CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
390regulations), forms incorporated by reference, the 
Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information 
upon which the proposed rulemaking is based. The 
Notice, the express terms, program forms, the Initial 
Statement of Reasons, and any information upon 
which the proposed rulemaking is based are available 
at https://oag.doj.ca.gov/charities/reg . Please refer to 
the contact information listed above to obtain copies 
of these documents.
AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR  
MODIFIED TEXT
After the Department analyzes all timely and 
relevant comments received during the 45–day public 
comment period, the Department will either adopt 
these regulations substantially as described in this 
Notice or make modifications based on the comments. 
If the Department makes modifications which are 
sufficiently related to the originally–proposed text, 
it will make the modified text (with the changes 
clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 
15 days before the Department adopts the regulations 
as revised. Please send requests for copies of any 
modified regulations to the attention of the name and 
address indicated above. The Department will accept 
written comments on the modified regulations for 15 
days after the date on which they are made available.
AVAILABILITY OF THE FINAL  
STATEMENT OF REASONS
Upon its completion, a copy of the Final Statement 
of Reasons will be available on the Department’s 
website at https://oag.doj.ca.gov/charities/reg . Please 
refer to the contact information listed above to obtain 
a written copy of the Final Statement of Reasons.
A V AILABILITY OF  
DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET
Copies of this Notice, the express terms, program 
forms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any 
information upon which the proposed rulemaking is 
based are available on the Department’s website at 
https://oag.doj.ca.gov/charities/reg .
TITLE 13.  AIR RESOURCES BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO 
CONSIDER PROPOSED CLEAN  
MILES STANDARD
The California Air Resources Board (CARB or 
Board) will conduct a public hearing at the date and time noted below to consider approving for adoption 
the proposed Clean Miles Standard.
Date: May 20, 2021  
Time: 11:00 a.m.
Please see the public agenda which will be posted 
ten days before the May 20, 2021, Board Meeting 
for any appropriate direction regarding a possible 
remote–only Board Meeting. If the meeting is to be 
held in person, it will be held at the California Air 
Resources Board, Byron Sher Auditorium, 1001 I 
Street, Sacramento, California 95814.
This item will be considered at a meeting of the 
Board, which will commence at 11:00 a.m., May 20, 
2021, and may continue at 8:30 a.m., on May 21, 2021. 
Please consult the agenda for the hearing, which will 
be available at least ten days before May 20, 2021, 
to determine the day on which this item will be 
considered.
WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD AND 
SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS
In accordance with the Administrative Procedure 
Act, interested members of the public may present 
comments orally or in writing during the hearing and 
may provide comments by postal mail or by electronic 
submittal before the hearing. The public comment 
period for this regulatory action will begin on April 
2, 2021. Written comments not submitted during the 
hearing must be submitted on or after April 2, 2021, 
and received no later than  May 17, 2021. Comments 
submitted outside that comment period are considered 
untimely. CARB may, but is not required to, respond 
to untimely comments, including those raising 
significant environmental issues. CARB requests that 
when possible, written and email statements be filed 
at least ten days before the hearing to give CARB staff 
and Board members additional time to consider each 
comment. The Board also encourages members of the 
public to bring to the attention of staff in advance of 
the hearing any suggestions for modification of the 
proposed regulatory action. Comments submitted in 
advance of the hearing must be addressed to one of 
the following:
Postal mail:  
 Clerks’ Office, California Air Resources Board  
 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814
Electronic submittal : 
https://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bclist.php
Please note that under the California Public Records 
Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.), your written and 
oral comments, attachments, and associated contact 
information (e.g., your address, phone, email, etc.) CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
391
become part of the public record and can be released 
to the public upon request.
Additionally, the Board requests but does not 
require that persons who submit written comments to 
the Board reference the title of the proposal in their 
comments to facilitate review.
AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE
This regulatory action is proposed under the 
authority granted in Health and Safety Code sections 
39600, 39601, 38530, 39600, 39601, 39607, and 
43000.5; and Public Utilities Code section 5450. This 
action is proposed to implement, interpret, and make 
specific these sections, including Public Utilities Code 
section 5450. This regulatory action also references 
Government Code sections 65301 and 65080; Health 
and Safety Code section 44274.4; Public Utilities 
Code sections 5360 and 5431; Streets and Highways 
Code sections 890.4 and 891.2; Vehicle Code sections 
27908 and 38750; and California Code of Regulations, 
title 13, sections 1961, 1961.3, 1962, and 1962.2.
INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF  
PROPOSED ACTION AND POLICY 
STATEMENT OVERVIEW  
(Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision (a)(3))
Sections Affected:  Proposed adoption to California 
Code of Regulations, title 13, section(s) 2490, 2490.1, 
2490.2, 2490.3, 2490.4, and 2490.5.
BACKGROUND AND EFFECT OF THE 
PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION
Although California has made progress with 
reducing emissions, there is still a long road ahead. 
With transportation emissions continuing to rise 
despite increases in fuel efficiency and decreases in the 
carbon content of fuel, California will not achieve the 
necessary greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions 
to meet mandates for 2030 and beyond without 
further action, including the regulation proposed in 
this notice. Specifically, CARB’s 2030 Scoping Plan 
Update identifies that reductions in single–occupancy 
vehicle travel are necessary to achieve the statewide 
emissions target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 
2030. Transitioning the transportation sector to zero–
emission vehicles (ZEVs) and reducing vehicle miles 
traveled (VMT) are critical to achieving California’s 
health protection goals, minimizing air pollution 
exposure, and mitigating climate change impacts, 
particularly to achieve the 2045 carbon neutrality goal.
To promote these purposes, Senate Bill 1014 
(Skinner, Stats. 2018, ch. 369) — the Clean Miles 
Standard and Incentive Program of 2018 — directs CARB to adopt and the California Public Utilities 
Commission (CPUC) to implement the Clean Miles 
Standard (CMS) program to place environmental 
requirements on transportation network companies 
(TNCs) in California. The proposed CMS regulation 
is a first–of–its–kind, in–use light–duty fleet rule for 
reducing emissions in the TNC sector. Electrification 
targets are set using the metric of percent electric 
vehicle miles traveled (eVMT) and GHG emission 
targets are set using the metric of grams of CO2 per 
passenger–mile–traveled (g CO2/PMT). The required 
targets direct TNCs to increase miles driven by 
cleaner vehicles, including zero emission vehicles 
(ZEVs). The GHG emission target also encourages 
a reduction of VMT relative to passenger miles 
traveled (PMT) through strategies such as increasing 
pooled (or shared) rides and decreasing deadhead 
miles, which are excess miles associated with TNC 
vehicles driving without passengers. Furthermore, 
the proposed regulation will support active transport 
and public transit by providing regulatory compliance 
credits for use with the GHG emission target when 
TNCs facilitate those modes of travel.
Background
Innovations are emerging in the transportation sector 
to meet the needs of Californians. TNCs provide on–
demand rides through a technology–based platform 
by connecting passengers with drivers using their 
personal or rental vehicles. They are well–positioned 
to help state and local agencies meet air quality and 
climate goals through electrification. In fact, the 
two largest TNCs in California, Uber and Lyft, have 
already been at the forefront of experimenting with 
electrification through various pilot programs in the 
U.S. and globally.
ZEV technology is a good fit for the ride–hailing 
platform. ZEVs are uniquely suited for frequent 
stop–start driving of ride–hail operations, given the 
lack of engine start and idling emissions, and the 
technology’s smooth acceleration enhances the driver 
and rider experience. Not only does more use of ZEVs 
benefit the environment; it also benefits drivers and 
the communities those drivers serve. Zero–emission 
technology in a TNC fleet provides environmental 
benefits, while drivers could benefit economically 
by switching to a ZEV. Even with the current higher 
purchase cost of ZEVs, lower fuel and maintenance 
costs lead to net savings over the lifetime of the vehicle.
Additionally, VMT reduction through pooling, 
reducing deadhead miles and mode shifting to active 
transportation and transit will ensure that TNCs 
become a more sustainable transportation option, 
reducing overall emissions.
Summary of the Proposal
The proposed regulation is the first in–use, light–
duty fleet regulation developed by the CARB, and the CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
392first to address environmental requirements for ride–
hailing services specifically. The specific requirements 
proposed in this regulation are two targets, including 
an electrification target in the metric of percent eVMT 
and a GHG emission target in the metric of grams of 
CO2 per passenger–mile–traveled (g CO2/PMT).
