| New California Air Standards Provide Options for Cleaning Up Diesel Vehicle Exhaust
On December 12, the California Air Resources Board ("ARB") approved stringent operating standards for diesel powered engines. As part of California's continuing initiative to reduce air pollutants, the ARB approved stringent operating standards for diesel powered engines applicable to approximately 170,000 businesses in nearly all industry sectors in California. The standards require fleet owners to employ best available technology to reduce emissions of particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Trade associations have raised concerns about the costs to retrofit or replace engines or vehicles. The regulations provide affected businesses with three options by which to comply with standards for both pollutants. Although the options provide owners with some flexibility, selecting the option that makes the most cost-effective strategy for owners will take time. With compliance deadlines beginning in 2011, fleet owners should begin now to determine how they will comply. Businesses, school districts, and school transportation providers that own, operate, lease or rent any of the following types of vehicles are subject to the regulation:
In addition, California sellers of a vehicle subject to the regulation must disclose the regulation’s potential applicability to buyers of the vehicles. Fleets are required to install exhaust retrofits in 2011 and accelerate replacements of engines or vehicles from 2012 to 2022. Fleets can choose among 3 compliance options for both pollutants. School buses are required only to add exhaust retrofits for NOx, and generally would not be required to replace engines. Small fleets (three or fewer vehicles) have extended deadlines. In general, the regulation would require owners to reduce emissions in their fleet by upgrading existing vehicles by using one of three compliance options.
If a vehicle cannot be safely equipped with the highest level verified PM exhaust retrofit, the fleet owner may request a one-year extension of the PM compliance deadline. The owner would have to provide documentation to support its claims. An example of a possible unique circumstance posing a safety concern mentioned by ARB staff would be the claim by some truckers that the only location to install a filter would block the driver's field of vision or would pose a fire hazard because of its location beneath a vehicle.
|
|||||
| Allen Matkins Environmental Attorneys | |||||
| John Allen Pam Andes Shanda Beltran David Blackwell Pat Breen James Burroughs David Cooke William Devine
|
Jan Driscoll
James Meeder Emily Murray Sandi Nichols Eileen Nottoli Yadira Taylor Robert Wyatt |
Orange County (949) 553-1313 San Diego (619) 233-1155 Century City (310) 788-2400 Walnut Creek (925) 943-5551 |
Los Angeles (213) 622-5555 San Francisco (415) 837-1515 Del Mar Heights (858) 481-5055 |
||
© 2009 Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. All rights reserved.
This email is intended for general information purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinions on any specific facts or circumstances. This email was sent by: Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP, 515 S. Figueroa Street, 7th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071. To stop receiving this publication, just reply and enter "unsubscribe" in the subject line.