BEP Reopens Public Comment on Elective Vehicle Sales Mandate

AUGUSTA – The Maine Board of Environmental Protection (BEP) has reopened Public Comment on the Chapter 127-A: Advanced Clean Cars II Program, also known as the “California Rule.” The public comment period extends until February 5, 2024.

In response to a citizen petition, this new rule was proposed to establish motor vehicle emission standards for new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles by incorporating the requirements of the California Advanced Clean Cars II regulations, beginning the model year 2027.

A public hearing on the proposed Chapter 127-A was held on August 17, 2023, and the comment period closed on August 28, 2023. A final vote on the proposed rule was scheduled for the Board meeting on December 21, 2023. However, due to the state of emergency resulting from the December 18 storm, that meeting was canceled. This prevented a Board vote on whether to adopt the proposed rule and forced any potential adoption beyond the rule’s proposed effective date of January 1, 2024. This also prevents the rule from taking effect in time to apply to the 2027 model year. Therefore, the proposed rule has been amended to begin with model year 2028, and the Department is now requesting comments from the public concerning this substantive change. The Department has also proposed other non-substantive changes to the proposal.

Since the public hearing was already held in August, comments may be made by email. The deadline for commenting is now February 5, 2024.

Communications Director’s Note: To the best of my knowledge, the Grange has not taken a position on the adoption of this rule. Since this is a very substantive change, I am providing this information for those who wish to share their personal thoughts and opinions. If you do so, please do not imply or claim you represent the Grange!

UPDATE: According to an article in the Portland Press Herald, the BEP will ask the Legislature to revise state law to authorize lawmakers, not state agencies, to adopt and enforce standards deemed as “major substantive” changes rather than have them handled by an agency. Most recently, however, there has been some discussion suggesting that the requested revision would NOT impact the existing potential rule change since it is already under consideration. The revision requested would only apply to future rule changes and adoptions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *