Watch Now


California OKs Advanced Clean Fleet rule; here’s a summary of it

Drayage faces earliest hit, ‘Milestones’ provide guidance on way to 100% ZEV fleets

CARB has approved the Advanced Clean Fleet

On a unanimous vote, the Advanced Clean Fleet rule has been adopted in California.

The sweeping rule was approved Friday by the California Air Resources Board after several years of proposals, hearings, and a combination of industry pushback and acceptance as equipment designed to meet the state’s requirements for a zero-emission-vehicle (ZEV) fleet made its way to the market. Purchases of that equipment got frequent attention.

CARB’s approval set off the usual rush of press releases hitting journalist mailboxes.

American Trucking Associations President Chris Spear decried the actions of “an unelected board [forcing] trucking companies to buy zero-emission trucks.”


“Fleets are just beginning to understand what it takes to successfully operate these trucks, but what they have learned so far is they are significantly more expensive, charging and refueling infrastructure is nonexistent, and ZEVs are not necessarily a one-for-one replacement — meaning more trucks will be needed on California roads to move the same amount of freight,” Spear said.

On the other side of the divide, Katelyn Roedner Sutter, the California director of the Environmental Defense Fund, said the ACF rule “will have significant positive health impacts and will help provide benefits for residents in communities exposed to high truck traffic. The Advanced Clean Fleets Rule will speed the transition to zero-emission trucks which is one of the most powerful opportunities to reduce climate pollution, address equity, improve our health and lower the cost of operating these trucks.”

But beyond the rhetoric, what’s actually in the ACF?

The ACF is aimed at the buyers of trucks; the Advanced Clean Trucks rule is targeted at the companies that make them. The ACT was approved in March 2021.


ACF affects three primary categories of fleets:

  • Drayage trucks.
  • Government fleets.
  • “High priority fleets.” CARB defines these as companies that “own, operate or direct” at least one vehicle in the state, and that have $50 million or more in gross annual revenues or “own, operate or have common ownership or control” of 50 or more vehicles in California. The weight of the vehicles that are affected is a gross weight of 8,500 pounds or more.

Drayage

There is little doubt that the biggest short-term impact from ACF comes from its rule on drayage trucks. Starting Jan. 1 of next year, only ZEVs can register in the CARB’s drayage registry. Vehicles with internal combustion engines (ICE) that are on the road now can continue to operate through their “useful life.” Those limits mean that when a drayage truck hits 800,000 miles, it can no longer be listed in the registry of drayage vehicles. The alternative is if it reaches 18 years after its model year, even if it has not reached 800,000 miles.

High-priority fleets

This one can be confusing. It could be read as being similar to drayage, where no new ICE vehicles can be registered at the start of 2024.

That is true — up to a point. Part of the ACF rule says fleets can only purchase ZEVs starting in January 2024 and must take ICE trucks out of their fleets by the start of 2025.

But the ability to replace an ICE vehicle in a high-priority fleet after Jan. 1 is convoluted. One part of the ACF says that to keep in compliance, a fleet must have “no ICE vehicles added on or after January 1, 2024, unless … .” And it’s the “unless” part that has several twists. For example, if the ICE vehicle was ordered before the end of this year, it’s OK to add it to a fleet. There are other exemptions that would allow ICE purchases if a variety of targets are hit. It’s complex and will keep compliance officers busy.

Since not all fleets are going full ZEV in 2024, what will govern the transition to 100% ZEVs is the “Milestones” schedule. It calls for a graduated move to ZEVs depending on the classification of the truck. So fleets of sleeper cab tractors need only be 10% ZEV by 2030. This chart is taken from CARB’s website.


That means a current fleet could buy a new ICE vehicle now and maybe past Jan. 1, 2024, (if it meets the exemption criteria), but it could also buy a greater quantity of ZEVs as long as the end figure reaches 10% ZEV by 2030. For that group of trucks, the percentage rises to 25% by 2033, 50% by 2036, 75% by 2039 and 100% by 2042 and beyond.

The difference in the Milestones target of 2042 for Class 8 tractors can be confusing because an amended proposal by CARB requires that no new vehicles delivered into California after 2036 be anything other than a ZEV. (It was reduced from 2040.) It isn’t clear whether a fleet could buy a used ICE Class 8 tractor after that date as long as it stays within its Milestone target. 

Government rules

The key thing to know is that there are Milestone targets here as well. The targets are the same as for the high-priority fleets. As far as the purchase requirements separate from the Milestones,  government fleets must have 50% ZEV purchases starting next year and 100% ZEV purchases by 2027. A fleet of fewer than 10 vehicles can wait until 2027 before being required to buy  ZEV-only vehicles.

