Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/47076
With the first of several deadlines looming in 2012, many operators and carriers that run in the state feel the increasing pressure of the state's air regulations MAX KVIDERA s California strives to shape its air pollution regulations to meet upcoming federal Clean Air Act standards deadlines, the impact on trucking operators is a matter of wealth. If you can afford to retrofit your diesel-burning equipment or buy new vehicles on a regular schedule, you may feel relatively little impact. If you don't have the financial means, you run the risk of falling short of compli- ance, facing stiff fines or going out of business. Trucking companies and operators than run in the state feel the presence of the Air Resources Board, a division of the California Environmental Protec- tion Agency, otherwise known as CARB. Depend- ing on your type of operation, CARB rules affect you differently. If you're a national carrier that regularly turns over your fleet, you may hardly notice the regulations. If you're an in-state linehaul company accustomed to running your trucks for a decade or longer, your busi- ness model may be disrupted. If you're a solo truck owner hauling containers from the Port of Oakland, one set of CARB rules could cause you to retrofit or scrap your truck. Overall, trucking's cost to comply with clean-air regulations is estimated at more than $10 billion. "A lot of companies out of state, particularly big carriers, are concerned about hours of service regula- tions and the truck driver shortage," says Bob Ramor- ino, president of RoadStar Trucking. "We in California have a much different radar screen. At the top for us right now is environmental regulations." California isn't the only state facing federal dead- lines, but it's the one state with the longest history of wrestling, often unsuccessfully, with dirty air caused 16 TRUCKERS NEWS DECEMBER 2011 by heavy traffic and trapped by unique geography. As such, the state's approach to regulating business oper- ations is monitored and often copied by other gov- ernments charged with controlling vehicle emissions. "There's definitely a recognition in other states of what's going on in California," says Mike Tun- nell, director of environmental affairs at the American Trucking Associations. "One of the differences is you have a more balanced debate in other states. The deci- sion-making process in other states rests in the leg- islature. In California it rests with the Air Resources Board." Trucking industry players are often critical of how CARB has developed the rules. They contend the agency doesn't always listen to the industry in researching the topics or relies on dubious calcula- tions in supporting its decisions. "We've found the decision process on those regula- tions wasn't entirely informed," says Ron Hall, direc- tor of operations technology at carrier C.R. England. CARB chairman "Mary Nichols and her administra- tion give preferential attention to university studies with comments on negative health impacts of pollu- tion. It didn't seem to be a true information gathering process. It seemed like decisions were made and opin- ions formed at that point." Michael Shaw, vice president of external affairs at the California Trucking Association, also finds fault with the CARB process and numbers employed in arriving at decisions. He contends the agency is out of touch with the problems trucking faces in meeting the regulations. "The challenge often is getting those drafting regulations and doing scientific analysis to understand their data is flawed outright," he says. "In A