Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA)

InfluenceMap Score
E+
Performance Band
39%
Organisation Score
Sector:
Automobiles
Head​quarters:
Chicago, United States
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: The Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) has been negatively engaged with heavy-duty vehicle climate policies in the United States from 2020-22. The industry association has strongly opposed federal and state rules intended to accelerate the transition to zero-emission trucks including the Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) regulation.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: InfluenceMap has not found evidence of any top-line communications on climate change from the EMA. The industry association does not appear to explicitly support the Paris Agreement, nor has it expressed any high-level position on climate policy.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: The Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) has negative US engagement on federal-level greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards. In a March 2022 consultation response, EMA appeared to oppose a proposal in the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “Clean Trucks Plan” that would tighten “Phase 2” GHG emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles for 2027 and beyond for certain vehicle categories. It further opposed the proposed revision of the “Phase 2” rule in an oral statement at an April 2022 EPA public hearing. Similarly, in a policy summary on the EMA’s Clean Truck Facts website, the industry association advocated for a “Phase 3” rulemaking, which would begin in 2030, rather than re-opening the “Phase 2” GHG rule. In an April 2022 policy summary, the EMA argued that a revision of “Phase 2” GHG emissions standards would “undermine regulatory certainty and stability” and “penalize manufacturers”. EMA’s president, Jed Mandel, has publicly expressed opposition to more stringent federal GHG emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles in the US, for example in a March 2022 CNN article and an April 2022 Politico article.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Despite appearing to commit to a “zero-emission future for the commercial vehicle industry” in an April 2022 Op-Ed, EMA has had negative engagement on the transition to a zero-emissions heavy-duty industry. At the federal level, EMA has communicated opposition towards the rapid decarbonization of heavy-duty vehicles and the phase-out of ICE-powered trucks, for example in a May 2022 joint letter to the EPA.

At the state level, in a June 2020 consultation response, EMA strongly opposed California’s proposed stricter-than-federal Advanced Clean Truck Regulation (ACT) that requires manufacturers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission trucks, emphasizing concerns around costs and infrastructure rollout. In a different June 2020 consultation response, EMA further challenged the rule and warned that the “proposed myopic regulatory mandate is likely to compel manufacturers to abandon the California market”.

Throughout 2021 and 2022, EMA lodged objections to other US states considering adopting California’s Advanced Clean Trucks Rule, including Oregon, Colorado, New York, New Jersey, Washington, and Maine. In Maine, which has signalled its intention to adopt California’s rule, EMA argued in an email to the state’s Department of Environmental Protection, found by InfluenceMap via an FOIA request, that “a ZEV-deployment strategy that is centred around the ACT Rule will more likely frustrate rather than foster the acquisition and use of ZEV trucks in Maine, will hurt the State’s economy, and will impede any envisioned environmental gains”. EMA also appeared to oppose Maine’s adoption of the ACT rule in November 2021 oral testimony and an October 2021 consultation response, both found via FOIA request. EMA opposed New Jersey's proposed adoption of California's ACT rule in a July 2021 joint letter written by the “Partners for a Zero Emission Vehicle Future” coalition (where EMA is a member) to New Jersey’s Governor. At a December 2021 Colorado Clean Trucking Strategy working group meeting about Colorado's plan to adopt the ACT rule, Sean Waters, chair of the EMA, explicitly stated "we strongly oppose the ACT rule”. Waters also expressed opposition in a March 2021 email to Colorado's Department of Transportation found via FOI request, where he stated “we are committed to a zero emission future, but that isn’t going to happen through the ACT rule”. EMA also submitted a consultation response to Colorado’s Department of Public Health and Environment in April 2022 (found via FOIA request) as part of the “Partners for a Zero Emission Vehicle Future” coalition, opposing the state’s proposed adoption of the ACT rule, emphasizing concerns around costs and charging infrastructure roll-out, and instead advocating for a nationwide federal program to decarbonize HDVs. EMA also appeared to oppose Massachusetts' adoption of the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) rule in February and March 2022 consultation responses, both found via FOIA requests. EMA also opposed New York's proposed adoption of California's Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) rule in a November 2021 oral testimony, a November 2021 consultation response, and a March 2021 letter, all found via FOIA requests. The industry association appeared to oppose the ACT rule more broadly in April 2022 public comments from the PZEVF coalition to the Clean Air Association of the Northeast States.

Furthermore, in an August 2022 consultation response and a June 2022 oral testimony, the EMA strongly opposed California's requests to the EPA for the issuance of preemption waivers authorizing CARB to enforce the ACT regulation, which requires manufacturers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission trucks, under the Clean Air Act.

Details of Organization Score

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
1NANANANANANA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NSNSNANSNSNSNA
NS-1NA-2-1-1NA
-20NA-2NS-1NA
1NANANANANANA
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS