Vermont executive order delays enforcement of clean-car and clean-truck rules while seeking evidence of dealer "ratioing"

The administration issued an executive order that pauses formal enforcement of Vermont’s Advanced Clean Cars (ACC2) and Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) requirements for an 18-month period while it establishes reporting and complaint procedures and pursues parallel rule amendments.

The pause is limited: enforcement discretion is conditioned on manufacturers and dealers not engaging in "ratioing" (allocating internal-combustion vehicles only in proportion to EV sales) and on meeting new reporting obligations. Secretary Moore described the action as “an overview of the executive order” and said the step was taken to preserve consumer choice while CARB rulemaking and federal uncertainty play out.

Why it matters: the administration told the joint Senate committees on Transportation and Natural Resources and Energy that model-year 2026 vehicles will begin arriving on dealer lots between July and September, raising the prospect that dealers could be offered internal-combustion vehicles only in proportion to EV allocations. That practice, officials and senators said, could constrain availability of desired vehicles for Vermont buyers and for municipal and fleet purchasers such as school districts and towns buying snowplows.

What the order does and does not do - The executive order does not rescind Vermont’s ACC2 or ACT rules; it makes use of enforcement discretion instead. “We didn’t rescind the current rules,” Secretary Moore said. The rules remain in place, the administration emphasized, while enforcement is exercised selectively. - The order has an 18-month effective term and requires reporting from manufacturers and dealers; the administration said the first report required by the order is due July 1 (the transcript gives the date as July 1 without specifying a year). - The administration established a complaints inbox at ANR to receive reports about suspected ratioing; the stated focus for that inbox is heavy-duty truck and fleet purchases (school buses, snowplows and municipal fleets), although some legislators expressed concern that uninformed public complaints could swamp the system.

Federal and CARB context The administration cited two sources of near-term uncertainty: federal action under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) and rulemaking by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The speaker said the U.S. House has already passed CRA resolutions affecting advanced clean cars, trucks and related low-NOx rules and that the Senate is debating whether those actions are subject to CRA review.

Separately, CARB is considering amendments to the Advanced Clean Trucks rule that the administration said would change crediting, deficit makeup periods and pooling provisions; Vermont plans to propose parallel amendments through its rulemaking process. Secretary Moore told the committees she expects some CARB amendments to be finalized by July and said Vermont will file its amendments in June.

Penalties and timing discussed Officials described existing penalty ranges for noncompliance as sizable: passenger-car fines cited in the hearing were capped at about $10,000 per vehicle and heavy-duty truck penalties at about $26,000 per vehicle. The administration said the practical accounting and crediting formulas mean dealers’ effective EV obligations could be lower than headline percentages (a cited 35% nominal target for 2026 may be reduced toward roughly 20% once credits are applied).

Lawmakers’ concerns and administration responses Committee members pressed the administration on several fronts: whether the inbox could be misused by individual consumers; whether delaying enforcement would make later compliance steeper; whether the executive order bypassed legislative and Climate Council processes; and whether Vermont has evidence that manufacturers or distributors are already ratioing vehicles into or out of the state.

- On the inbox, Secretary Moore said the primary expected reporters are dealerships and municipalities ordering fleets, not individual consumer complaints, and that anonymity would be optional. Several senators urged clearer public messaging to avoid perception that the inbox is for routine car-shopping complaints. - On enforcement and negotiating leverage, some senators said the state had never (or rarely) fined manufacturers under these rules and worried the executive order removes tools. Secretary Moore replied that the enforcement discretion is conditional and that ANR would pursue enforcement if ratioing occurred: “The enforcement discretion is contingent on not ratioing. If a manufacturer engages in ratioing, we will pursue enforcement,” she said. - On climate and policy process, senators said many constituents opposed rollbacks and that the Climate Council and prior climate planning had endorsed the clean-car rules; the administration said the Climate Council’s charge is focused on the Global Warming Solutions Act obligations and that the executive branch must weigh a broader set of impacts to consumers and businesses.

Funding and charging infrastructure Lawmakers repeated longstanding concerns about public and residential charging infrastructure and program funding. The administration said the governor’s climate omnibus (H.289) contained proposals for added EV incentives and charging investments that were not enacted and said available funding sources such as RGGI and NEVI federal funds remain uncertain. The administration noted utility programs and weatherization work that affect home charger uptake (for example, many homes lack 200-amp service needed for Level 2 charging).

What’s next The administration said it will move quickly to adopt Vermont rule amendments after CARB finalizes its changes, coordinate with other Section 177 states on guidance, and stand up the reporting and complaint processes required by the executive order. Committee members requested evidence of ratioing in writing, counts of utility- or incentive-supported home chargers installed, and more specific plans for how the state will expand public and multiunit charging access.

Ending note Committee members voiced divergent views: some welcomed the pause as pragmatic, others criticized the executive action for circumventing legislative debate. The administration maintained the rules remain in force and characterized the EO as a temporary, conditional measure intended to preserve consumer access while federal and CARB developments play out.