First Name | Jay |
---|---|
Last Name | Snable |
Email Address | jsnable@mac.com |
Affiliation | none |
Subject | Proposed Changes to the ZEV Mandate |
Comment | Dear Chairman Nichols, I am writing in support of Tesla Motor's recent communication. As a Californian and soon-to-be owner of two California-manufactured fully electric vehicles, the Tesla Roadster and Aptera Typ-1e, I find it hard to believe that we are considering rolling back requirements for true ZEVs in favor of more hybrid automobiles. As a current hybrid owner, I appreciate the advances they represent in reducing air pollution and the need for more oil. However, the hybrid market is well established; the need for inducements seems analogous to tax breaks for oil companies for exploration. To reiterate, I support: 1) Increase not decrease the minimum number of Pure ZEV required in Phase III (2012-2015); 2) Eliminate the substitution of Pure ZEVs with Enhanced AT-PZEVs; 3) Set the minimum ZEV requirements on a yearly basis rather than for three years, thus preventing manufacturers from getting an additional three year grace period and eliminating “blackout” years; 4) Change the carry forward provision of gold ZEV credits earned by any manufacturer that exclusively manufactures pure ZEVs to expire 3 years from the date of transfer to another manufacturer. Sincerely, Jay Snable |
Attachment | |
Original File Name | |
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted | 2008-08-13 21:24:31 |
If you have any questions or comments please contact Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594.