Response to Recent CARB Advisory

Truck Owners Respond to CARB’s Reprieve of Diesel Filter Requirement

 

By January 1, 2014, most heavy-duty trucks operating in the state will be required to have a diesel particulate filter (DPF). At the October 24, 2013 California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) meeting, members of the Alliance for California Business and others in the trucking industry told CARB that thousands of trucks have not yet complied and won’t be able to meet the deadline. The truck owners told CARB that the DPF is a technically flawed device that causes constant repair problems and resulting delays in shipments. It places truck drivers and the general public at risk of fires and other truck related accidents. The DPF is designed to reduce diesel particulate matter but it leaves a giant carbon footprint on the state when it malfunctions or damages trucks – which is often. Small businesses and agriculture are most immediately impacted, but the effect of the DPF requirement will be felt throughout the state, as businesses absorb the financial impact by raising prices or reducing service to rural areas.

None of this was news to trucking industry, but for the first time it appears that someone on the Board finally listened. On November 14, 2013, CARB announced that it would give some truck owners more time to comply with the Truck and Bus Regulation. Trucking owners or companies must show “good faith compliance,” by doing one of the following by January 1, 2014: (1) enter into an agreement to buy and install a DPF; (2) sign a purchase contract and order a replacement truck equipped with a DPF; or (3) show that they were approved or denied a loan or other financing for a retrofit DPF or replacement truck equipped with a DPF. Alternatively, the truck owner could register the truck as one that stays exclusively within a designated low NOx county or drives less than 5000 miles per year.

Alliance for California Business’s president, Bud Caldwell, agrees that these are all steps in the right direction, but the deferment of just one year and these limited exemptions are not going to fix this problem. “First of all, thousands of truck owners will still have to adopt the seriously flawed DPF technology in order to meet the original deadline because they do not fit within these exemptions. And, says Mr. Caldwell “it’s not the small number predicted by CARB. CARB’s statistics on the number of trucks that still need to be upgraded appear to be numbers pulled out of a hat, and do not consider the trucks coming into the state.”

Second, CARB’s regulatory objective remains steadfast: that all California trucks and those trucks that come into the state must be equipped with a DPF. Again, Mr. Caldwell: “The Alliance for California Business brought its lawsuit to require CARB to put an end to a program that by design will require truck owners fit their trucks with a dangerous and mechanically defective DPF device, and by doing so causes more harm to the environment than it cures. So, CARB’s newest advisory is just a first step. Now, CARB has to examine the real facts about the DPF and stop this regulatory debacle before it does still more harm to California’s environment and economy.”

4 Responses to “Response to Recent CARB Advisory”

  1. JOHN BRANNOCK | November 29, 2013 at 8:35 pm #

    I have a 2001 truck that I just rebuilt the engine in. I haul honey bees in and out of the state every year, usually 10-12 loads a year. this amounts to about 35% of my business. I am now looking for ways to replace this lost revenue, and my bee people are worried that the cost to find another carrier to ship bees will bankrupt them and the fact that not everybody can haul bees. I would go for an annual mileage cap, but not 5,000 miles. one load from the Oregon boarder and back will run around 750-800 miles. multiply that by 10 and you see that a cap of 5,000 miles would leave me short of hauling all the bees. I know that a lot of nut farmers are worried that they wont be able to get bees in to pollinate their crops. that would be a huge loss for the state tax roles.

    • Mike H | December 3, 2013 at 6:16 am #

      Dear John. They don’t care about state tax collection. I am single truck owner with my own interstate authority. I usually do truck repairs and maintenance in Los Angeles area. I did calculation and here is the result for last year.
      Paid sales taxes: ~ $3500
      IFTA tax paid to CA ~ $600 (by the way highest in the nation rate and looks like you are paying to use GOLDEN roads)
      IRP registration ~$1000
      Federal income and State Franchise taxes is not count.
      I am not talking that mechanic shops getting income because I repair and maintain the truck here in LA. I am not talking truck stops are getting income because I buy fuel…It’s just a chain connected to each other…why they don’t see this?
      I will not put DPF on my truck because that device will not work. I have seen already carriers suffered because of it.

  2. Mike H | December 3, 2013 at 5:53 am #

    I have 05 truck with new rebuilt engine. I am an interstate carrier from Los Angeles area. I don’t haul intrastate because of low rates. Last year I drove in people republic of california about 12k miles. I can cut that mileage to 5k-7.5k. And I will be happy to do that because don’t want to face Nazi troops (CARB) and crazy california truck inspectors at weight stations. I think ‘low use exemption’ must be around 12k per year in California and not total miles driven in year for interstate carriers.

  3. Sebastian Diaz | December 24, 2013 at 10:11 pm #

    Hi. Here is my story. I am single truck O/O who runs between LA, CA and Detroit, MI. My truck is 07 Freightliner Century with 06 year engine. It’s a nice looking truck with low mileage. I have paid off it in April 2013. I was happy because after paying it of I could start saving for kid’s collage, but… In may 2013 after little research and following CARB suggestion( they advertise on their website that economical way of compliance is dpf retrofitting) I decided to retrofit my truck with dpf. I visited one of certified installers in Fontana, CA. They explained me process of retrofitting and I agreed to start the retrofitting. The installer installed temperature logger on exhaust pipe just before muffler and asked me run the truck loaded few days. I came back after round trip to Detroit and they removed temperature logger. The data from logger was submitted to manufacturer and the manufacturer suggested passive dpf for my truck because exhaust temperature was higher than 250 C. In September the dpf was installed and the total invoice was $15626.00. I had no problem with the truck until mid October. One beautiful day dpf got clogged on the road and I paid $900 to local shop for removing, cleaning and installing to cartridge. After 6000-7000 miles again it got clogged and again I paid around $850 for cleaning. The third time it got clogged in Los Angeles area. The shop suggested taking off all 6 injectors for testing and turbocharger replacement. The turbocharger was working ok but I replaced it. All 6 injectors came back from testing place ok. All this totaled $4400. Again after 7000 miles it got clogged. This time I went to dpf installer. They called to manufacturer and after long phone conversation decided to put temperature logger again. I did one round trip to Detroit and back. Removed data from logger was showing low exhaust temperatures. Not enough for regeneration to start. Conclusion was that low ambient temperature is causing exhaust pipe and gas cooling. So passive DPF will work ok if you run in Cali or southern NV, AZ. If you go to cold states such as MI, MN, ND, MT you will have big problems. DPF installer suggested replacing the passive system with active one. The cheapest option was $22000. They refused to take back the passive system because it was sold according to data came off from my truck. My truck market value is about $25000 dollar today. I have spent already $23000 and the truck is not compliant yet. I have no money and not trying to get loan to replace the dpf again. After being California’s resident for 17 year I have decided to leave this state and move to Nevada. Nevada State respect taxpayers, working individuals and small business owners. I am not the only one who is facing this problem. The bad is that nobody from Fascist organization called CARB pay attention on this matter. (((Instead of moving out of state I had one more option too. Its shame to write but I could file bankruptcy, sit on welfare and let CA governor to think how to clothe and feed my family.
    Sincerely Sebastian Diaz

Leave a Reply to Sebastian Diaz Click here to cancel reply.