Existing law requires the Secretary of State to prepare and mail to voters a state voter information guide and to make available the complete contents of the guide over the Internet. Existing law also requires the Secretary of State to establish processes to allow a voter to opt out of receiving the state voter information guide by mail and, instead, to either receive the guide in an electronic format or receive an electronic notification making the guide available by means of online access. Existing law also requires the Secretary of State to establish a procedure to permit a voter who has opted out of receiving the voter information guide by mail to again begin receiving the voter information guide by mail.

This bill would require the Secretary of State to post this opt-in procedure for receiving the guide by mail on his or her Internet web site.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Wieckowski, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: SB 962

SUBJECT: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: replacement tires

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law:

1. Sets, through the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and its implementing regulations, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants, designates air basins that do not achieve NAAQS as nonattainment, allows only California to set vehicular emissions standards stricter than the federal government, and allows other states to adopt either the federal or California vehicular emissions standards. (42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq.)
   
2. Establishes the ISO 28580 rolling resistance test method created by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. §17001 et seq.)
   

Existing European law:

1. Sets, among other things, through European Regulation 661/2009 as it read on January 1, 2018, rolling resistance and wet grip index standards for replacement tires concerning motor vehicles, their trailers and systems, components, and separate technical units.
   

Existing state law:

1. Establishes the Air Resources Board (ARB) as the air pollution control agency in California and requires the ARB, among other things, to control emissions from a wide array of mobile sources and implement the FCAA. (Health and Safety Code (HSC) §39500 et seq.)
   
2. Requires, under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (also known as AB 32), ARB to determine the 1990 statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions level and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit that is equivalent to that level to be achieved by 2020. (HSC §38500 et seq.)
   
3. Requires ARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the 1990 level by December 31, 2030. (i.e., SB 32). (HSC §38566)
   
4. Allows ARB, until December 31, 2030, to adopt regulations that utilize market-based compliance mechanisms. (HSC §38562)
   
5. Establishes the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) in the State Treasury, requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected pursuant to a market-based mechanism be deposited in the fund. (Government Code §16428.8)
   
6. Establishes, as a part of the Charge Ahead Initiative, the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (EFMP)—funded with moneys from the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Subaccount within the High Polluter Repair or Removal Account within the Vehicle Inspection and Repair Fund—to incentivize the voluntary retirement of passenger vehicles and light- and medium-duty trucks. (HSC §44125 et seq.)
   
7. Requires ARB to adopt and develop regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, or any other vehicles determined by ARB whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation. (HSC §43018.5)
   
8. Establishes the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (CEC) as the state’s primary energy policy and planning agency. (Public Resources Code (PRC) §25000 et seq.)
   
9. Establishes the California Tire Recycling Act to, among other things, reduce the number of used tires disposed in landfills and generate secondary uses for used tires. (PRC §42860 et seq.)
   

This bill:

1. Defines, among other things:
   
   1. “Cost effective” means that the amount of money a customer is expected to save from having a more fuel-efficient tire is larger than the additional cost to the customer for a tire that meets the stricter GHG standards.
      
   2. “European Union Stage II standards” means the Stage II limits contained in European Regulation 661/2009, as it read on January 1, 2018.
      
   3. “Replacement tire” means a tire sold in the state that is designed to replace a tire sold with a new passenger car or light-duty truck, as specified.
      
2. Requires ARB, on or before December 31, 2019, through a public process, to adopt a regulation that is no less strict than European Union Stage II standards for rolling resistance and wet grip index unless alternate standards achieve equivalent or greater GHG emissions reductions and wet grip traction, and are cost-effective, as specified.
   
   1. Requires that the regulation maximize consumer cost savings and GHG emissions reductions while avoiding or minimizing any potential for adverse impacts on the average life of replacement tires and state efforts to manage scrap tires pursuant to the California Tire Recycling Act.
      
   2. Requires ARB to make reasonable efforts to estimate the fuel cost savings for consumers and increased range for plug-in electric vehicles that result from the standards.
      
