CARB and older trucks

You have a point, BUT...
It's no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take up the case. They only hear a small fraction of cases that make it that far up that narrow ladder. Secondly, don't count your chickens before they hatch. You MUST consider the makeup of the sitting justices to get an idea of how the vote may go. Even then you just don't know.

The Supreme Court can maintain the shape or reshape America. That is a big reason there is so much heated rhetoric around presidential election time. Not so much because of what the newly elected president may make law(there are checks and balances for that). But because of who he/she may nominate to the Supreme Court.
Like it or not... What they say goes!

 

First of all, the state of California can and will cite ANY truck that does not meet a state regulation. They rountinely cite trucks with trailers over 48' for the 40' kingpin to rear axle rule.Two years ago three nascar haulers were towed and impounded at the Banning scales for violating this rule. Will this be more ammo that OOIDA can fight with? Of course it will. There is no guarantee that this will ever reach the Supreme Court. Chances are it wont. Plus, there is no special equipment needed on a truck to be CA compliant. Every single truck, no matter where it is sold, that was made after model year 2007, is CARB compliant. That means it is NOT special equipment

 

1 - there is an agreement about bridges, weights and trucks that has been in place since at least the deregulation. The states are allowed to have that rule seeing that the states are also allowed to have their own road specs.

2 - the lawsuit has to be placed at the foot of the Supreme Court to decide, no where else. The sc knows this and will have to have a very good not to take the case on, like an order from the other two branches of government not to hear the case. one very important reason they will is the interstate commerce clause has been used for a lot of things by the Feds and preventing states from this stuff is the exact reason for the clause and mandate of federal power over the states. there is only one way that all of these things can be upheld as legal without gutting all of them which is to tell California that they can not force out of state trucks to have special equipment to enter the state. And plus the sc has already stated that the ICC gives only the Feds the power to regulate interstate commerce. For those who think that a lower curt can actually rule, it doesn't work that way. The 9th can not rule on the case or better put have it apply to say Michigan trucks because the 9th only applies to the western group of states, not binding in Michigan - where Michigan is covered by another court and the decision of the 9th can't apply to Michigan.

3 - the fitting of special equipment to qualify to enter the state is the issue, the solution for the kingpin length was fixed by having an adjustable wheel base trailer, but this also is used in other states to adjust weights on the axles so it is not California exclusive. However the need to have special equipment to enter the state of California is not an easy solution nor cost effective like a trailer change. The idea that every truck made after 2007 is ok to enter California is wrong, I have been driving a a 2014 western star that can't enter California but it has a 2012 engine in it, it has a sticker on the door and under the hood stating it is not CARB compliant, so there are a lot of gliders, older trucks and so in that is not allowed there.

4 - one solution would be to have all the states all agree to stricter emission standards but that is not likely to happen for at least another decade and it would also not take a lot of trucks off the road. California has to provide the exception to all out of state trucks because of the agreements they made, just like treaties, they become state law in a way. If California decided to go back on these agreements, then that means that their trucks will not be allowed in say Arizona because of a lack of a light or some other trivial thing. Or Nevada can decide to ban all California trucks or charge them ten dollars a mile to drive in Nevada.

5 - there is a question that can also be added to the one that the sc will rule on, can a state actually regulate international commerce seeing that is also a federal mandate. Ports are something else that would be off limits to any state on emissions and/or the limiting of citizens to a port for plying commence - in other words can the LA ports be forced to allow say a truck from Texas to enter without anything other than proper ID (TWIC card)?

 

amazing....the trucking has complete power over this country,and we cant get together to use it

 

The vote was today. There was so much testimony yesterday they could not vote. By the way let me re-phrase. Every 2007 and newer model year engine and are CARB compliant. So if you have a '14 western star thats a glider kit or have deleted the DPF, you are not CARB compliant. The port compliance in Oakland, Hueneme, and LA/Long Beach are totaly different they have their own rules. Botom line is that this rule something we fought tooth and nail and did not want. However it is law and everyone is going to have to comply. They wanna clean the air and have identified that PM soot from diesel engines is the biggest contributor. Trust me the US EPA will be on the bandwagon to make this a federal rule soon. Right, wrong or indifferent its gonna happen. We truckers in CA fought this for two years and lost.Everyone in this country wants cleaner air. All Im saying is it is wrong to punish the people who spent the money to comply by spending hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars by letting people get extensions or letting out of state trucks in that dont have to comply. If you wanna do business in CA, everyone is gonna have to play by the same rules

 

Lisa Kelly LIES!!!

retrofit requirement deadline extended to dec 2016 for small fleets who have been denied a loan on a new truck.

 

Where did you hear that? I guess those of us who complied with the law and bought new trucks or retrofitted our old ones got screwed

 

http://www.landlinemag.com/Story.aspx?StoryID=26926

 

Great.....a couple more years watching old iron rollin down the road, pretending that "this" piece must fall under the excemption. I have a question..........when the $^^&# are they gonna start ENFORCING?