The electrification and GHG targets start in 2023 at 
2 percent eVMT and 252 g CO2/PMT, respectively, and 
slowly increase in stringency to 90 percent eVMT and 
0 g CO2/PMT in 2030. The electrification targets can 
only be met with electric miles driven with passengers 
in the car using a battery electric vehicle (BEV) or a 
fuel–cell electric vehicle (FCEV). TNCs have a menu 
of options for reducing their company–wide GHG 
emissions to comply with the annual targets. These 
include improving fleet–wide fuel efficiency, reducing 
VMT by increasing shared rides, reducing VMT by 
reducing deadhead miles, and earning CO2 credits  by 
investing in active transportation infrastructure, or by 
providing integrated fare services to connect riders to 
mass transit. The proposed regulation also includes 
requirements for annual data submittals, annual 
compliance reports, and biennial compliance plans.
Small TNCs whose operations result in five million 
annual VMT or less statewide will be exempt from 
meeting electrification and GHG targets. Small TNCs 
are not exempt, however, from continued annual data 
submittals as part of the TNC permit requirement. 
Small TNCs are also exempt from the requirement 
to submit two–year (biennial) plans and annual 
compliance reports. If a small TNC grows to exceed 
five million VMT in a given calendar year, they will 
be subject to the requirements beginning the following 
calendar year.
CARB may also consider other changes to the 
sections affected, as listed on page two of this notice, 
during the course of this rulemaking process.
OBJECTIVES AND BENEFITS OF THE 
PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION
The proposed regulation will decrease GHG 
emissions, criteria pollutant emissions, such as NOx 
and PM2.5, which in turn, will help California meet its 
climate and air quality goals. Given the way that the 
targets are structured, the proposed regulation may 
also decrease VMT and may support transportation 
alternatives. In addition to emission reductions, the 
proposed regulation may also increase awareness 
of ZEVs with more Californians experiencing the 
technology through ride–hailing trips.
To comply with this regulation, TNCs may need to 
work with platform drivers to enable ZEV adoption, 
and may require future automated vehicle operators 
providing ride–hailing service to electrify their fleet. 
While staff do not know which strategies TNCs will use to comply with the regulation, or how the 
TNC business model may evolve in the future, staff  
have taken a conservative approach by assuming 
that drivers, particularly low–income individuals, 
would acquire ZEVs for themselves. This approach 
is conservative, as it is entirely possible that TNCs 
will decide to make fleet purchases, rent vehicles, or 
otherwise provide vehicles or cost supports to drivers. 
However, some drivers may buy vehicles and although 
ZEVs have many advantages, they also have costs. 
To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on the drivers, 
staff developed a cost model to derive electrification 
targets that have a zero net cost to the driver amortized 
over a year at most, a timeframe in which staff believe 
makes purchasing a ZEV feasible by the majority of 
drivers. In general, staff expect higher–mileage TNC 
drivers to switch to ZEVs earlier because they are 
more likely to see cost benefits from switching sooner 
than other lower–mileage drivers. Note that under 
the proposed targets — and depending on how TNCs 
choose to comply with the proposed regulation — a 
large portion of TNC drivers may not need to switch 
to ZEVs by 2030.
Staff developed cost assumptions as model inputs 
and the resulting output is the percent of vehicles that 
would switch to a ZEV with net cost savings after a 
year to the driver. This model methodology leads to 
the drivers with the highest annual service miles and 
the lowest vehicle fuel efficiency switching to a ZEV. 
Applying the model for every year of the regulation, 
staff derived the electrification target of 90 percent 
eVMT in 2030. Given a number of the TNC vehicles 
are high mileage, the electrification target alone would 
require less than half of the TNC vehicles to switch 
to ZEVs in 2030. However, for the GHG target, TNCs 
could comply by fully electrifying the TNC fleet, 
projected to be over 750,000 vehicles in California by 
2030.
Staff also proposes allowing TNCs to use optional 
GHG credits for actions that support transit and active 
transportation. This will encourage VMT reduction 
strategies through TNC and mobility provider 
partnerships rather than eroding transit market share, 
a trend currently occurring in urban areas. It will also 
help to support transportation alternatives, which is 
important for lower–income residents that do not have 
access to TNC services or cannot afford their own 
vehicle.