   3. Requires that the standards apply to all replacement tires manufactured 12 months after the effective date of the standards taking effect.
      
   4. Requires ARB to allow the operator or operators of an authorized emergency vehicle fleet (as defined in Vehicle Code §165) to purchase tires for those vehicles that do not meet the standards if no tire that meets the standard is available.
      
   5. Requires ARB to review and revise the standards as necessary as long as revisions do not result in increased GHG emissions.
      
   6. Requires ARB to determine an appropriate compliance mechanism, including, but not limited to, testing, reporting, and consideration of a passenger vehicle tire database that designates compliant products.
      
3. Allows, but does not require, ARB to establish a fuel-efficient passenger vehicle tire incentive program to promote the development of the efficient tire market and the adoption of premium efficient tires in the state, on or before December 31, 2019, but requires the program to have an effective date of no later than December 31, 2020.
   
4. Requires, among other possible funding sources, ARB to consider GGRF moneys to fund the program, as well as consider opportunities to coordinate with existing incentive programs, including, but not limited to, EFMP.
   
5. Requires, among other things, ARB to establish a pilot program to identify major market barriers to the adoption of highly efficient tires and effective intervention mechanisms followed by the evaluation of and potential implementation of a full-scale market transformation program in the state.
   
6. Requires ARB to determine an appropriate method for tire manufacturer certification as well as the verification of manufacturer certifications, as specified.
   
7. Requires ARB, as specified, to evaluate the benefits of implementing a labeling program for replacement tires sold in the state with the stated legislative intent that the potential labeling program to provide additional GHG emissions reductions, wet grip benefits, and fuel savings benefits.
   

Background

1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). NHTSA is the federal agency charged with writing and enforcing safety standards for motor vehicles, as well as regulations for motor vehicle theft resistance and fuel economy (known as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards). NHTSA also licenses vehicle manufacturers and importers, deals with the import of vehicles and safety-regulated vehicle parts, administers the vehicle identification number (VIN) system, develops the anthropomorphic dummies used in safety testing and the associated test protocols, and provides vehicle insurance cost information.
   
   Tire safety is a subset the safety standards NHTSA develops, for which it holds federal preemptive authority. As such, NHTSA developed a test method for rolling resistance for tires. Unfortunately, different labs performing the same tests on the same tires produces wildly variable results, indicating the test method is not producing reliable results.
   
   Although results are slowly improving, an accuracy of +/- 2.0% was reported in NHTSA’s 2009 regulatory analysis of testing 600 tires across 2 labs. ISO 28580 recognizes that lab to lab variability is much higher and thus, relies on two things happening to get to these accuracy levels. The first is that a “reference tire” and a “reference lab” be identified and used. That is to say, there is a golden tire tested at a golden lab that all other labs must then use as a benchmark. No such golden tire or golden lab has yet been identified.
   
   The second is that all other labs must periodically test against that golden tire and golden lab results and make adjustments to their results to correct them back to a theoretical point. Establishing the reference tire and lab is not a trivial task and it is unclear at this point how well those two items will really work out in wide scale implementation across the nation, let alone across global tire testing labs that would be used by regulators and tire manufacturers.
   
   Are the EU and the USA currently doing any significant validation that labs are adhering to these specifications? Without oversight, the labs may be incentivized to falsify the data to say they are within specification just as much as the claim they are incentivized to actually stay within specification to avoid burdensome test procedures.
   
2. Rolling resistance and wet grip. Rolling resistance is a measure of the friction between the tire and the road. By using a tire with low rolling resistance, the amount of energy needed to overcome the friction between the tire and the road and move the vehicle forward decreases. This can lead to improvements in fuel efficiency, which reduces both the air pollution and GHGs emitted from vehicles.
   
