Unpacking CARB’s trucking rules, regulations and legal challenges

Last Updated: November 19, 2024By

The state of California has positioned itself as a central figure in a revolutionary shift from a 100-year path of internal combustion engines (ICE) used in commercial transportation. Within a three-year span, the state has adopted the world’s most stringent commercial vehicle regulations: Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT), the Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Omnibus Regulation and Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF). The three rules work together to gradually transition commercial trucks, buses and vans to zero emission vehicles (ZEVs).

The stringent regulations have generated plenty of praise, collaboration, concern and even legal challenges. Turning away from familiar and trusted technology will be anything but easy but the industry is proving it is possible.

Questions around ZEV cost and capability relative to ICE are not taken lightly by Cummins nor other players in one of the nation’s most critical industries.

As with prior emissions legislation, amendments will undoubtedly emerge as collaborative efforts between policymakers and industry continue. That is currently the case with the Omnibus regulation as proposed amendments are under review by the Environmental Protection Agency. Some of the amendments in question focus on diesel engine testing, warranty periods and aftertreatment.

“Omnibus, the amended version, got resubmitted to EPA and is calling for increased legacy allowances,” explained Tom Swenson, Director of Global Regulatory Affairs.

Emission legislation passed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requires a Clean Air Act waiver from the EPA when it proves stricter than federal policy. CARB has been receiving federal waivers for its emissions policies since the 1960s given its ongoing battles with air pollution.

Geographical features such as valleys and mountains appearing throughout the state can hinder air circulation to keep pollutants hanging around.

“The San Joaquin Valley in California, for example, is like a little trap of NOx,” Uma Vajapeyazula, North American Market Strategy Director, described.

Eager to overcome its unique air pollution issues, CARB has kept a close eye on ZEV development. Once board members decided the technology was up to the challenge of replacing ICE trucks up to Class 8, CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) rule in June of 2020. To date, it’s the only one of the three ZEV polices that has received an EPA waiver.

The ACT rule requires that manufacturers who certify chassis or complete vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 8,500 lbs. sell zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) at an increasing percentage of their annual California sales starting with the 2024 model year. The annual reporting began with the 2021 model year.

OEMs struggling to sell ZEVs can buy ZEV credits from other manufacturers to unlock sales of their ICE vehicles. However, there’s concern that funds used to purchase ZEV credits could impact their bottom line.

“One question is, ‘Will ZEV credit trades happen between competitors?’” Swenson said.

In September 2021, CARB adopted the Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Omnibus Regulation to “drastically cut smog-forming nitrogen oxides (NOx) from conventional heavy-duty engines. The Omnibus Regulation will significantly increase the stringency of NOx emissions standards and will also lengthen the useful life and emissions warranty of heavy-duty diesel engines for use in vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 pounds. The more stringent NOx emission standards begin with the 2024 model year engines and become more stringent with 2027 and subsequent model year engines.”

Extending warranty coverage will necessarily increase the cost of equipment, Swenson noted.

Advanced Clean Fleet legislation rolled out next in April 2023. ACF requires fleets to gradually replace acquired ZEVs while allowing them to retain ICE vehicles throughout their useful life. Per CARB, useful life is defined “as the later of either: 1) 13 years, beginning with the model year that the engine in the vehicle and was first certified for use by CARB or United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), or 2) the date that the vehicle exceeds 800,000 vehicle miles traveled or 18 years from the model year that the engine in the vehicle was first certified for use by CARB or U.S. EPA (whichever is earlier).”

ACF compliance challenges

In August, EPA held an ACF waiver hearing that included a full day of testimony, comments were also accepted online. One of the companies to participate was Sundance Stage Lines in San Diego. The charter bus company currently uses diesel-powered custom-built buses with a 1,000-mile range and 20-minute refueling time. It has stated opposition to ACF’s zero-emission mandate.

“As BEVs, range is cut to approximately 200 miles (substantially less in cold weather), at which point the vehicle requires a four-hour charge at a dedicated high-voltage charger before it can proceed another 200 miles,” Sundance Stage Lines writes. “Thus, any group attempting to access an area not serviced by either an airport or a nearby charter operator will be forced to make other arrangements. This will have substantial negative effects both on motorcoach operators and the traveling public.”

Among the concerns expressed, Sundance noted that “four major motorcoach manufacturers offer at least one of their models as battery-electric vehicles (BEVs.) In converting the vehicle to run as a BEV, all of the buses have lost over 70% of luggage space because the volume of batteries needed to give the vehicle a reasonable range requires the batteries and the accessories normally driven by the engine be mounted in the underfloor luggage compartments.”

Sundance also pointed out the high cost of ZEVs versus ICE. In the case of motor coaches, the company contends the price “more than doubles, from $650,000 each to over $1,400,000 per bus – a cost per unit over twice as high as any other electric vehicle.”

In its ACF waiver request submitted last November to EPA, CARB writes that “anticipated developments will likely both reduce the costs and increase the number of commercially available ZEVs, including projected decreased costs of batteries and improvements in battery energy density due to economies of scale and increasing pace of technology development and decreased costs of other ZEV components resulting from the projected increased production of ZEVs.”

Legal battles persist

At least three lawsuits that have emerged to challenge the enforcement of ACF make it California’s most contentious trucking legislation to date.

The first complaint was filed in October 2023 by the California Trucking Association in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The challenge has resulted in the state holding off full enforcement that was originally slated to go into effect on January 1, 2024. CTA’s 32-page complaint argues that the state needs a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency prior to enforcing ACF since its policies exceed federal mandates.

In response, California put ACF enforcement on hold for most fleets pending receipt of an EPA waiver. CTA noted on its website that waivers typically take 9-12 months to process. The state has been enforcing ACF for public fleets since applying for the waiver in November

“They’re implementing and enforcing ACF for state [California] and local government fleets,” explained Mari Mantle, Cummins Regulatory Affairs Manager. “It’s the high priority, federal and then drayage [fleets] that they’re waiting on the waiver for.”

CTA’s complaint also highlights concerns of ZEVs relative to internal combustion. Acquisition costs of ZEVs, according to CTA, are “projected to be 2 to 6 times higher than comparable ICE tractors”; ZEV range “is less than half that of an ICE truck”; additional refueling stops needed for ZEVs will require additional time and infrastructure and thus limit more route options historically utilized by ICE trucks.

In April, American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce (AmFree Chamber) and Associated Equipment Distributors (AED) filed suit also challenging California’s ACF regulation.

In May, the Nebraska Trucking Association topped a list of plaintiffs that included seventeen states opposing ACF: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming. Several of these same states joined a suit last year against the Advanced Clean Trucks rule.