EPA schedules hearing on California zero-emissions units

PMC · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm **Posts:** 2876

"The CARB regulation would ban any locomotive that is 23 years or older from operating in California. The regulation sets dates after which all locomotives with engines built after certain years must operate in a “zero-emission configuration"." Hopefully the second sentence means that older preserved units could still operate, depending on the cutoff: https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... egulation/

PCook · **Joined:** Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:16 am **Posts:** 2127

I wonder if these regulations are also applied to the same equipment builders engines in marine and stationary power generating service in California. The EMD engines in some power plants are over the age cited. Most EMD 645 engines in marine service are 40 or more years old. For an example, USS NIMITZ has four EMD 645 engines that went into service around 1975. This class of ships berth in California frequently.

PC

CaliforniaSteamin · **Joined:** Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:13 pm **Posts:** 4

Did anyone on this board attend the hearing? Looking for some general notes on the different testimonies, considering this rule does affect heritage rail operations in some capacity.

PMC · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm **Posts:** 2876

CaliforniaSteamin wrote:

Did anyone on this board attend the hearing? Looking for some general notes on the different testimonies, considering this rule does affect heritage rail operations in some capacity.

After much searching I found this link, could be relevant, could be a crank, and I don't like those "cancel any time" subscription things, If you give it a go let us know: https://insideepa.com/daily-news/rail-s ... otive-rule Eventually the EPA will post the meeting video on utube.

Brian Norden · **Posted:** Fri Mar 22, 2024 9:10 pm

Earlier this week, the BNSF sent this email to their "Friends of the BNSF" email list:

Quote:

We sent an email this morning to friends like you nationwide, requesting help on a new proposal in California that could negatively impact rail transportation across the U.S., our national supply chain, and our economy (read more below). Unfortunately, some of you received a faulty link — we apologize for the error. Please click on the updated link below to take action on this important issue:

The California Air Resources Board has proposed well-intentioned but ill-conceived regulations that would require companies like BNSF to use zero-emission locomotives in California, despite the fact that the technology is not ready, and it’s not clear when it will be. Complying with these regulations would cost freight rail companies hundreds of millions per year, diverting resources from existing emission-reduction projects and potentially halting or canceling them altogether.

It’s a lose-lose deal.

We must swiftly voice our concerns about these proposed regulations. Stopping the proposal ensures the effectiveness and efficiency of our rail network, and it allows time and resources to develop the freight rail network of tomorrow.

You can learn more and send a note to oppose the regulation by clicking here.

The effect of the regulation would be devastating:

Our supply chain would suffer without new rail projects that improve efficiency, increasing costs for shippers and consumers.
It will slow our transition to lower-emission locomotives.
Cargo will shift away from rail, the most environmentally-friendly way to move freight over land.
Rail projects in the works would be canceled, eliminating thousands of well-paying jobs and supply chain efficiencies.
Small business short line railroads will go out of business, unable to take on the cost of compliance.

There are two ways to help:

Send an email – We’ve pre-written an email you can edit and send to decision-makers to ensure clean technology and infrastructure projects may continue in California.

Testify at a hearing – Attend a virtual public hearing on March 20, 2024, beginning at 7:00 a.m. (Pacific Time), to share comments concerning the proposed rules. Sign up here.

Thank you for taking a moment to oppose this ineffective, patchwork approach and support a realistic pursuit of lower- and zero-emission locomotives.

Sincerely,

BNSF Team

The email also had a couple of hot links for possible messages to send to the EPA.

Overmod · **Joined:** Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm **Posts:** 2492

E-mail address that was used to register for the Zoom hearing -- this would be the first place to ask for a copy of the recorded proceedings:

EPAPublicHearing@icf.com

PDF list of participants in the hearingL

https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/ca-nonrd-eng-pollution-control-publ-hearing-speakers-2024-03-20.pdf

PMC · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm **Posts:** 2876

Scuttled: https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... egulation/

They probably don't want the incoming administration to be able to make a big to-do about cancelling California's waivers.

rea_reefwagon · **Joined:** Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:52 am **Posts:** 39

My betting money is the state waivers and any Chevron deference aspects are toast regardless of trains.

ironeagle2006 · **Joined:** Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:27 am **Posts:** 142

CA is about to be hit with a very BIG Freaking Hammer from the Federal Government from what I have been told from several sources inside the logistics industry.