   Wet grip is a measurement of how well a tire grips the road while moving when the road and tire are wet (such as the case when it rains). Wet grip is ultimately a safety feature. By increasing the grip a tire has on the road when it is wet—which ultimately increases the friction between the tire and the road—the likelihood of hydroplaning (i.e., sliding uncontrollably on the wet surface of a road) decreases.
   
   While reduced friction between a tire and the road improves the air quality and climate change impacts of motor vehicle use, it also reduces the safety of the tire in wet conditions. The right balance of rolling resistance and wet grip is, therefore, a difficult determination to make, and one for which the ARB has neither the expertise to determine nor the authority to regulate.
   
   Previously, AB 844 (Nation, Chapter 645, Statutes of 2003) required the CEC to develop a statewide replacement tire efficiency program to promote the use of fuel efficient tires. As the completion of that work neared, NHTSA began to look at regulating rolling resistance and wet grip so the state took a “wait and see” approach to what the federal government would do. In the intervening years, NHTSA has only adopted a rolling resistance test method.
   
3. AB 1493 (Pavley, Chapter, Statutes of 2002). AB 1493 was signed into law in 2002 and requires ARB to adopt and develop regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, or any other vehicles determined by ARB whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation. These standards required a waiver under the FCAA to implement.
   
   Under Section 209 of the FCAA, the US EPA Administrator is obligated to grant the waiver unless there is evidence that (1) the proposed standards are not more protective of public health and welfare than the federal standards, (2) the state does not need stricter standards given a set of compelling and extraordinary circumstances (e.g., pollution could be abated using the less strict federal standards), and (3) the proposed standards are not consistent with Section 202(a) of the FCAA (this section prescribes the US EPA Administrator’s scope of the authority to regulate emissions from all classes of motor vehicles and their engines). In other words, the process of California being granted a waiver is ministerial, or nondiscretionary on the part of the Administrator.
   
   Although California has ultimately prevailed in receiving every one of the nearly 150 waiver requests it has made, California has faced federal administrations in the past that have not supported the stricter standards we have set that are necessary to meet our obligations under the federal and state law.
   
   In 2005, the US EPA under President Bush failed to act on a waiver request made by California. The state informed then-Administrator Johnson of their intent to sue for delay. Ultimately, the US EPA denied the waiver request, triggering a lawsuit by California against the US EPA.
   
   While that lawsuit was pending in the courts, there was a change of administration and the EPA, under president Obama, reversed the denial and granted the waiver request. This approval made the lawsuit moot and the ARB finally implemented the Pavley standards in California on September 24, 2009.
   
4. Tire recycling. California has more registered vehicles than any other state. As a result, approximately than 44 million reusable and waste tires are generated each year. Tire stockpiles pose a potential threat to public health, so the Legislature required the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to find new uses for used tires.
   
   For the last year numbers are available, CalRecycle staff estimates that of the approximately 42 million reusable and waste tires generated in 2015, approximately 80.9% were diverted through various alternatives, including reuse, retreading, and combustion.
   
   Currently, the recycling markets in California do not consume all of the waste tires generated. Waste tires need to be stored safely until sufficient markets are in place to increase the consumption of waste tires. CalRecycle provides the proper waste tire management framework by enforcing waste tire facilities and waste tire hauler regulations. As the use of tires as feedstock material in commercial applications increases, illegal stockpiling and the need for permitted storage will decrease or cease to exist.
   
   SB 962 includes a provision to avoid or minimize any potential for adverse impacts on the average life of replacement tires and state efforts to manage scrap tires pursuant to the California Tire Recycling Act.
   

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author, “new vehicles are equipped with tires that have low rolling resistance designed to boost the new car’s fuel economy rating to ensure the automaker meets federal requirements. However, there is no comparable incentive for aftermarket replacement tires to maintain that efficiency. So when California consumers replace their tires, the less efficient replacement tires cause the consumer to spend more money on gasoline and increase the amount of pollution and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
   
   “Recent research shows that consumers can save $750 or more over the lifetime of passenger vehicles with a typical family saving between $50-$100 per year in fuel costs, quickly repaying any incremental costs and then providing net savings to consumers. According to prior estimates by the California Energy Commission, improving the rolling resistance of these tires by 10% could result in $882 million in customer cost savings and 2.7 million metric tons of GHG emissions annually, which is equal to 12% of California’s transportation goal additional GHG reductions by 2030 (in addition to policies already in place).”
   
