Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Opinion
Opinion
B. FLETCHER, J.
Volume 1 of
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY,
Petitioner, v. No. 06-71891
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC
SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA EX REL. BILL LOCKYER,
ATTORNEY GENERAL; STATE OF
CONNECTICUT; STATE OF MAINE;
COMMONWEALTH OF
MASSACHUSETTS; STATE OF NEW
JERSEY; STATE OF NEW MEXICO;
STATE OF NEW YORK; STATE OF
OREGON; STATE OF RHODE ISLAND; No. 06-72317 STATE OF VERMONT; DISTRICT OF TRAN No. COLUMBIA; CITY OF NEW YORK, Reg. 17,566 Petitioners, v.
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC
SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, an agency within the UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
Respondents.
14831 14832 CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY v. NHTSA
STATE OF MINNESOTA,
Petitioner, v. No. 06-72641 NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC TRAN No. SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, an agency Energy Policy Act within the UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
Respondent.
SIERRA CLUB; PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC.,
Petitioners, v. …
Concurrence in Part
Siler, J.
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the conclusions by the majority on all points, with the exception of its conclusion in Section III.A.4. I would not find that the NHTSA acted arbitrarily or capriciously in failing to adopt a backstop for a minimum level of average fuel economy. The majority admits that the EPCA does not require NHTSA to adopt a backstop. We must realize that the arbitrary or capricious standard is one that grants an agency a significant amount of deference. Its failure to adopt this backstop was not an act which ignored factors that Congress required to be taken into account. Under those circumstances, when the EPCA did not require the adoption of a backstop, I would not find that NHTSA acted arbitrarily or capriciously by failing to do so.
Lead Opinion
Fletcher, J.
Eleven states, the District of Columbia, the City of New York, and four public interest organizations petition for review of a rule issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) entitled “Average Fuel Economy Standards for Light Trucks, Model Years 2008-2011,” 71 Fed.Reg. 17,566 (Apr. 6, 2006) (“Final Rule”) (codified at 49 C.F.R. pt. 533). Pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), 49 U.S.C. §§ 32901-32919 (2007), the Final Rule sets corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for light trucks, defined by NHTSA to include many Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs), minivans, and pickup trucks, for Model Years (MYs) 2008-2011. For MYs 2008-2010, the Final Rule sets new CAFE standards using its traditional method, fleet-wide average (Unreformed CAFE). For MY 2011 and beyond, the Final Rule creates a new CAFE structure that sets varying fuel economy targets depending on vehicle size and requires manufacturers to meet different fuel economy levels depending on their vehicle fleet mix (Reformed CAFE).
Petitioners challenge the Final Rule under the EPCA and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347 (2007). 1…