Opinion ID: 392800
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Source of the EPA's Authority

Text: 12 Before turning to the merits of the EPA's rulemaking activities, we must consider a threshold question that has attracted attention sporadically throughout the course of the proceedings. Although none of the parties contests the EPA's authority to regulate diesel particulate emissions, there is some disagreement as to the precise statutory provision conferring that authority. GM insists that the EPA's particulate rulemaking for non-heavy-duty vehicles 8 may be viewed only as an exercise of its broad general power to prescribe motor vehicle emission standards under section 202(a)(1) of the Act; 9 the EPA argues that an explicit provision of the Act specifically directs it to promulgate particulate standards. 13 In proposing the challenged regulations, the EPA cited as its statutory basis section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act, added by the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments, Pub.L.No.95-95, § 224, 91 Stat. 685. That provision, set out more fully in the margin, 10 requires that (t)he Administrator shall prescribe regulations under (section 202(a)(1)) applicable to emissions of particulate matter from classes or categories of vehicles manufactured during and after model year 1981 (or during any earlier model year, if practicable). GM maintains that this provision empowers the agency only to set standards for heavy-duty vehicles, while the EPA reads it as applying to any classes or categories of vehicles, including all light-duty diesels. The apparent meaning of the language of section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii), read in isolation, comports with the EPA's view, but we conclude that that language should not be read in isolation, see, e. g., Brown v. Duchesne, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 183, 194, 15 L.Ed. 595 (1857). The structure of section 202 casts doubt on the validity of a literal reading, and after a closer examination of the section's legislative history, we conclude that GM's position is correct. 14 The EPA's power under section 202(a)(1) antedates the 1977 amendments such authorization, to the agency and its predecessors, has been present in varying forms since the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1965, Pub.L.No.89-272, § 101, 79 Stat. 992. The legislative history of the 1970 amendments 11 demonstrates that Congress expected that section 202(a) authority would be used for regulation of particulate emissions. S.Rep.No.1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. 24 (1970), reprinted in 1 Legislative History of the Clean Air Act Amendments 424 (1974) (hereinafter cited as Legislative History). Congress did not write in a statutory particulate standard at that time, as it did for vehicular emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and oxides of nitrogen, 12 because of technological obstacles: 15 No present measurement techniques exist to evaluate or establish standards for such particulate emissions. Such standards cannot be established on the basis of 1970 vehicles as required by subsection (b) because measurement techniques will not exist until 1972. At such time as measurement methods are developed the Secretary would be expected to establish standards for particulate emissions under 202(a) authority. 16 Id. 17 By 1977, however, Congress had become impatient with the EPA's failure to promulgate a particulate standard. 18 The need for a standard for the pollutant particulate matter for motor vehicles was identified in the Senate report in 1970. None has yet been proposed, except for a smoke standard for heavy duty diesels. 19 EPA should promulgate a standard requiring best available control technology for smoke from heavy duty diesels and other particulate emissions from heavy duty vehicles and motorcycles by model year 1978, if possible, or by model year 1979. 20 S.Rep.No.127, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 67 (1977), reprinted in 3 Legislative History 1441. Congress therefore adopted the mandatory language of section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii). 21 The 1977 Senate report illustrates that congressional concern over vehicular particulate emissions focused on heavy-duty vehicles. They are the major source of the problem; as the EPA observed in the present rulemaking, light-duty gasoline-powered vehicles with three-way catalysts emit very low levels of particulate. Regulatory Analysis at 31, J.A. 510. Not surprisingly, then, the origin of section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii) can be traced to a provision in the 1977 Senate bill applicable to emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, particulates, and oxides of nitrogen from heavy duty trucks, buses, and motorcycles and engines thereof, S. 252, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. § 19 (1977), see S.Rep.No.127, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 193 (1977), reprinted in 3 Legislative History 1567. 13 22 The Senate provision was compromised in conference with a less stringent House provision, and the contents of the Senate's bulky paragraph were distributed among subparagraphs of paragraph 202(a)(3)(A) under circumstances suggesting that the omission of the words heavy duty from subparagraph 202(a)(3)(A) (iii) was inadvertent. The section of the act that emerged from conference bore the title, Emission Standards for Heavy Duty Vehicles or Engines and Certain Other Vehicles or Engines, Pub.L.No.95-95, § 224, 91 Stat. 685; the substance of that section indicates that the certain other vehicles are motorcycles. Subparagraphs 202(a)(3)(A)(i) and 202(a)(3)(A)(ii) still retain the limitation to heavy-duty vehicles. Subparagraph 202(a)(3)(A)(iv), which empowers the Administrator to establish classes or categories of vehicles or engines for purposes of regulations under this paragraph, is not so restricted, but the conference report is written as if it were: The Administrator is specifically authorized to subdivide heavy duty vehicles into classes or categories for purposes of this section. H.R.Rep.No.564, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 164 (1977), reprinted in (1977) U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News 1502, 1544, 3 Legislative History 544. 23 This accumulation of detail convinces us that Congress did not intend, in adding section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii), to mandate adoption of particulate standards for light-duty vehicles. Rather, Congress directed the EPA to give priority to establishing particulate emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles, and left the agency free to exercise its power under section 202(a)(1) to regulate light-duty automobiles, whether diesel-powered or otherwise. 14 24 Our conclusion that the EPA cited the wrong section of the statute 15 as authority for its rulemaking does not necessitate a remand, even though paragraph 202(a)(1) requires, as subparagraph 202(a)(3)(A)(iii) does not, a threshold finding that the regulated pollutant may be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Particulates have long been recognized as one of the major targets of the Clean Air Act. See, e. g., U.S. Dep't of Health, Education, and Welfare, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter (National Air Pollution Control Administration Publication No. AP-49) (1969). And the EPA, in issuing the present regulations, made specific findings on the environmental impact of diesel particulates: 25 Section 202(a)(3)(A)(iii) directs EPA to control particulate emissions; it does not require that the Agency first conduct an environmental impact assessment. Nevertheless, EPA has carefully examined the environmental impact of this rulemaking. 26 .... 27 ... Small particles, which are much more likely to be deposited in the alveolar region and which require much longer periods of time to be cleared from the respiratory tract, have a greater potential to affect human health than larger particles. Thus, control of diesel particulate, of which 100 percent is less than 15 micrometers in diameter and approximately 97 percent of which is less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, is especially important with respect to human health. 28 45 Fed.Reg. 14,496, 14,498-99 (1980). Indeed, GM expressly concedes in its brief that the Administrator considered and discussed the health risks of particulate emissions during rulemaking (and that his) determination that particulate emissions require priority control to protect human health would entitle him to prescribe particulate standards under § 202(a)(1) for light-duty vehicles. Reply Brief for Petitioner General Motors Corp. at 6 (hereinafter GM Brief). 16