California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards rule (2023)

What is a significant rule? Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition. |
California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty and Maintenance Provisions; Advanced Clean Trucks; Zero Emission Airport Shuttle; Zero-Emission Power Train Certification; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision | |
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency | |
Action: Agency decision | |
Res. of disapproval status: Signed into law | |
Type: Not deemed significant | |
Federal code: EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0330, EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0331; FRL-9900-02-OAR | |
Estimated cost:[1] $0 | |
Estimated benefit:[1] $0 | |
Policy topics: Environmental regulation |
The California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards decision is a decision issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designed to go into effect on April 6, 2023, that grants various California emissions standards an exemption from federal preemption.[2]
President Donald Trump (R) signed a resolution of disapproval on June 12, 2025, to repeal the rule.
Timeline
The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:
- June 12, 2025
President Donald Trump (R) signed the resolution of disapproval, repealing the rule.
- May 22, 2025
The U.S. Senate passed a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, overruling the determination of the Senate Parliamentarian.[3]
- April 30, 2025
The House of Representatives passed a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act.[3]
- April 4, 2025
The Senate Parliamentarian issued a non-binding determination that this waiver was not subject to the Congressional Review Act.[5]
- April 4, 2025
A resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act was introduced in the U.S. Senate.[4]
- April 2, 2025
A resolution of disapproval of this decision under the Congressional Review Act was introduced in the US House of Representatives[3]
Background
Administrative State |
---|
![]() |
Five Pillars of the Administrative State |
•Agency control • Executive control • Judicial control •Legislative control • Public Control |
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
|
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker. |
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA emissions regulations preempt state-level regulations, with the specific exception of California regulations (and identical regulations from other states) for which the EPA may grant a waiver. This decision responded to two 2021 requests by the California Air Resources Board for waivers to apply state-level standards that were generally more stringent than federal-level standards, and granted these requests. In April 2025, resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act were introduced in both houses of Congress, despite non-binding determinations by the Government Accountability Office and Senate Parliamentarian that EPA waiver decisions of this type are not subject to the Congressional Review Act.[5] On May 22, 2025, the Senate passed a resolution of disapproval, overruling the Senate Parliamentarian's determination.
Congressional Review Act
- See also: Congressional Review Act
Under the CRA, Congress can nullify recent administrative rules if both the House and the Senate pass a joint resolution of disapproval by a simple majority and the President signs it.
Summary of the rule
The following is a summary of the decision from the decision's entry in the Federal Register:[2]
“ | In its letter to the Administrator, CARB requested that EPA determine the 2018 HD Warranty Amendments to be within the scope of a waiver the Administrator previously granted for California's emission standards and associated test procedures for 2007 and subsequent model year heavy-duty diesel vehicles and engines or, alternatively, that EPA grant California a new waiver of preemption for the amendments. By today's decision EPA finds that 2018 HD Warranty Amendments meet the criteria for a new waiver under section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b).[6] | ” |
Summary of provisions
The following is a summary of the provisions from the decision's entry in the Federal Register:[2]
“ | The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting the California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) requests for waivers of Clean Air Act (CAA) preemption for the following California regulations: the Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty Regulations and Maintenance Provisions, the Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation, the Zero Emission Airport Shuttle Regulation, and the Zero-Emission Power Train Certification Regulation.[6] | ” |
Responses to resolution of disapproval
Supporting the decision
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D) opposed the resolution of disapproval, saying that "we’re gratified that the Senate parliamentarian followed decades of precedent showing that California’s Clean Air Act waivers are not subject to the Congressional Review Act."[5]
Opposing the decision
Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R) supported the resolution of disapproval, saying that "The American people have made it clear that they want consumer choice – not an EV mandate. I will continue to address all options available to strike down these rules and eliminate the consequential impact they would make across our country."[5]
Significant impact
- See also: Significant regulatory action
Executive Order 12866, issued by President Bill Clinton (D) in 1993, directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine which agency rules qualify as significant rules and thus are subject to OMB review.
Significant rules have had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. Executive Order 12866 further defined an economically significant rule as a significant rule with an associated economic impact of $100 million or more. E.O. 14215, issued on February 18, 2025, by President Donald Trump (R), required independent agencies to comply with all aspects of OMB review, including review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).[2]
The text of the decision states that OMB deemed this decision not significant:
“ | As with past authorization and waiver decisions, this action is not a rule as defined by Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it is exempt from review by the Office of Management and Budget as required for rules and regulations by Executive Order 12866.[6] | ” |
Text of the rule
The full text of the rule is available below:[2]
See also
- Overview of significant federal agency rules
- Overview of significant federal agency rules (2024)
- Significant rule
- REINS Act
- Congressional Review Act
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Note: Estimated costs and estimated benefits here refer to estimated quantitative costs represented by dollar amounts. The estimates are a required part of the rulemaking process and are provided in the rule text. For qualitative costs or benefits, see the summaries of rule purpose and provisions.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Federal Register, California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty and Maintenance Provisions; Advanced Clean Trucks; Zero Emission Airport Shuttle; Zero-Emission Power Train Certification; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision, accessed May 9, 2025
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Congress.gov, House Joint Resolution 87," accessed May 9, 2025
- ↑ Congress.gov, Senate Joint Resolution 46," accessed May 9, 2025
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 The Hill, Senate parliamentarian says lawmakers can’t overturn California car rules — but Republicans may try anyway, accessed May 9, 2025
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.