If there’s one thing we know about state regulators in California, it’s that they refuse to recognize any limits on their power.
The California Air Resources Board recently closed the second 15-day public comment period on the Advanced Clean Fleets regulations, which aimed to transition medium- and heavy-duty trucks owned by state and local governments to zero-emission by 2045.
CARB is doubling down on how broadly they intend to apply these regulations to private fleets, who until now have been told they were out.
This brazen expansion by CARB of the ACF regulations to apply to private fleets simply by virtue of the fact they contract with state and local governments likely exceeds CARB’s regulatory authority, since the federal Clean Air Act waiver was withdrawn. In doing so, CARB is attempting to regulate entities that were never represented to be a part of the state and local government fleet provisions and are no longer reachable.
The California Senate Environmental Quality Committee, chaired by Senator Catherine Blakespear, D-Laguna Hills, will have an opportunity to reject this blatant overreach with a simple bill, AB 1436 by Contra Costa Assemblymber Anamarie Avila Farias that seeks to clarify existing law – CARB needs to obtain the waiver required by the federal Clean Air Act.
Since withdrawing of the waiver, CARB has repeatedly told stakeholders for over a year that the regulations do not apply to private fleets. The proposed ACF regulations do not state whether they include any private entity that contracts specifically or solely for the “operation of” a vehicle, a contract for any service that could reasonably or potentially include the operation of a vehicle, or simply every contract.
The guidance that was released by CARB shortly following the release of this draft expressly states that “Private fleets are not subject to the ACF State and local government regulations.” But then the guidance adds that the regulations apply to “functions carried out through contractual arrangements.” This guidance is very broad, including any contract for any project or purpose.
For public works projects, a contract might not be “for operation of” a vehicle, but a contractor could need to transport items, and then the private entity could be forced to comply with ACF. Many state and local governments contract with Amazon for orders that are likely to be delivered by vehicles. Would these entities be subject to ACF? Or every entity that has a contract for any service with state and local governments?
Words matter but there is a drastic difference between interpretations and implications with costs that will have to be paid by local governments and those they serve.
Expanding to private fleets is a significant cost shift onto local governments and ratepayers without corresponding statutory authority, demonstrated need, or available vehicle technology. Caltrans’ recent report, documents these substantial costs, infrastructure barriers, procurement challenges, delayed deliveries, and operational limitations of the current marketplace.
According to the report, ZEVs are 132 percent more expensive than their counterparts, have taken years to be delivered, and face limited range, possibly requiring 2-3 ZEVs to perform the same amount of work as one regular vehicle. Expanding these requirements to private fleets that contract with local governments will compound these cost burdens and significantly increase the cost of every contract that state and local governments enter into when affordability weighs heavily on the mind and pocketbook of every Californian.
But for all of those who took CARB at its word, their opportunity to provide public comments on the ACF regulations has passed. The state legislature is the only remaining option. That’s why the legislature, starting with the Senate Environmental Committee, must pass AB 1436 to address this regulatory issue CARB seems unwilling to, despite knowingly withdrawing the federal waiver request.
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.