EPA Official Says GHG Final Rule on Track to Be Published During 2nd Quarter of 2016

ORLANDO, Fla. — An Environmental Protection Agency official said the federal government remains on track to issue a final rule during the second quarter of 2016 that will further tighten the trucking industry’s greenhouse-gas emissions.

Speaking here Sept. 22 at the Technology & Maintenance Council’s fall meeting, EPA’s Matthew Spears reminded truckers the public comment period closes Oct. 1 for the proposal that EPA issued in June in conjunction with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Spears, who heads EPA’s heavy-duty diesel programs, is “listening carefully” to trucking’s concerns and recognizes how important it is to finalize the rule in a timely fashion, because the industry is being asked to “push the envelope on technology.”

The rule will require “widespread deployment of current technologies and spur research and development on new technology that will be deployed over time,” he said.

The current proposal would phase in increasingly stringent standards for new trucks in 2021, 2024 and 2027. It includes separate standards for engines during that same timeframe and for the first time would regulate trailer efficiency starting in 2018.

On several occasions, Spears stressed that EPA is aware the Phase 2 proposal is “more aggressive” than the Phase 1 final rule, which kicked in at the start of last year without much difficulty. The second segment of Phase 1 is set to start in January 2017.

“There is a significant amount of additional technology . . . especially in the powertrain,” Spears said of the Phase 2 proposal.

Several executives from different sectors of the trucking industry shared some of their concerns about the proposal.

In particular, Jason Johnson of Paccar Inc. said he is concerned with the expectation that truck manufacturers will need to utilize “technology on trucks we have not yet seen” to comply with the latter phases of the rule.

Paccar is the parent company of Kenworth Truck Co. and Peterbilt Motors Co.

Johnson noted there are questions about testing procedures and the awarding of emissions credits because of the stringent standards.

As with previous rules, the government will allow manufacturers to produce vehicles that do not meet the regulations, provided they have earned credits through EPA’s long-standing average, bank and trade program by surpassing targets or complying early with other vehicles.

However, Johnson said that, as currently written, the proposal would offer limited credits, even to the most aerodynamic “SuperTrucks” currently being developed as concept vehicles.

Johnson also voiced worries regarding efforts by the California Air Resources Board to shorten the implementation window of the later phases of the proposal, while also considering further reductions in nitrogen oxides emissions.

EPA’s Spears acknowledged the agency is aware of California’s desires and has been working with the state as part of the process to finalize the rule.

Meanwhile, Charles Fetz, vice president of design and development for Great Dane Trailers, said there remain many unresolved details that trailer makers are wrestling with as they review the proposal.

He warned fleets they “may have to buy things they may not want” to ensure their trailers meet the final regulation.

Low-rolling-resistance tires, automatic tire-inflation systems, skirts and rear fairings are a few of the items manufacturers may need to include as part of a trailer, Fetz said.

Additionally, he said fleets could be responsible for maintaining these items over time because they could be “part of the emissions equipment.”

Brian Keck, director of fleet maintenance for Con-way Inc., did not speak in detail about the current proposal. Instead, he shared company data from previous rules to illustrate some of the positive and negative outcomes.

He said miles per gallon for the less-than-truckload carrier Con-way Freight has risen significantly since 2014, when the Phase 1 GHG rule took effect. He credited both the engines and an investment in a range of aerodynamic products by the company.

However, parts of his presentation illustrated what he considered excessive maintenance and repair costs — ranging from electronics to aftertreatment — with 2007- and 2010-compliant engines, a signal that a rushed final rule could have devastating consequences.