Cost and Emission Impacts
To assess cost and emission impacts, CARB staff  
modeled compliance with the GHG target given it is 
the more stringent of the two requirements. The GHG 
target in 2030 is equivalent to 100 percent eVMT in 
TNC fleets, and was used to estimate reductions in 
GHG emissions, criteria emissions, including NOx 
and PM2.5, and health costs for California residents. CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
393
Cumulative statewide emission reductions from the 
proposed regulation from 2023–2031 are estimated to 
be 93.21 tons PM2.5, 298.03 tons NOx and 1.81 million 
metric tons (MMT) CO2.
In addition, the proposed regulation is estimated to 
result in a reduction of 0.36 MMT of CO2 in the year 
2030, which represents a 0.39 percent reduction in 
the light–duty fleet for that year. Emission reductions 
are estimated based on an assumption of 100 percent 
eVMT and do not include emission reductions that 
could come from implementing VMT reduction 
strategies for compliance with the GHG targets (e.g., 
pooling and deadhead mile reduction).
COMPARABLE FEDERAL REGULATIONS
No current federal regulations address the same 
issue as CARB’s proposed greenhouse gas reduction 
and electrification targets for TNCs.
AN EVALUATION OF INCONSISTENCY OR 
INCOMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING  
STATE REGULATIONS  
(Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision (a)(3)(D))
During the process of developing the proposed 
regulatory action, CARB conducted a search of any 
similar regulations on this topic and concluded these 
regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible 
with existing state regulations.
DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE  
PROPOSED REGULATION
Fiscal Impact/Local Mandate Determination 
Regarding the Proposed Action (Gov. Code, 
§  11346.5, subdivisions (a)(5)&(6)):
The determinations of the Board’s Executive 
Officer concerning the costs or savings incurred by 
public agencies and private persons and businesses in 
reasonable compliance with the proposed regulatory 
action are presented below.
Under Government Code sections 11346.5, 
subdivision (a)(5) and 11346.5, subdivision (a)(6), the 
Executive Officer has determined that the proposed 
regulatory action would create costs or savings to 
any State agency, would not create costs or savings in 
federal funding to the State, and would not impose any 
mandate to any local agency or school district, whether 
or not reimbursable by the State under Government 
Code, title 2, division 4, part 7 (commencing with 
section 17500), or other nondiscretionary cost or 
savings to State or local agencies. The proposed 
regulation could affect State and local governments 
finance through changes in taxes and fees collected 
from change in fuel expenditures and other fees. Because the regulation does not impose unique new 
requirements on local agencies, the regulation is not a 
reimbursable mandate for this reason as well (County 
of Los Angeles v. State of California, 42 Cal. 3d 46 
(1987)).
Cost to any Local Agency or School District 
Requiring Reimbursement under sections  17500 et 
seq.:
The proposed regulation is a general law that does 
not specifically regulate any local community. The 
proposed regulation imposes no mandate to local 
agencies or school districts, but could affect State 
and local governments finance indirectly through 
changes in taxes and fees collected from change 
in fuel expenditures and other fees. Therefore, the 
regulation does not constitute a “Program” imposing 
any unique requirements on local agencies as set forth 
in section 17514 of the California Government Code. 
Furthermore, costs are not reimbursable when they 
may be fully financed by local agencies raising their 
own fees. (See, e.g., Clovis Unified School Dist. v. 
Chiang (2010) 188 Cal App. 4th 794, 812; Connell v. 
Superior Court (1997) 59 Cal. App. 4th 382, 397–403; 
County of Fresno v. State of California (1991) 53 Cal. 
3d 482, 487–88; Cal. Gov. Code section 17556(d)).
Cost or Savings for State Agencies:
The Proposed Regulation would require one 
additional CPUC Research Data Specialist III position, 
responsible for implementing the rule. This position 
would be needed starting in 2021 at a cost of $161,568 
per year.
Fuel taxes on gasoline are used to fund transportation 
improvements at the state, county, and local levels. 
Displacing gasoline fuel with electricity will decrease 
the amount of gasoline dispensed in the state. This 
will result in a reduction in revenue collected by the 
state for use in multiple levels of government. There 
is a $0.505 per gallon state excise tax on gasoline. 
Gasoline is exempt from the portion of sales tax that 
goes towards the state’s general fund.
