With less than three weeks before California's Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule is set to take effect, the state is seeking a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency that would end any questions about whether the state can implement it.
A waiver request for California-specific environmental regulations is generally required under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The CAA allows the state and its unique status under the act to impose environmental restrictions and mandates that go beyond federal law as long as a waiver is granted by EPA. No other state has that ability.
The EPA in March granted a waiver for the Advanced Clean Trucks rule (ACT), the companion legislation to ACF that is a mandate on truck manufacturers; the ACF is a mandate on the purchasers of what the manufacturers produce. There is no corresponding federal rule as restrictive and mandate-heavy as the ACT.
The California Air Resources Board submitted the waiver request for ACF in November, but did not make a public announcement of its action.
The first wave of significant regulations under ACF take effect January 1. The steps that go into effect that day are not particularly onerous and outside of impacts on drayage there is little in the ACF on day one that would require significant steps to be taken while the waiver approval process plays out.
To continue reading this article...
Already have an account? Sign In
Create a Free Account
No payment required
Tex
Let California starve dont pick up production in that state let it all rot there California wants goodbye?
Christopher Roberts
Great article, just a note though, in the following section:
“The overarching mandate in the ACF is that no zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) can be sold in the state after 2035, with their ongonig usage phased out over several years beyond that.”
I think you meant to reference ICE vehicles, and not ZEV’s.
Thank you,
Christopher Roberts
George miller
My 2008 kw is like new I payed for it now I have to sale it . Can’t aford to buy a new one . So now I am unemployed with out a job . Because of the year of my truck. And the money in my Pocket I no longer can make a living . So now what be come home less or work for someone else hauling what was once mine now someone else’s . Because of the year of my truck. That should be fleet owners not a guy that has 1 or 2 trucks .
Jack
Wow, forcing people to “retire” a truck at 800k, it can run well pass 1mill, “retire” at the owners expense of course, cali makes the laws but does nothing to actually help.
Bradley
All I can say is I don’t go there, and glad of it. It’s really hard to tell, I always get the feeling any news we get about it “cherry picked” to support one side or the other, but I just have a strong feeling this isn’t going to end well…
Thagearjammer
We run old trucks that get 8 plus a mile per gallon consistently and we can repair themselves! Reduce reuse recycle ♻️ or as California says buy new and junk!
Emissions is a small part of the pie. Resource extraction to build new? The cost to landfill. The cost of recycling? The waste/leaching from factories? What’s the cost for poorer quality equipment because r&d is focused on emissions instead of quality lasting forever? Ol spooner drive millions of miles in one truck over 40 plus years. Buy cheap buy twice?