White House nixes truck emissions delay

Aug. 1, 2002
The White House yesterday rejected a plea from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL.) and other lawmakers to postpone the October 2002 EPA deadline to reduce emissions from diesel engines. Senior officials of the Office of Management and Budget and the EPA confirmed the decision, with one saying, "We looked at the science and heard from as many stake-holders as possible . . . and believe that moving
The White House yesterday rejected a plea from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL.) and other lawmakers to postpone the October 2002 EPA deadline to reduce emissions from diesel engines.

Senior officials of the Office of Management and Budget and the EPA confirmed the decision, with one saying, "We looked at the science and heard from as many stake-holders as possible . . . and believe that moving forward is the right thing to do," according to The Washington Post.

"Obviously we think it's the wrong decision, given that most of the companies haven't had a chance to adequately test the engines," Hastert spokesman John Feehery told The Washington Post. "There could be safety concerns, but we will have to see what they say before making any official reaction."

Diesel engine manufacturers face millions of dollars in penalties because they cannot meet the October 1 deadline. Six engine manufacturers signed consent decrees with the Justice Department in 1998 agreeing to meet the new standard.

The Washington Post said Hastert was drawn into the dispute by Caterpillar, which is based in Peoria, IL. A Hastert spokesman said recently that Caterpillar "is a very important company, not only in Illinois but in the country," and that Hastert and other lawmakers were "trying to get some common-sense regulation."

Caterpillar officials say it would be unfair for the government to implement the new rule this fall because manufacturers haven't been given sufficient time to test new engines that cause less pollution and because the added cost of developing those engines will seriously harm an industry already reeling from years of declining sales.

The company complained that EPA has proposed a sliding-scale penalty system of fines that is three times greater than originally discussed. According to the EPA, the penalties range from a few hundred dollars – for an engine close to meeting the new emission standards – to more than $12,000 for an engine far from compliance.

About the Author

Tim Parry

Sponsored Recommendations

Reducing CSA Violations & Increasing Safety With Advanced Trailer Telematics

Keep the roads safer with advanced trailer telematics. In this whitepaper, see how you can gain insights that lead to increased safety and reduced roadside incidents—keeping drivers...

80% Fewer Towable Accidents - 10 Key Strategies

After installing grille guards on all of their Class 8 trucks, a major Midwest fleet reported they had reduced their number of towable accidents by 80% post installation – including...

Proactive Fleet Safety: A Guide to Improved Efficiency and Profitability

Each year, carriers lose around 32.6 billion vehicle hours as a result of weather-related congestion. Discover how to shift from reactive to proactive, improve efficiency, and...

Tackling the Tech Shortage: Lessons in Recruiting Talent and Reducing Turnover

Discover innovative strategies for recruiting and retaining tech talent in the trucking industry at our April 16th webinar, where experts will share insights on competitive pay...

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of FleetOwner, create an account today!