The Energy Resources Fee is a $0.0003/kWh 
surcharge levied on consumers of electricity 
purchased from electrical utilities. The revenue 
collected is deposited into the Energy Resources 
Programs Account of the General Fund which is 
used for ongoing electricity programs and projects 
deemed appropriate by the Legislature, including 
but not limited to, activities of the California Energy 
Commission (CEC). Increased use of ZEVs will result 
in increases in electricity use and increased revenue 
from the Energy Resources Fee.
From 2021 to 2031, the net impact of the Proposed 
Regulation is a cost of $98.7 million. The net impact 
in Fiscal Year 2021–2022 is $162 thousand, the net 
impact in Fiscal Year 2022–2023 is $588 thousand, CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
394and the net impact in Fiscal Year 2023–2024 is $1.4 
million.
Housing Costs (Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision 
(a)(12)):
The Executive Officer has also made the initial 
determination that the proposed regulatory action 
will not have a significant effect on housing costs. The 
proposed regulation does not create or substantially 
expand an industry such that any particular housing 
market would be impacted.
Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact 
Directly Affecting Business, Including Ability to 
Compete (Gov. Code, §§  11346.3, subdivision (a), 
11346.5, subdivision (a)(7), 11346.5, subdivision  
(a)(8)):
The Executive Officer has made an initial 
determination that the proposed regulatory action 
would not have a significant statewide adverse 
economic impact directly affecting businesses, 
including the ability of California businesses to 
compete with businesses in other states, or on 
representative private persons.
RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT 
ANALYSIS/ASSESSMENT  
(Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision (a)(10))
Major Regulation: Statement of the Results of the 
Standardized Regulatory Impact Analysis (SRIA) 
(Gov. Code, §  11346.3, subdivision (c)):
In August 2020, CARB submitted a Standardized 
Regulatory Impact Analysis (SRIA) to the Department 
of Finance (DOF) for its review. CARB has updated 
the proposed Clean Miles Standard regulation since 
the original SRIA submittal, and to address DOF 
comments. The revisions are discussed in the Initial 
Statement of Reasons (ISOR), Chapter IX.
The creation or elimination of jobs within the state
The proposed regulation is estimated to result 
in a slight negative job impact in all years of the 
assessment. Industries that are estimated to have net 
costs, decreases in demand, or revenue loss such as 
petroleum production, transit and ground passenger 
transportation services, automotive repair, and state 
and local government are estimated to see decreases 
in employment growth. These changes in employment 
represent less than 0.01 percent of BAU California 
employment. Based on the major sector breakdown 
of job impacts in 2031, the proposed regulation is 
estimated to result in 1,454 job gains and 4,738 job 
losses for a net impact of approximately 3,285 job 
losses.The creation of new businesses or the elimination of 
existing businesses within the state
The proposed regulation is not anticipated to 
directly result in new business creation or elimination. 
Neither of the two companies that are directly 
impacted are anticipated to be eliminated as a result 
of the proposed regulation. While changes in jobs for 
the California economy cannot directly estimate the 
broader impacts on business creation and elimination, 
they can be used to understand some of the potential 
impacts to businesses. The overall job impacts of the 
proposed regulation are very small relative to the total 
California economy, representing changes of less than 
0.01 percent.
The competitive advantages or disadvantages for 
businesses currently doing business within the state
At this time, the competitive advantages or 
disadvantages created by the proposed regulation 
between Uber and Lyft do not appear to be material. 
Both companies’ drivers exhibit similar vehicle types, 
average passenger miles per trip, and exist in similar 
markets. The economics of one of these companies 
meeting GHG and electrification targets appear to be 
very much the same as the other.
The proposed regulation may provide a competitive 
advantage to TNC drivers that already have ZEVs 
or more fuel–efficient vehicles. All else being equal, 
TNCs could potentially favor more efficient vehicles 
when matching passengers to drivers, as miles traveled 
in these vehicles could increase eVMT and have lower 
GHG emissions per passenger mile.
The increase or decrease of investment in the state
Private domestic investment consists of purchases 
of residential and nonresidential structures and 
of equipment and software by private businesses 
and nonprofit institutions. It can be used as a proxy 
for impacts on investment in California because it 
provides an indicator of the future productive capacity 
of the economy. An increase of private investment 
of $173 million is expected by 2031, amounting to 
approximately 0.04 percent of baseline investments. 