Useful life

The same useful life rules that are impacting drayage will govern the retirement of older vehicles in high-priority fleets. A truck must be removed from the system if it reaches the earlier of 18 years or 800,000 miles, or a minimum of 13 years if the truck has more than 800,000 miles.  There are no such rules for state and local government fleets.

What if the infrastructure isn’t ready?

In the latest round of revisions from earlier this year, CARB observers said they believed the biggest changes involved permissible delays if charging or other refueling infrastructure — like hydrogen — wasn’t available. There had been a one-year delay in mandated ZEV purchases in the prior regulation; that has been increased to two years.

The latest revision also added a similar compliance extension if a ZEV simply could not be obtained. In one example that CARB might have accepted some of the concerns about vehicle availability, it increased to 180 days the amount of time a buyer that had its ZEV purchase canceled by the supplier has to secure a substitute. That number had been 90 days.

Getting to 100% ZEVs

CARB staff estimates that, of the 1.8 million medium- and heavy-duty vehicles operating daily in California, 532,000 will be subject to ACF fleet requirements. On its website, CARB estimates that 12% of all Class 2B-3 vehicles will be affected, 52% of Class 4-8 vocational vehicles will fall under the rule, and 67% of Class 7-8 tractors. 

But with the ACF and ACT rule together limiting the ability of ICE vehicles to be sold into the state, truck owners not directly affected by the rule whose vehicles simply wear out due to age won’t find the marketplace providing them an opportunity to buy a new ICE truck.

What happens there doesn’t stay there …

Six states that have said they will follow California’s lead in adopting ACF rules: New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Massachusetts, Washington and Vermont.

More articles by John Kingston

TriumphPay network’s growth slows by some measures, stronger by others

C.H. Robinson’s Q1 was weak; April’s freight market was no better

CTA, OOIDA target Gonzalez statements in latest filings

4 Comments

  1. Mr. X

    @Robert Shelton
    You have a solution.
    There is also the case of trucking companies fleeing CA and doing business in CA but registered in AZ or NV.
    California cannot impose that no ICE trucks are allowed from other states as that is interfering with Interstate Commerce. Most of the highways in CA are built and maintained with federal funds by taxes on fossil fuels. If someone is paying a tax for a service he is not allowed to access by a third party, that is the definition of taxation without representation. With that logic, all the other states can charge a hefty tax (or entry fee) to all EV with California license plates as those haven’t paid their “fair share” of taxes to access roads build by fossil fuel vehicle taxes.

  2. May F

    This is another example of California government officials creating regulations without understanding the impact of their decisions or involving the impacted parties in the development of new regulations.

    Go ahead and try it, CA. It will simply dramatically increase the cost of goods to the residents of California, encouraging more of them to leave the state. Haven’t enough evacuated California already?

  3. Debra Jo

    First! There is no such thing as “Zero Emissions”, for just an electric car to be built before it even hits the dealership, it has already created 20 tons of emissions, I can’t even imagine how much a truck puts out. Soooo there’s that.
    Second! There is no such thing as “Renewable Energy”, unless of course it’s wind, water, and sun.
    Third! California I can not wait until this blows up in your face i.e., Little to NO freight coming in and even less coming out. You are forcing something that this country is literally not ready for. You know the Cart before the Horse mentally NEVER works, but go ahead and keep forcing it down our throats

  4. Robert Shelton

    I’m 32 yr OTR Truck Driver , here is my comment concerning California’s Clean Fleet Rule and how the Trucking Industry should solve California. First off , California’s Clean Fleet Rule is just another attempt by California to control the trucking industry. They tried first by requiring all trucks that enter California to have DEF ( blue horse piss ) systems on their trucks for cleaner emissions . FAILURE!!! Here is my solution : California wants Clean Fleets but still want food, fuel, lumber, clothes, ETC.. I believe all trucking companies should band together and tell California “ fine you want Clean Fleets. Then we will deliver the requires products for your citizens to survive to the California state line and it will be up to your Clean Fleets to deliver them throughout the State “!!! Frankly and Personally, I will just refuse to deliver any product to California and not cause the companies I work for to purchase a specialized fleet just to go into California . That is just insane!!

Comments are closed.

John Kingston

John has an almost 40-year career covering commodities, most of the time at S&P Global Platts. He created the Dated Brent benchmark, now the world’s most important crude oil marker. He was Director of Oil, Director of News, the editor in chief of Platts Oilgram News and the “talking head” for Platts on numerous media outlets, including CNBC, Fox Business and Canada’s BNN. He covered metals before joining Platts and then spent a year running Platts’ metals business as well. He was awarded the International Association of Energy Economics Award for Excellence in Written Journalism in 2015. In 2010, he won two Corporate Achievement Awards from McGraw-Hill, an extremely rare accomplishment, one for steering coverage of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster and the other for the launch of a public affairs television show, Platts Energy Week.