GRAIN VALLEY, Mo. — The Golden State has truckers seeing red these days. American owner-operators have joined the country’s carriers in trying to put a stop to a controversial rule which subjects trucks hauling reefers in California to extremely stringent emission standards.

The wildly unpopular Airborne Toxic Control Measure, proposed to the EPA by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), establishes tough, new environmental performance standards for any diesel-powered, in-use transport refrigeration units (TRU) and TRU generator sets that come into California, regardless of where the unit is baseplated.

The TRU standards, which are even stricter than upcoming federal diesel engine emission mandates, will be phased-in over time and vary depending upon the age of the engine. The rule requires reductions in PM emissions of at least 50 percent for older engines and 85 percent for engines newer than 2002. Operators would either have to retrofit or replace existing, non-compliant TRUs before bringing them into California.

Reefers with less than a 25-hp engines would have to be certified at 0.30 gallons per horsepower-hour, and units with more than a 25-horsepower engine would have to be certified at 0.22 gallons per horsepower-hour, according to CARB.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has now filed comments with the EPA echoing concerns also made by the American Trucking Associations. A few of the arguments both groups are voicing in an attempt to get the rule thrown out, include:

CARB lacks authority to affect interstate commerce
with its proposal for more stringent TRU rules: Truckers

Out-of-state carriers and owner-ops were not involved in CARB’s rulemaking process; that both California and out-of-state truckers are dramatically affected by the costs and other bourdons the rule imposes; that the rule would require carriers to segregate their fleets into approved and non-compliant divisions — a near impossibility considering how much freight is hauled into the state; that CARB failed to consider the technical feasibility and costs; and the rule is based on unproven technology, including diesel particulate filters — which are required for ’07 truck engines, but are not guaranteed to work in smaller TRUs.

More than 11,000 of OOIDA’s members identified refrigerated trailers as the primary type of equipment they pull, while thousands of other members pull them on a less frequent basis, the association says. Furthermore, over two-thirds of these members indicate that they buy used equipment, “which of course is less likely to be compliant with the CARB standards,” says OOIDA.

“Small fleet owners with 20 or fewer trucks make up approximately 95 percent of the industry. Further, these small business truckers typically operate on small profit margins without any extra equipment, a situation that would not allow them to segregate equipment for California and non-California operations,” wrote OOIDA President Jim Johnston, in a submission to EPA.

OOIDA’s comments allege CARB’s rule seriously underestimated the number of out-of-state TRUs affected by the proposed standard. “The 7,500 figure (established) by CARB doesn’t make any adjustment for the obvious fact that the same out-of-state TRUs can not possibly be entering California 365 days per year.”

OOIDA sites stats submitted by the ATA that finds, on the contrary, that the actual number of out-of-state TRUs in California over the course of a year is about 223,000, almost 30 times the number suggested by the CARB.

“CARB’s decision is arbitrary and capricious if the agency failed to consider the relevant factors and the relevant data relating to an important aspect of the problem or considered data that should not have been considered, and consequently has made a clear error in judgment,” writes Johnston, adding that CARB simply “paid lip service” to the number of truckers that would be affected by the rule.

The owner-op group continues by saying CARB failed to take a serious look at the economics of the refrigerated trucking industry. OOIDA and ATA suggest the cost of retrofitting or replacing TRUs, as required by CARB, could cost between $2,000 and $20,000.

“This is an industry where profit margins are small and overall earnings are generally low,” says Johnston. “Small business truckers, including those pulling refrigerated equipment, operate on especially tight budgets. These truckers have little choice but to buy used equipment and keep it longer than larger carriers, an option that will no longer be available if the CARB prevails.”

Furthermore, OOIDA, like ATA, suggests CARB lacks authority over out-of-state trucks operating in interstate commerce. Even if the TRU standards are satisfied, says the group, they should not be approved because the general rule governing state laws that affect interstate commerce, as set forth by the Supreme Court, is that the statute must “effectuate a legitimate local public interest, and its effects on interstate commerce are only incidental.”

“The EPA’s rejection of the proposed standards would not leave the CARB without viable alternatives for addressing the PM emissions problem in California,” OOIDA concludes. “To the contrary, it would only require the CARB to focus its attention on the real source of the problem, the facilities where refrigerated vehicles are forced to wait, often for several hours, to load and unload perishable freight.”