Comment Log Display

I provided a comment in the 45-day comment period about the new,
undue burden of unnecessary fleet reporting for those fleets
utilizing the straight BACT schedules (Tables 1 and 2) that
installed PM filters prior to January 1, 2014. This change in the
regulation that should not have been overlooked at the recent
Governing Board hearing represents a major reporting change for
fleets that will easily lead to compliance issues.
 
Under the provisions of the current regulation, CARB provided
relief from reporting if the straight BACT method was utilized,
provided that the fleet followed the rigorous schedule of
installing PM filters (or replacement) on 1996 - 2006 heavy-duty
engines in vehicles > 26,000# GVWR prior to January 1, 2014.
Installation of the PM filters allows fleets to operate these
retrofitted trucks until sometime between January 1, 2020 and
January 1, 2023 depending upon the engine model year without any
vehicle reporting other than for low-use vehicles and the annual
affirmation reporting. This relief from reporting has been
addressed by CARB at workshops and in their on-going training as an
added plus for those electing this path for compliance. Reporting
for vehicles with other than 1996 – 2006 engines that were
retrofitted still required reporting by January 31, 2014.

In an attempt to recognize ‘good-faith’ fleets that followed the
proper compliance retrofit requirements of the regulation, CARB
made proposed changes in the regulation that is awaiting final
approval that would allow for a 3-year extension of the original
January 1, 2020 date to January 1, 2023. However, contrary to
CARB’s original “no-reporting” relief, CARB will now require fleets
to report their entire fleet of heavy duty vehicles to have any
extension for any vehicle retrofit before January 1, 2014. This
unfair change actually penalizes those that followed the BACT
compliance path with the extra, unnecessary reporting. 

In cases like ours, where we replaced over 75 vehicles with 2010 or
better engines and retrofitted over 30 vehicles, such reporting
would be a huge undertaking as engine information must be pulled
manually from each vehicle’s engine as this information is not
available with the VIN data. There are many other fleets like ours
that would also be unnecessarily forced to now report. Many of
these fleets will likely not understand the ramifications of this
change and will suffer undue compliance.

In my comment made during the 45-day comment period, I suggested
the following changes to sections 2025(f)(2) and 2025(g)(4) to
alleviate this now-imposed burden on fleets that elected the BACT
approach with no previous fleet reporting:

1. The “no reporting” provision should be retained for vehicles
with 1996 – 2006 engines in vehicles > 26,000# GVWR if the PM
filter was installed in accordance with Table 2 and a fleet wants
to keep the original deadlines for replacement as per Table 2. 

2. Reporting would still be required as in the current regulation
for retrofitted vehicles > 26,000# GVWR with engines other than
1996 – 2006, or for any vehicles retrofitted on vehicles < 26,000#
GVWR.

3. Reporting of an entire fleet would only be required if the fleet
desired the extra 3 years for vehicles > 26,000# GVWR with engines
other than 1996 – 2006, or for any vehicles retrofitted on vehicles
< 26,000# GVWR. Note again, as confirmed by CARB staff, the
provision in 2025(g)(4) should only apply to vehicles > 26,000#
GVWR with other than 1996 – 2006 engines. Provisions for “no
reporting” for vehicles with engines in the 1996 – 2006 range is
exempt from reporting as stated in the preamble to 2025(g) if the
BACT schedule is utilized.

The following language is suggested:

In the preambles of 2025(f) and 2025(g) the following sentence must
be retained to state reporting is not required if using the
straight BACT method for compliance: “Fleet owners are not required
to meet the reporting requirements of section 2025(r).”

In addition, the following modifications to 2025(f)(2) and
2025(g)(4) are necessary:

2025(f)(2) - 	Any engine that meets PM BACT prior to January 1,
2014 does not have to be upgraded to a 2010 model year emissions
equivalent engine until January 1, 2020 as long as the vehicle
remains in the fleet, and the owner meets the reporting and record
keeping requirements of sections 2025(r) and 2025(s) for such
vehicle. Fleets may extend this deadline to January 1, 2023 for
engines that met PM BACT prior to January 1, 2014 provided that all
lighter vehicles in the fleet meet the reporting and record keeping
requirements of sections 2025(r) and 2025(s) by no later than
January 31, 2015.

2025(g)(4) - Any engine that meets PM BACT prior to January 1, 2014
does not have to be upgraded to a 2010 model year emissions
equivalent engine until January 1, 2020 as long as the vehicle
remains in the fleet, the owner meets the reporting and record
keeping requirements of sections 2025(r) and 2025(s) for such
vehicle, and the vehicle is in compliance with the schedule set
forth in Table 2 above at the end of this extension. Fleets may
extend this deadline to January 1, 2023 for engines that met PM
BACT prior to January 1, 2014 provided that all heavier vehicles in
the fleet meet the reporting and record keeping requirements of
sections 2025(r) and 2025(s) by no later than January 31, 2015.

Again, the regulation needs to stick to the original CARB incentive
of “no reporting” if the BACT path is utilized.

Thank you for your consideration.

Bob Shepherd