[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 63 (Monday, April 2, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17513-17516]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-8156]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 533

[Docket No. NHTSA-2001-8977]
RIN 2127-AI35


Light Truck Average Fuel Economy Standard, Model Year 2003

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the corporate average fuel economy 
standard for light trucks manufactured in model year (MY) 2003. The 
issuance of the standard is required by statute. As required by section 
320 of the fiscal year (FY) 2001 DOT Appropriations Act, the light 
truck standard for MY 2003 is identical to the standard for MY 2002, 
20.7 mpg.

DATES: This final rule becomes effective on May 2, 2001.

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: For non-legal issues, call Henrietta 
Spinner, Office of Consumer Programs, at (202) 366-0846, facsimile 
(202) 493-2290, electronic mail ``[email protected]'' For legal 
issues, call Otto Matheke, Office of the Chief Counsel, at 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. The Act established an automotive fuel economy 
regulatory program by adding Title V, ``Improving Automotive 
Efficiency,'' to the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act. 
Title V has been amended from time to time 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, we 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. Using this authority, we have set light 
truck CAFE standards through MY 2002. See 49 CFR 533.5(a). The standard 
for MY 2002 is 20.7 miles per gallon (mpg) (65 FR 17776).
    We 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 the model years from 1998 to 2006.
    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.

    We then 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, the same standard as had been set for MY 1997. 61 FR 145 
(January 3, 1996). This 20.7 mpg standard was adopted by a final rule 
issued on March 29, 1996. 61 FR 14680 (April 3, 1996).
    On September 30, 1996, the Department of Transportation and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1997 was enacted. Pub. L. 
104-205. Section 323 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.

    On March 31, 1997, we issued a final rule (62 FR 15859) 
establishing light truck fuel economy standards for the 1999 model 
year. This final rule was not preceded by an NPRM. The agency concluded 
that the restriction contained in Section 323 of the FY 1997 
Appropriations Act prevented us from issuing any standards other than 
the standard set for the 1998 model year. Because we had no other 
course of action, we determined that issuing an NPRM was unnecessary 
and contrary to the public interest.
    We followed that same procedure for following years and did not 
issue an NPRM prior to establishing the 2000, 2001, and 2002 light 
truck fuel economy standards. The agency concluded, as it had when 
setting the 1999 standard, that the restrictions contained in the 
appropriations acts prevented us from issuing any standards other than 
the standard set for the prior model year. We also determined that 
issuing an NPRM was unnecessary and contrary to the public interest 
because we had no other course of action.
    On October 23, 2000, the Department of Transportation and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 was enacted. Pub. L. 
106-346. This law contained the appropriations provisions for the 
Department of Transportation for the 2001 fiscal year. Section 320 of 
that Act provides:

    None of the funds in this Act shall be available to prepare, 
propose, or promulgate any regulations pursuant to title V of the 
Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act prescribing corporate 
average fuel economy standards for automobiles, as defined in such 
title, 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 us to set the MY 2003 standard is approximately April 1, 
2001. As the agency cannot spend any funds in violation of the terms of 
Section 320, it cannot undertake any work in preparation of a standard 
for MY 2003 unless it is identical to the MY 2002

[[Page 17514]]

standard.\1\ Preparation of any fuel economy standard requires the 
agency to spend money to determine what the appropriate fuel economy 
level would be, to analyze the costs and benefits of that standard and 
to prepare documents and studies regarding the standard. Incurring 
these costs when the legislation dictates the fuel economy level would 
not be a productive use of resources. Accordingly, the agency is 
foregoing any analysis of what the appropriate fuel economy level for 
MY 2003 might be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA notes that while the language in section 320 of the FY 
2001 Appropriations Act is identical to that contained in prior 
appropriation acts, the Conference Committee Report for the FY 2001 
Act directs the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to conduct a 
study to evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of CAFE standards 
(H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 106-940, at 117-118). The NAS study, to be 
completed by July 1, 2001, will not affect the MY 2003 CAFE 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We note that the language contained in section 320 of the FY 2001 
Act is identical to that found in section 330 of the FY 1996 
Appropriations Act, section 323 of the FY 1997 Appropriations Act, 
section 322 of the FY 1998 Appropriations Act, section 322 of the FY 
1999 Appropriations Act, and section 321 of the FY 2000 Appropriations 
Act. The adoption of identical language in these acts leads us to 
conclude that Congress considered our prior view of this language to be 
correct: the limitation precludes NHTSA from setting a light truck 
standard that differs from one adopted for the previous year.
    As explained above, section 320 precludes NHTSA from preparing, 
proposing, or issuing any CAFE standard that is not identical to those 
previously established for MYs 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. We are 
therefore establishing the MY 2003 light truck standard through the 
issuance of this final rule. In our view, the express directive in the 
FY 2001 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act stops us from considering a different CAFE standard 
for the 2003 model year. As we cannot expend any funds to set the 2003 
standard at any level other than the MY 2002 standard, issuing a notice 
of proposed rulemaking and providing an opportunity for notice and 
comment would be unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. 
Accordingly, this final rule sets the MY 2003 light truck CAFE standard 
at the MY 2002 level of 20.7 mpg.

