Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fleet Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CARB seeks permanent staff for airport shuttle and zero‑emission forklift rules; waiver uncertainty complicates enforcement
Summary
CARB requested conversion of limited‑term positions to permanent staff and additional ongoing funding to implement the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF)/airport shuttle rules and a newly adopted zero‑emission forklift regulation. CARB said these initiatives are long‑term SIP commitments; LAO flagged enforcement and waiver uncertainties
The Assembly subcommittee heard CARB’s request to convert limited‑term positions to permanent roles and to fund implementation of the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) airport shuttle provisions and a recently adopted zero‑emission forklift regulation.
Kim Horoi Rogalski, branch chief in CARB’s Mobile Source Control Division, outlined two requests. For ACF and airport shuttle, CARB asked for $5.8 million from the Air Pollution Control Fund and authority to convert 32.5 limited‑term positions to permanent positions. CARB described these rules as state implementation plan (SIP) commitments that contribute to ozone attainment and long‑term emissions reductions. For the zero‑emission forklift regulation, CARB requested $3.5 million and 17 permanent positions; forklift phase‑out requirements extend well into the 2030s and CARB said ongoing staff are needed for reporting, compliance assistance, outreach and exemption processing.
CARB noted the withdrawn ACF waiver request to U.S. EPA complicated enforcement prospects for parts of the ACF rule that require federal authorization. The airport shuttle rule and some state‑and‑local elements of ACF do not require an EPA waiver; CARB said it would use permanent staff to implement provisions that do not require the waiver and to develop alternative approaches where federal authorization is pending.
LAO recommended the Legislature consider the waiver and enforcement uncertainty as it evaluates permanent conversions and asked for clarity on vacancy reductions elsewhere in CARB’s budget. Committee members questioned whether permanent positions are justified when some regulatory provisions cannot be enforced until or unless EPA grants relevant authorizations; CARB answered that long lead times and multi‑decade phase‑out schedules make permanent staffing more efficient and that many implementation tasks (reporting systems, outreach and voluntary compliance) are appropriate in the near term.
Committee members did not vote on the conversions at the hearing and directed CARB to provide additional detail on vacancy reductions, expected workloads and alternative actions CARB could take if federal authorizations remain unavailable.
