” Emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles published in October 2016 apply to such vehicles. In November 2017, EPA proposed to repeal the emission requirements for glider vehicles, engines, and kits. On July 6, 2018, EPA issued the no action memorandum, stating that EPA intended to exercise its enforcement discretion through July 6, 2019 or the effective date of a final rule extending the compliance date applicable to small manufacturers. In the EPA administrator’s letter withdrawing the no action memorandum, he said he had concluded that application of the current standards to the glider industry “does not represent the kind of extremely unusual circumstances that support the EPA’s exercise of enforcement discretion.” 07/18/2018 Order Download Request for administrative stay granted. 07/17/2018 Motion Download Emergency motion for stay or summary disposition and request for administrative stay filed by petitioners. 07/17/2018 Petition for Review Download Petition for review filed. -
California v. EPA
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 07/24/2018 Petition for Review Download Amended petition for review filed. 07/19/2018 Motion Download Emergency motion for summary vacatur, or in the alternative, for stay pending judicial review filed by petitioners. 07/19/2018 Petition for Review Download Petition for review filed.