The Clean Truck Check, part of California’s broader Heavy-Duty Inspection and Maintenance (HD I/M) Program, represents one of the state’s latest moves to reduce air pollution and address the environmental impact of heavy-duty diesel vehicles. The California Air Resources Board (CARB), charged with ensuring cleaner air under the Clean Air Act, has implemented a series of regulations aimed at curbing the emissions from vehicles weighing more than 14,000 pounds, particularly those running on diesel. While these vehicles play a vital role in the state’s economy, their pollution—primarily nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM 2.5)—has been a persistent issue for California’s air quality. Despite decades of efforts to reduce these pollutants, these trucks remain a significant source of harmful emissions.
The Clean Truck Check seeks to ensure that heavy-duty vehicles in California are regularly inspected and maintained, particularly their emissions control systems, which include diesel particulate filters and selective catalytic reduction systems. The goal is to ensure that malfunctioning vehicles are identified and repaired swiftly, maintaining a level playing field for businesses that adhere to emissions standards and protecting communities from harmful pollutants. CARB estimates that, once fully implemented by 2037, the program will reduce NOx emissions by 81 tons per day and PM emissions by 0.7 tons per day. These reductions are expected to save over 7,500 lives by reducing pollution-related illnesses and deaths.
However, the program is not without controversy. One of the major regulations under this initiative is the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule, which mandates that certain fleets—including drayage fleets, government-owned fleets, and those classified as high-priority fleets—transition to zero-emission trucks over a phased timeline. While the environmental benefits of this transition are clear, the economic implications for the trucking industry, truck parts manufacturers, and related businesses are substantial.
In response to this regulation, several lawsuits have been filed by industry associations, including the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) and the National Truck Equipment Association (NTEA), challenging the legality and practicality of the ACF rule. The plaintiffs argue that the regulation exceeds CARB’s authority and is in conflict with both federal and state law. Their main points of contention center on the high costs of compliance, the impracticality of the new standards for certain types of vehicles, and the potential damage to the economy.
One of the primary concerns expressed by the truck equipment and parts manufacturers is that the ACF rule fails to account for the specific needs of various specialized vehicles, such as utility trucks, emergency vehicles, and snowplows, which may not be well-suited for battery-electric technology. The associations argue that the current suite of regulations would render many products and technologies obsolete, effectively cutting California—the world’s fifth-largest economy—out of the market for diesel and other internal combustion truck parts.
This shift toward zero-emission vehicles will place an enormous financial burden on businesses in the trucking industry. Fleets adhering to these new emission standards will likely incur steep operating costs due to the need for expensive equipment upgrades and compliance with cumbersome regulatory requirements. Some smaller businesses may be unable to afford these changes, forcing them out of the market altogether. This regulatory shift could have devastating effects, particularly on small to mid-sized fleet operators and companies that provide aftermarket truck equipment and parts.
Furthermore, the lawsuits emphasize the potential for unintended consequences, such as a rise in consumer prices. As the costs of fleet compliance rise, businesses will likely pass these expenses onto consumers, leading to increased prices for goods and services. Trucking is the backbone of much of California’s economy, responsible for the transportation of food, raw materials, consumer goods, and more. If operational costs rise due to regulatory changes, the additional expenses will ripple through the supply chain, ultimately affecting consumers.
In addition to the immediate impact on California’s economy, the plaintiffs also argue that the regulation discriminates against out-of-state companies. For instance, a fleet with fewer than 50 trucks in California is exempt from certain requirements, but a company operating 49 trucks in another state and only one in California would still be subject to the regulation. This discrepancy, they claim, violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause by imposing unfair burdens on interstate commerce.
As the legal battles continue, businesses remain in limbo, unsure of how to prepare for the future. Although CARB has not yet been granted the necessary waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce the new regulations, the state has indicated that it may enforce the rule retroactively. This uncertainty adds to the financial strain faced by businesses, which may be forced to retire vehicles or upgrade to zero-emission alternatives, even without the official green light from the EPA.
In conclusion, while the Clean Truck Check and the Advanced Clean Fleets regulation are steps toward a greener future, they come with significant economic and legal challenges. The potential rise in operational costs, the lawsuits against CARB, and the possible impact on consumer prices highlight the complexity of balancing environmental progress with economic sustainability. How these issues will ultimately be resolved remains to be seen, but for now, California’s trucking industry is at a crossroads.
https://landline.media/truck-equipment-groups-challenge-advanced-clean-fleets-in-new-federal-lawsuit