   “The technology is available to ensure consumers can buy efficient tires for passenger cars and trucks, however, without a state standard and with no way for consumers to identify efficient tires, tire manufactures lack an incentive to offer consumers a better product in California.”
   
2. Rolling resistance standards in the heavy duty market. The author’s staff claims that “ARB has also established low rolling resistance efficiency standards for tractor-trailer tires as part of the agency’s efforts to reduce emissions from heavy duty vehicles.” Unfortunately, that claim is not accurate.
   
   ARB staff worked jointly with US EPA and NHTSA on phase 2 of the federal GHG emission standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. These federal phase 2 standards were built on the improvements in engine and vehicle efficiency required by the phase 1 emission standards (phase 1 came about as a result of the Pavley standards passed in 2002). In the California phase 2 standards, California is aligning with the federal phase 2 standards in structure, timing, and stringency, but with some minor differences.
   
   Therefore, ARB has not established a rolling resistance standard for tractor-trailer tires as part of the agency’s efforts to reduce emissions from heavy duty vehicles. Rather, ARB has indicated it does not have any plans to develop an independent procedure for heavy duty tires and intends to use federal standards—specifically the “SmartWay” standard—for phase 2, but that is dependent on the federal government completing the certification that is currently underway.
   
3. An uphill battle. On May 19, 2017, Assemblymembers Reyes, Limón, C. Garcia, and Senator Skinner sent a letter asking ARB to consider a pilot level incentive program for fuel efficient replacement tires. In her response, Chair Nichols noted that, “regarding fuel-efficient passenger vehicle replacement tires [ARB had] previously considered an incentives pilot project for low rolling resistance tires and did not proceed due to the absence of California or federal certification standards for low rolling resistance tires.”
   
   ARB gave such a program consideration in fiscal year 2015-16 and reached the conclusion that such a program is still not feasible two years later. Specifically, Chair Nichols quoted the following findings in her response, “staff considered an incentives pilot project for the purchase of low rolling resistance tires to increase use of this technology in the replacement tire market. This technology holds promise for obtaining increased fuel efficiencies and emission reductions in the light-duty fleet. However, staff does not recommend such a project at this time because low rolling resistance tires are not yet certified either nationally or in California (ARB does not have certification authority for this technology), so there is no uniform standard in place to identify tires as low rolling resistance tires or to verify emission reductions. More study is needed to verify potential fuel savings and emission reductions, and further analysis is needed regarding which vehicles are appropriate for low rolling resistance tires. ARB will monitor the National Highway Safety Traffic Administration’s tire rating program and, if appropriate, reconsider this type of project in future funding cycles.”
   
   Additionally, Chair Nichols wrote, “The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has a process and rulemaking to establish certification standards for low rolling resistance tires and new tire labeling, which could include a metric for rolling resistance. Once these standards are established, there will be an objective way to reasonably quantify benefits and to identify which tires truly would be low rolling resistance. CARB continues to monitor the NHTSA processes and recognizes that regulating all replacement tires to meet a minimum low rolling resistance could have real greenhouse gas benefits for all communities.”
   
   “In addition and in recognition of the potential greenhouse gas benefits associated with low rolling resistance tires, in the 2017 Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, CARB identifies the potential additional action to promote research for low rolling resistance tires in the replacement tire market, specifically certification standards to identify tires as low rolling resistance tires or to verify emission reductions and potential fuel savings.”
   
   It is important to note the distinction between what Assemblymembers Reyes, Limón, C. Garcia, and Senator Skinner asked for in their letter—a pilot level incentive program for fuel efficient replacement tires—and what SB 962 calls for—mandating that replacement tire standards adopted by a foreign power be enshrined in California statute in addition to an incentive pilot program. The difference, however, is marginal in the face of the reasoning ARB had for not moving forward with a regulation or incentive program for fuel efficient tires in the first place.
   
