CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD letter to UHCA regarding AB 1675 October 3, 1996 Mr. David Barnes, President United Highway Carriers 1817 South Fresno Avenue Stockton, California 95206 Dear Mr. Barnes: I wish to express my personal gratitude to the United Highway Carriers Association (UHCA) for the vital role played by the Association, many individual UHCA members and your tireless legislative advocate, Deborah Mattos, during the final critical days of the 1996 Legislative Session. Without your assistance, a well intentioned, but disastrous bill almost certainly would have been approved by the Legislature. That bill, AB 1675, would have banned the operation and registration of pre-1987 trucks in California beginning in 2004. Because there was so much confusing and contradicting information concerning AB 1675, I want to take this opportunity to set the record straight. For example, it was believed by many that AB 1675 would shield trucking companies from local air quality district regulations including so-called “fleet rules.” This simply was not the case. AB 1675 had no provisions that restricted local air quality district authority. With or without AB 1675, local air quality districts must fulfill their legal obligation to develop and manage air quality programs that meet federal and state clean air goals. The sponsors of AB 1675 stated that the proposal was intended to deliver a significant improvement in air quality in accordance with the federally-mandated State Implementation Plan (SIP) that was adopted in 1994. However, after careful and exhaustive analysis of the emission reducing impact of AB 1675, the Air Resources Board (ARB) staff determined that the bill would fall far short of achieving the pollution reductions that would be necessary to offset the need for other efforts to reduce emissions from trucks. Specifically, the ban on pre-1987 trucks would provide only 1.18 tons per day of emission reductions where more than 10 tons are needed. The principal reason for the meager emission-reducing effect of the bill is that natural attrition will result in relatively few pre-1987 trucks that will be in significant use in 2004 and thereafter. Furthermore, the confirmation of vehicle mileage for exempt trucks as well as verifying the adequacy of modified and repowered trucks would make the ban difficult to enforce. The bill’s uncertain impact on interstate and international trucks further complicated enforcement and administrative issues. The short-fall in emission reductions coupled with the high administrative and enforcement burdens that would be necessary to effectively implement the bill, lead to the inevitable conclusion that AB 1675 would not be cost-effective, and should not become a part of the State’s strategy to satisfy the SIP. For these reasons, the ARB opposed AB 1675. I recognize that both state and local air quality programs can be a burden on the trucking industry. However, I also believe that we all share the common goal of achieving healthful air quality for all Californians. I pledge to you and UHCA members that I am sensitive to your concerns and interested in hearing your views and suggestions on developing and implementing air quality programs that make the most sense. I you or your members have any questions or comments on this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me or my Legislative Director, Mr. Chris Reynolds, at (916) 322-8520. Sincerely, John D. Dunlap III Chairman, CARB

LIST YOUR WEB PAGE HERE!! IF YOU DONT HAVE A WEB YET! WE WILL CREATE ONE FOR YOU for more information CALL 1800-483-8343
EMAIL TO: WEB PAGE
telnet to: UHCA.Com