First Name | Steve |
---|---|
Last Name | McDonald |
Email Address | smcdonald@papemachinery.com |
Affiliation | Equipment Dealer |
Subject | PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE REGULATION FOR IN-USE OFF-ROAD FLEETS |
Comment | After reviewing the ARB’s latest proposed amendments to the In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets and Implementation Update, I would agree that for the most part, the proposed changes are in the best interests of employers that rely on their Off-Road Diesel-Fueled equipment to provide services and construction related jobs to tens of thousands of tax paying employees. Having said this, I would like to remind staff members and lawmakers that those employers and employees can only pay taxes when they are working or employed. These taxes are the states income and in turn pay state employee wages. Just as employers within the state must have an income to be able to pay employee wages, so must the state. In the early stages of the regulations development, staff argued that employers would cover the costs of compliance to the regulation through increases in revenues from competitive bidding, ongoing housing development, business growth and increased infrastructure needs. As we enter 2009 these projections by staff have not come to pass. In fact with construction and housing starts in a tremendous downturn and banks unwilling or unable to extend credit, it becomes increasingly more difficult for employers to meet payroll let alone come up with the tens of thousands of dollars required to meet the requirements set forth by the regulation. Most companies are in survival mode as they down size and lay off employees just to keep their balance sheets from going into the red. Staff must also consider that this is not the only ARB regulation that employers are required to comply with. Most of these employers also must comply with the PERP, ATCM, and the upcoming On-Road Rule. This overwhelming burden to repower, retrofit or replace equipment will only further diminish those much needed tax revenues by the state to meet budgetary requirements. This state is in a financial crisis and needs to protect potential revenues. While it is an undeniable fact that the air quality of California is a great concern for everyone, we must also balance this concern with what is financially feasible at this time of economic crisis. Cleaning the air and saving lives is the goal, bankrupting the state and employers is not. If we are to survive this economic downturn we must all make concessions and that includes those at the regulatory level. Allowing the extension of the double credit for early PM retrofits by 10 months will provide the additional time need for device manufacturers to sort out the additional requirements put on them by the ARB during the ever changing verification process. However, it will not make cash available for of those employers required to purchase and install those retrofit devices. Unlike our State and Federal Governments, employers usually don’t spend cash that they don’t have or foresee as income and therefore the purchase of these devices will be delayed until such a time as the work load will justify and pay for their purchase. Also, on pages 14 and 19 of the staff report, I believe that staff has once again over stated their VDECS estimates. The burden of installing VDECS to meet the staff projection of 30 percent by 2011 will fall largely upon the shoulder of the large fleets to the tune of approximately 59,500 units, as medium fleets first compliance is 2013 and small in 2015 and I would disagree that medium and small fleets will find the double credit to be a large enough benefit to retrofit early. Particularly when cash flow is low. On page 12 of the staff report it is stated that “some manufacturers have limited the resources they have invested in off-road verifications”. While it is true that manufactures have had difficulty in meeting the needs for verified devices it is not for a lack of persistence. The ARB must also shoulder some of the responsibility for the low number of verified devices. The ARB must establish a criteria threshold and maintain it. Changing the target for meeting verification criteria is not a fair and reasonable practice for manufactures to be held accountable for. Just as many devices were de-verified in the early stages of the program, so to have many devices by numerous manufacturers been put through additional requirements after the fact because the ARB has changed the verification criteria. This becomes an expensive and time consuming endeavor for the manufacture and one that significantly impacts the end user cost of the device. Let’s stop reinventing the wheel and use those technologies that have already been developed and proven in other countries. These manufactures have much to offer in the way of saving lives and money now. I would ask that the ARB consider expediting these products to market in an effort to save lives and control end user costs. I would also ask that the ARB reconsider the time frames and the impact of theses regulations with respect to our current financial situation as a whole on the employer. Employers that have the burden of meeting three or more regulation simultaneously will find it difficult at best to become fully compliant. I believe we should look at the bigger picture when considering the compliance strategy for these employers. The goal is to reduce emissions and therefore the overall reduction of the combined diesel fleet (PERP, ATCM, Off-Road and On-Road) should be an additional path to compliance. There must be a point to which everyone affected by the multitude of regulations and the quality of our air can find acceptance and practical applicability with all of our endeavors. The proposed requirements for fleet size changes is a step in the right direction. However, this change to the regulation should also be afforded to the large fleets also. The large fleets will feel the negative affects of these regulations years before the medium and small fleets. These large fleets are also the large contributors to the states income through taxes and allowing them the ability to move from medium to large as their dormant fleets become active again will further assist in them in this economic downturn and will help to support that tax base. Thank You, Steve McDonald |
Attachment | |
Original File Name | |
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted | 2008-12-17 06:49:32 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594.