‘Costly and burdensome’

The trucking industry is not ready for electric vehicles.

That was the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association’s message to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during a hearing in May.

On May 2, the EPA held a public hearing for its Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles – Phase 3 proposed rule, which would require a quarter of new heavy trucks sold in the U.S. to be all-electric by 2032.

Dozens of stakeholders spoke out for and against the proposal, including representatives for OOIDA.

In his testimony, OOIDA Executive Vice President Lewie Pugh pointed out that the Association has expressed its concerns with emission mandates since the early stages of the Cleaner Trucks Initiative in November 2018. Five years later, EPA is proposing another “costly and burdensome” rule, Pugh said.

Pugh also brought up concerns with the charging infrastructure, or the lack thereof.

“The Phase 3 rule is also a blatant attempt to force consumers into purchasing electric vehicles while a national charging infrastructure network remains absent for heavy-duty commercial trucks,” Pugh said. “Professional drivers are skeptical of (electric vehicle) costs, mileage range, battery weight and safety, charging time, and availability. It’s baffling that the EPA is pushing forward with more impractical emissions timelines without first addressing these overwhelming concerns with electric (commercial motor vehicles).”

OOIDA Board Member Monte Wiederhold spoke about the past mistakes the EPA has made with emission standards.

“Downtime became so costly, many truckers lost their businesses and their livelihoods,” Wiederhold said. “Trucks became less reliable. Now we’re told that (electric vehicles) are the way to go.”

Wiederhold brought up how batteries for an electric truck will add several tons to the weight of the truck. Consequently, electric trucks force truckers to carry less cargo.

“While there is nothing wrong with looking for alternative fuels, it seems this administration seeks punitive measures to force truckers to comply with these standards,” Wiederhold said.

Danny Schnautz, also an OOIDA board member, told the EPA the effects of a truck breaking down, which happens often with new, unproven technology.

“Drivers are affected by breakdowns,” Schnautz said.“The family budget is affected and the family schedule. Another issue is the supply chain, where broken heavy trucks delay loads. We’re all worried about supply chain reliability, and here we are with advanced technologies that fail often.”

Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles – Phase 3

The EPA’s proposed emission standards for heavy trucks would require a quarter of new heavy trucks sold in the U.S. to be all-electric by 2032.

According to the EPA’s 717-page proposal, the upfront cost difference between an electric truck and an internal combustion engine truck is $582 for a short-haul daycab tractor. However, that price difference skyrockets to $14,712 for long-haul sleeper cab tractors.

The proposal complements the criteria pollutant standards for model year 2027 and beyond heavy-duty vehicles that EPA finalized in December 2022 and represents the third phase of EPA’s Clean Trucks Plan.

EPA is proposing stronger carbon dioxide standards for model year 2027 heavy-duty vehicles that go beyond the current emission standards that apply under the HD Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas program. EPA also is proposing an additional set of carbon dioxide standards for heavy-duty vehicles that would begin to apply in model year 2028, with progressively lower standards each model year through 2032.

“By proposing the most ambitious pollution standards ever for cars and trucks, we are delivering on the Biden-Harris administration’s promise to protect people and the planet, securing critical reductions in dangerous air and climate pollution, and ensuring significant economic benefits like lower fuel and maintenance costs for families,” EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan said in a statement.

Senate votes to overturn emission mandate

A resolution aimed at overturning the EPA’s stringent emission mandate for heavy-duty trucks narrowly passed the Senate on April 26.

Utilizing a swing vote from Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., the Congressional Review Act joint resolution passed with a vote of 50-49.

The EPA’s final rule was announced by the agency in December and took effect on March 27. The rule would impose strict clean air standards for heavy-duty trucks beginning with model year 2027.

In February, Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., introduced a measure to overturn the rulemaking.

“The irony is, the prices of newer vehicles will escalate, incentivizing truckers and businesses to hold onto their older, higher-emitting trucks,” Fischer said on the Senate floor. “Smaller, more affordable trucking businesses will close up shop, and the ones that can afford higher prices will raise their rates. This means consumers will be paying more money to a smaller group of businesses.”

Fischer received full support from Republican senators, and Manchin’s vote brought the measure across the finish line.

The measure will now move to the House, where Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, already introduced a similar bill.

However, President Joe Biden is expected to veto the measure if it passes the House.

“Over time, the final rule will prevent hundreds of premature deaths, thousands of childhood asthma cases, and millions of lost school days every year for the tens of millions of Americans who live, work, and go to school near roadways with high truck volume including truck freight routes,” according to a White House statement. “If Congress were to pass S.J. Res. 11, the president would veto it.”

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association supports the resolution to overturn the mandate.

“If small-business truckers can’t afford the new, compliant trucks, they’re going to stay with older, less efficient trucks, or leave the industry entirely,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said. “Once again, EPA has largely ignored the warnings and concerns raised by truckers in this latest rule.” LL

Land Line’s Mark Schremmer contributed to this article.