EXCLUSIVE — California’s Republican delegation is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to deny a waiver to the state for its zero-emissions mandate on commercial trucks.
In the letter obtained by the Washington Examiner, the Republican House lawmakers claimed the mandate, also known as the Advanced Clean Fleets rule, would have major unintended negative consequences if enforced.
“While we support efforts to reduce emissions and improve air quality, we believe this waiver is unjustified and could have significant negative impacts on our economy and the livelihoods of many Californians,” the lawmakers said Thursday.
The Advanced Clean Fleets rule was adopted by the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, in April 2023 and became effective later that October. It is one of the most aggressive electrification plans for trucks in the country, requiring all commercial truck sales to be zero emissions by 2036.
While CARB officials have claimed a waiver was not required to implement the rule, they submitted a waiver request to the EPA in November 2023 after facing pushback from groups like the California Trucking Association. One month later, the board revealed it would not enforce the rule while the request was still pending. This means if the EPA approves the waiver, or sides with CARB by deeming it unnecessary, the state can move forward enforcing the regulation.
CARB officials have estimated that the rule would bring in more than 1.6 million zero-emission vehicles into the state’s fleet by 2050, saving drivers around $48 billion. The board says the mandate would also help significantly reduce emissions in the state, helping achieve “long-term air quality, climate, and public health goals.”
However, the state Republicans accused the mandate of being a “one-size-fits-all approach” that rejected other environmentally friendly alternatives to gas, including renewable diesel.
The regulation has been hotly contested by dozens of states, free market groups, and top trucking associations in the country. Earlier this month, 24 attorney generals from states including Nebraska, Alabama, Ohio, and Texas sent a letter to the EPA urging the agency to deny the waiver claiming the mandate was attempting to “force a nationwide compliance.”
“Our states are also connected to California via the interstate system,” the states said. “An electric truck mandate in California means more battery-electric trucks traveling in our states — a mandate our states did not ask for and do not support.”
California Republicans pointed to similar criticism in their Thursday letter, citing the American Transportation Research Institute, which estimated that fully electrified passenger and commercial vehicles would consume more than 40% of generated electricity than it does today.
“California alone would need to increase power generation by 57.2% to support a fully electric vehicle fleet,” the lawmakers wrote. “Utilities are nowhere near ready to supply this amount of power, as evidenced by regulations approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) this month that would give electric companies up to nine years in some cases to connect new EV chargers to the grid.”
They accused the mandate of being impractical, saying diesel-powered trucks have a longer driving range and take a fraction of the time to fuel compared to battery-electric trucks.
The lawmakers also claimed the Advanced Clean Fleets rule would disrupt the national agricultural supply chain, causing higher prices for consumers and families already facing pressure from inflation.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“California’s one-size-fits-all regulations would disrupt our entire nation’s supply chain, stress California’s electrical grid, and raise prices for consumers,” Rep. David Valadao (R-CA), who spearheaded the letter, told the Washington Examiner. “The Newsom administration has repeatedly shown they care more about the environmental lobby than helping middle-class families struggling with rising prices.”
In mid-August, the EPA held a public hearing over the pending waiver and opened a comment period that ended on Sept. 16. The agency received more than 41,000 comments on the issue.