The Auto Channel
The Largest Independent Automotive Research Resource
The Largest Independent Automotive Research Resource
Official Website of the New Car Buyer

Engine Manufacturers Oppose California Arb Proposal

11 December 2000

Engine Manufacturers Oppose California Arb Proposal to Pull-Ahead 2007 Requirements for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines

    CHICAGO--Dec. 8, 2000--The Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) today announced its strong opposition to the California Air Resources Board's (ARB) proposal to apply not to exceed (NTE) and other supplemental emissions requirements and tests (SERTs) to heavy-duty on-highway vehicles. Testifying at the Board hearings in Sacremento, EMA counsel Lisa Stegink stated "This ARB proposal, which covers diesel engines manufactured for 2005 and beyond model years, constitutes a completely new set of emissions standards and not just the simple addition of testing procedures as the Board maintains."
    ARB has proposed to pull ahead its own version of supplemental emissions requirements and tests for the 2005 and beyond model year for on-highway heavy-duty diesel engines. The Board has characterized its proposal as simply "filling the emissions gap" created by the expiration of previously imposed consent decrees and the implementation of the EPA SERTs in 2007.
    "As a signatory to the 1995 Statement of Principles (SOP), and in order to comply with the federal Clean Air Act and California Law, the ARB must ensure that any standards adopted for on-highway, heavy-duty engines are technologically feasible, cost effective, and allow the industry sufficient lead-time and regulatory stability to comply, said Stegink. "This proposal fails to meet any of these requirements."
    The ARB plans to adopt the proposed amendments before the end of the year. The diesel engine manufacturers argue that this leaves inadequate time to fully analyze all the issues associated with the proposal. "Such a schedule fails to provide industry with sufficient time to consider the proposal and comment meaningfully on its substance," said Stegink. "Additionally, the proposal would create a significant "harmonization" problem for manufacturers in which different standards would apply to different companies in different states, simultaneously," added Stegink .
    EMA urged the ARB to delay these proposed amendments and take the time necessary to fully analyze the technological feasibility, lead-time, stability, cost impacts, harmonization with existing federal requirements and other facets of its proposal. "EMA is certain that upon closer inspection, the ARB will conclude it cannot take the action it has proposed," noted Stegink." We remain committed to cleaner air for the state and to that end, working with ARB to develop solutions to the emission reduction challenges facing California."