Strike 3: Court Dismisses Auto Industry Bid to Bar Rhode Island GHG Regulation

Strike 3: Court Dismisses Auto Industry Bid to Bar Rhode Island GHG Regulation

By John O'Dell, Senior Editor

In yet another defeat for carmakers attempting to block state-by-state implementation of greenhouse gas regulations, a federal judge today dismissed an industry suit that sought to stop Rhode Island from imposing limits on tailpipe emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate-impacting exhaust gases.

It was the third defeat for auto manufacturers, who have lost similar clean car suits in California and Vermont.

In his 28-page Rhode Island decision, U.S. District Court Judge Ernest Torres said that it was apparent that automakers were trying to take "another bite of the apple" by attempting to make the same case that already had been tossed out by federal judges in the other two states.

"It is difficult to see what interests the public has in permitting another bite of the apple in challenging regulations limiting the emission of greenhouse gases," the judge wrote in dismissing the suit by General Motors Corp., Chrysler LLC and the two major auto industry trade groups, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers.

In each case, the states have said they intend to implement the greehnosue gas limits adopted in California -the only state permitted under federal law to establish air pollution regulations that are stricter than federal EPA standards.

Although other states cannot set their own rules, they can opt out of the EPA regulations by adopting California's standards, which 13 states have done or said they intend to do.

Torres let stand a companion suit on the same issues filed by Rhode Island car dealers.

While voicing suspicions that the dealers and the automakers were acting in concert, he said there was no clear connection between the two suits and that the dealers thus were entitled to a hearing of their own. Dealer suits in California and Vermont were dismissed along with the industry suits.

In their auits, the automakers argue that allowing individual states to adopt California's rules would result in a mish-mash of regulation that would unfairly punish the industry by forcing companies to build different cars and trucks for different states - or to refuse to sell certain models in some states.

Their rationale is that while the regulated level of permissible emissions would remain the same in each state, the mix of vehicles sold in each would differ - pickups might account for a bigger portion of annual sales in a farm state than in a heavily urbanized state, for example - and thus would require state-by-state adjustments to average out total greenhouse gas emissions.

While California has adopted greenhouse gas limits, it has not yet begun implementing the rules. Federal law requires the state to obtain a waiver from the EPA to do so, and under the Bush Administration, the EPA has refused to grant one.

President-elect Barack Obama, however, has said his administration would approve the state's waiver request.

That would enable the other states that have adopted California rules to begin enforcing them - and that is the scenario the auto industry fears and has been fighting with its unsuccessful court challenges.

Unless the new president renegs on his campaign pledge to let California and the 13 other states move ahead with their own greenhouse gas regulations, the auto industry now seems to be fighting losing battle.

At a time when domestic automakers are in danger of bankruptcy and are asking taxpayers to bail them out, their continued expenditure of millions of dollars on legal fees to fight tougher emissions rules - rules that taxpayers in many states have approved via their state governments - seems an exorbitant waste of money and effort.

"It's time for automakers to read the handwriting on the wall. Lock up your lawyers and unleash your engineers," said David Doniger, an attorney representing the Natural Resources Defense Council in the clean car cases.

"American auto companies cannot be competitive, or even survive, if they make carsonly marginally better than they are building today. They have to be dramatically cleaner, higher mileage cars," he said in a statement.

The NRDC, he said, is "ready to support taxpayer assistance to the American car companies, if it is linked to retooling" factories to make cleaner, more efficient cars.

John O'Dell:  is an AutoObserver Senior Editor. Follow @AutoObserver on Twitter.