   That is, the right balance of rolling resistance and wet grip is a difficult determination to make, and one for which the ARB has neither the expertise to determine nor the authority to regulate. Of course, the Legislature could avoid dealing with that problem by trusting the work done by the European Union and simply adopt their regulations into statute. However, this leaves the regulating agency little ability to be dynamic and flexible in response to changing realities.
   
   Furthermore, as noted in the background, ARB is already required to adopt and develop regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, or any other vehicles determined by ARB whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation. Low rolling resistance tires clearly fall under that mandate, which is why ARB has considered the policy proposed in SB 962 before, but determined they could not move forward with the policy.
   
   Given that, the Committee may wish to consider whether this bill should move forward.
   
4. May or shall. SB 962 has a provision that states “on or before December 31, 2019, the state board may establish a fuel-efficient passenger vehicle tire incentive program …” (Emphasis added.)
   
   SB 962 goes on to “require the program adopted pursuant to this section to have an effective date of no later than December 31, 2020.” (Emphasis added.)
   
   It appears that ARB has the leeway to decide whether or not to establish the incentive program, but that if ARB does decide to establish an incentive program, it must do so by the end of next year, giving roughly a year of lead time before the program goes into effect.
   
   ARB has already expressed good reasons for not moving forward on this policy and nothing is likely to change with regard to a federal standard on rolling resistance and wet grip.
   
   Given that, a question arises as to the likely outcome of ARB’s decision on whether an incentive program is warranted.
   
5. Lawful uses of GGRF moneys. Legislative Counsel has opined that until January 1, 2021, it is unlawful for the Legislature to use GGRF moneys for purposes that are not reasonably related to the reduction of GHG emissions. Given that the program envisioned in SB 962 is directly related the reduction of GHG emissions from motor vehicles due to the tires impact on fuel economy, the program would be a lawful use of GGRF moneys.
   
6. Trust, but verify. On March 8, 2016 and again on March 21, 2017, the Senate Environmental Quality and Transportation and Housing Committees held joint hearings on the Volkswagen emissions cheating scandal. In those hearings, the Committees learned that European regulators failed to notice that Volkswagen had installed emissions cheating devices on several of its diesel models. It was ARB and US federal government that finally caught Volkswagen.
   
   Given that, a question arises as to whether it is prudent for California to trust the work of the European Union without verification.
   
7. Federal government involvement. As noted in the background, NHTSA has preemptive authority over tire safety standards, so any program or standards ARB develops would require the cooperation of the current federal government. Furthermore, what work NHTSA has done has produced unreliable results regarding rolling resistance for tires.
   
   Given the lack of progress NHTSA has made, a question arises as to whether any efforts undertaken in California would ever come to fruition.
   
8. Avoiding a long bill. Through SB 962, the author is putting many pages of European Union regulations into statute by reference as a “floor” for a future ARB rulemaking. Because those regulations may cease to exist at some point in the future, for transparency reasons it would be most appropriate to put all of that content into the Health and Safety Code rather than simply referencing it. However, it is understandable that the author may have wished to avoid a bill that seems unnecessarily long by simply referencing the regulations.
   

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 844 (Nation, Chapter 645, Statutes of 2003) requires the CEC to develop a statewide replacement tire efficiency program to promote the use of fuel efficient tires.

AB 1493 (Pavley, Chapter , Statutes of 2002) requires ARB to adopt and develop regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from passenger vehicles, light-duty trucks, or any other vehicles determined by ARB whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation.

DOUBLE REFERRAL:

If this measure is approved by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee, the do pass motion must include the action to re-refer the bill to the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee.

SOURCE:

Author

SUPPORT:

Natural Resources Defense Council

OPPOSITION:

None on file

-- END --