II. Final rule

    These regulations are being published as a final rule. Accordingly, 
the fuel economy standards in part 533 are fully in effect 30 days 
after the date of the document's publication. No further regulatory 
action by the agency is necessary to make these regulations effective.
    These regulations have been published as a final rule without prior 
issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking because section 320 of the 
FY 2001 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act prevents us from issuing any fuel economy standard 
for the 2003 model year that differs from those in effect for the 2002 
model year. Because of this, providing for prior notice and opportunity 
for comment would have been superfluous.
    In the agency's view, vehicle manufacturers and other parties will 
not be harmed by the agency's decision not to issue an NPRM before 
issuing a final rule to establish the MY 2003 light truck fuel economy 
standard. The applicable fuel economy standards established in this 
final rule do not differ from those established for the prior model 
year. As these standards cannot be modified by the agency, use of a 
final rule without a prior NPRM has no impact on the positions of any 
interested party.

III. Impact Analyses

A. Economic Impacts

    We have not prepared a final economic assessment because of the 
restrictions imposed by Section 320 of the FY 2001 DOT Appropriations 
Act. All past fuel economy rules, however, have had economic impacts in 
excess of $100 million per year. 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. Although we 
have no discretion under the statute (as well as with respect to the 
costs it imposes), we are treating this rule as ``economically 
significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and ``major'' under 5 U.S.C. 
801.

B. Environmental Impacts

    We have 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 document.

C. Impacts on Small Entities

    We have not conducted an evaluation of this action pursuant to the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The agency notes that this final rule, 
which was not preceded by a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, is not a 
``rule'' as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and is, 
therefore, not subject to its provisions. As Congress has eliminated 
the agency's discretion by precluding any action other than the one 
taken in this document, we would not be able to take any action in the 
event such an analysis supported setting the light truck fuel economy 
at a different level. Past evaluations indicate, however, that few, if 
any, light truck manufacturers would have been classified as a ``small 
business'' under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires 
each agency to evaluate the potential effects of a final rule on small 
businesses. Establishment of a fuel economy standard for light trucks 
affects motor vehicle manufacturers, few of which are small entities. 
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has set size standards for 
determining if a business within a specific industrial classification 
is a small business. The Standard Industrial Classification code used 
by the SBA for Motor Vehicles and Passenger Car Bodies (3711) defines a 
small manufacturer as one having 1,000 employees or fewer.
    Very few single stage manufacturers of motor vehicles within the 
United States have 1,000 or fewer employees. Those that do are not 
likely to have sufficient resources to design, develop, produce and 
market a light truck. For this reason, we certify that this final rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), revokes and replaces 
E.O.s 12612 ``Federalism'' and 12875 ``Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership.'' E.O. 13132 requires NHTSA to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' E.O. 13132 defines the term ``Policies that 
have federalism implications'' to include regulations that have 
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under 
E.O. 13132, NHTSA may not issue a regulation that has federalism 
implication, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that 
is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the 
funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

[[Page 17515]]

costs incurred by State and local governments, or NHTSA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation.
    This final rule would not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government as specified in E.O. 13132. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this 
rule.

E. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires 
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and 
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate 
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than 
$100 million annually.
    The agency notes that section 320 of the FY 2001 Department of 
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act precludes the 
agency from the expenditure of any funds to prepare, propose or 
promulgate any fuel economy standard that differs from those currently 
in effect. This directive forbids NHTSA from studying any alternative 
fuel economy standards other than those presently in force. The agency 
cannot consider any other alternative standards that may result in 
lower costs, lesser burdens, or more cost-effectiveness for state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector. Furthermore, as we 
are precluded from expending any funds to prepare an alternative fuel 
economy standard, it cannot embark on any studies of such alternatives. 
We have therefore not prepared a written assessment of this final rule 
for the purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Act.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no information collection requirements in this final 
rule.

G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

H. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 and the President's memorandum of June 1, 
1998, require each agency to write all rules in plain language. 
Application of the principles of plain language includes consideration 
of the following questions:

--Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
--What else could we do to make the rule easier to understand?

    If you have any responses to these questions, please forward them 
to Otto Matheke, Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

I. Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or 
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by us.
    This rulemaking does not have a disproportionate effect on 
children. The primary effect of this rulemaking is to conserve energy 
resources by setting fuel economy standards for light trucks.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary 
consensus standards \2\ in its regulatory activities unless doing so 
would be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory 
provisions regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise 
impractical. In meeting that requirement, we are required to consult 
with voluntary, private sector, consensus standards bodies. Examples of 
organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards 
bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 
the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), and the American National 
Standards Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use available and 
potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards, we are required 
by the Act to provide Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the 
reasons for not using such standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. 
Technical standards are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based 
or design-specific technical specifications and related management 
systems practices.'' They pertain to ``products and processes, such 
as size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or 
material.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In establishing this fuel economy standard, the agency is simply 
establishing a goal for manufacturers to meet. Therefore, setting this 
standard does not involve the use of any voluntary standards.

K. Department of Energy Review

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 32902(j), we submitted this final rule 
to the Department of Energy for review. That Department did not make 
any comments that we have not responded to.

[[Page 17516]]

V. Conclusion

    Based on the foregoing, we are establishing a combined average fuel 
economy standard for non-passenger automobiles (light trucks) for MY 
2003 at 20.7 mpg.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 533

    Energy conservation, Fuel economy, 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 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32902; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
1.50.

    2. Section 533.5 is amended by revising Table IV in paragraph (a) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 533.5  Requirements.

    (a) * * *

                                Table IV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Model year                            Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996.........................................................       20.7
1997.........................................................       20.7
1998.........................................................       20.7
1999.........................................................       20.7
2000.........................................................       20.7
2001.........................................................       20.7
2002.........................................................       20.7
2003.........................................................       20.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Issued on: March 29, 2001.
L. Robert Shelton,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 01-8156 Filed 3-29-01; 3:07 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P