U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 85— AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES › Part Part D— Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas › Subpart subpart 1— nonattainment areas in general

42 U.S.C. § 7507

New motor vehicle emission standards in nonattainment areas

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
Notwithstanding section 7543(a) of this title, any State which has plan provisions approved under this part may adopt and enforce for any model year standards relating to control of emissions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines and take such other actions as are referred to in section 7543(a) of this title respecting such vehicles if—(1) such standards are identical to the California standards for which a waiver has been granted for such model year, and(2) California and such State adopt such standards at least two years before commencement of such model year (as determined by regulations of the Administrator).Nothing in this section or in subchapter II of this chapter shall be construed as authorizing any such State to prohibit or limit, directly or indirectly, the manufacture or sale of a new motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine that is certified in California as meeting California standards, or to take any action of any kind to create, or have the effect of creating, a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine different than a motor vehicle or engine certified in California under California standards (a “third vehicle”) or otherwise create such a “third vehicle”.(July 14, 1955, ch. 360, title I, § 177, as added Pub. L. 95–95, title I, § 129(b), Aug. 7, 1977, 91 Stat. 750; amended Pub. L. 101–549, title II, § 232, Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2529.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1990—Pub. L. 101–549 added sentence at end prohibiting States from limiting or prohibiting sale or manufacture of new vehicles or engines certified in California as having met California standards and from taking any actions where effect of those actions would be to create a “third vehicle”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Engine Mfrs. Ass'n v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist., 541 U.S. 246 (2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Engine Mfrs. Ass'n v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist., 541 U.S. 246 (2004). · cites it 4× “See 42 U. S. C. § 7507 (authorizing States to adopt California production mandates "[n]otwithstanding section 7543(a) of this title").”
Am. Auto. Mfrs. Ass'n v. Comm'r, Massachusetts Dep't of Env't Prot., 31 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 1994). · cites it 6× “Prior Proceedings Plaintiffs filed an action in the District Court for the District of Massachusetts, arguing that DEP’s regulations are preempted by the Act because DEP allegedly failed to comply with § 177 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7507 . Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment…”
Motor Veh. Mfrs. Ass'n of United States, Inc. v. New York State Dep't of Env't Conservation, 810 F. Supp. 1331 (N.D.N.Y. 1993). · cites it 9× “Plaintiffs claim that the Part 218 Regulations are preempted by § 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7507 . The complaint contains six counts.”
Chamber of Com. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 642 F.3d 192 (D.C. Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 7507 . States that adopt California’s motor vehicle emissions program are referred to as “Section 177 states,” after the section of the CAA that authorizes them to do so.”
Ford Motor Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Auto. Importers of Am., Inc. & State of California, Intervenors, 606 F.2d 1293 (D.C. Cir. 1979). · cites it 7× “We do not hold that such cars are barred from sale in states which choose to adopt the California standards as their own pursuant to § 177 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7507 (Supp. I 1977). See 196 U.”
Motor Veh. Mfrs. Ass'n of the United States, Inc. v. New York State Dep't of Env't Conservation, 831 F. Supp. 57 (N.D.N.Y. 1993). · cites it 5× “In count two of the complaint Plaintiffs alleged that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) adoption of the Part 218 Regulations violates the “undue burdens” and “third vehicles” prohibitions of § 177 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7507 . The…”
Green Mountain Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Jeep v. Crombie, 508 F. Supp. 2d 295 (D. Vt. 2007). · cites it 4× “42 U.S.C. § 7507 . In 2004, California adopted' a comprehensive set of GHG emissions regulations for new motor vehicles, including standards applicable to large-volume motor vehicle manufacturers beginning in model year 2009.”
Motor Veh. Mfrs. Ass'n of the United States v. New York State Dep't of Env't Conservation, 17 F.3d 521 (2d Cir. 1994). · cites it 8× “This opt-in authority, set forth in § 177 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7507 , is carefully circumscribed to avoid placing an undue burden on the automobile manufacturing industry.”
Engine Mfrs. Ass'n v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist., (SCAQMD), 498 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2007). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7507 . Like § 209(a), § 177 contains no language impliedly or expressly limiting states’ proprietary action, and we decline to infer such a limit for the reasons just stated regarding § 209(a).”
Am. Auto. Mfrs. Ass'n v. Massachusetts Dep't of Env't Prot., 163 F.3d 74 (1st Cir. 1998). · cites it 3× “42 U.S.C. § 7507 . In 1990, section 177 was amended by adding the following language: [n]othing in this section [section 177] .”
Epc of Hillsborough Cty. v. Volkswagen Grp. of Am., 959 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2020). “” 42 U.S.C. § 7507 ; see also § 7543(b). But see The Safer Affordable Fuel- 14 IN RE VOLKSWAGEN LITIGATION California (which entered into the first and second consent decrees), no other state or local government released Volkswagen from liability.”
Am. Auto. Mfrs. Ass'n v. Comm'r, Massachusetts Dep't of Env't Prot., 998 F. Supp. 10 (D. Mass. 1997). · cites it 7× “1 42 U.S.C. § 7507 et seq. The CAA is the federal statutory scheme governing emissions from gasoline-powered engines, a source of air pollution.”
Show all 42 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.