Increases in private investment are largely driven by 
the impact of net savings of the proposed regulation, 
whereby cost savings to TNC drivers increases 
discretionary spending in the broader economy.
The incentives for innovation in products, materials, 
or processes
As part of the proposed regulation, TNC 
and supporting rental companies have several 
opportunities to innovate. Over the past several years, 
there were a small number of rental companies that 
supplied BEVs or FCEVs for TNC drivers to rent. 
Typically, these companies offer vehicles on a weekly 
basis and charging is included. Most drivers who rent 
vehicles drive more to earn enough income driving CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
395
for TNCs in order to cover the rental fees. We expect 
these rental programs to re–emerge and grow as the 
price of ZEVs goes down and the proposed regulation 
will further support these businesses. This part of the 
market has not yet been developed, presumably due 
to low demand for such services and the expense of 
transaction logistics. Were these types of new hourly 
rental services to develop, as a result of the proposed 
regulation, this would assist low– to moderate–income 
drivers in accessing ZEVs for TNC services with 
no capital required. Since the vast majority of TNC 
drivers are part–time, this innovation would provide 
ZEV access to a much larger segment of TNC drivers.
For TNC companies themselves, the GHG targets 
are designed for innovation in myriad ways, such 
as reducing deadhead miles, increasing pooling or 
occupancy, developing partnerships with transit, and 
investing in active transportation and other forms of 
increased system efficiency.
The benefits of the regulation include, but are not 
limited to, benefits to the health, safety, and welfare 
of California residents, worker safety, and the state’s 
environment and quality of life, among any other 
benefits identified by the agency.
The proposed regulation will benefit individual 
California residents mainly by reducing adverse 
health impacts caused by criteria emissions, including 
NOx a n d  P M2.5. The reduction of GHG emissions 
helps combat climate change and its destructive 
environmental effects felt by California residents. 
The proposed regulation is expected to achieve a 
cumulative reduction of 298.03 tons of NOx and 93.21 
tons of PM2.5 by 2031, aiding in the achievement of 
state and federal health standards, and protecting 
communities exposed to roadway pollution. The 
proposed regulation is also expected to cumulatively 
reduce well–to–wheel GHG emissions by 1.8 MMT 
CO2 by 2031. If TNCs comply with the GHG targets 
in part through VMT reduction, this could also benefit 
California individuals by reducing congestion on 
California roads.
Table 1 shows the estimated avoided incidence 
of mortality and morbidity because of the proposed 
regulation from 2023 through 2031 by California 
air basin. Values in parentheses represent the 95% 
confidence intervals of the central estimate. The 
largest estimated health benefits correspond to regions 
in California with the greatest TNC activity: San 
Diego County, San Francisco Bay, and South Coast air 
basins.
Table 1. Regional and statewide avoided 
premature deaths, hospital admissions, and emergency 
room visits from 2023 to 2031 under the proposed 
regulation from PM2.5 and NOx emission reductionsAir Basin:  San Diego County.  
Cardiopulmonary Mortality:  1 (1-1)  
Hospitalizations for cardiovascular  
 illness:  0 (0–0)  
Hospitalizations for respiratory illness:  0 (0–0)  
Emergency room visits:  0 (0–0)
Air Basin:  San Francisco Bay.  
Cardiopulmonary Mortality:  4 (3–5)  
Hospitalizations for cardiovascular  
 illness:  1 (0–1)  
Hospitalizations for respiratory illness:  1 (0–1)  
Emergency room visits:  2 (1–3)
Air Basin:  South Coast.  
Cardiopulmonary Mortality:  13 (10–15)  
Hospitalizations for cardiovascular  
 illness:  2 (0–4)  
Hospitalizations for respiratory illness:  2 (1–4)  
Emergency room visits:  7 (4–9)
Air Basin:  Statewide.  
Cardiopulmonary Mortality:  18 (14–22)  
Hospitalizations for cardiovascular  
 illness:  3 (0–5)  
Hospitalizations for respiratory illness:  3 (1–6)  
Emergency room visits:  9 (6–13)
Department of Finance Comments and Responses
DOF Comment:  In general, Finance concurs with 
the methodology used to estimate impacts of proposed 
regulations. However, they asked that the benefits and 
costs be reported separately for each year without 
netting for transparency and disclosure of impacts. 
The annual valuation of health benefits of the proposed 
regulation was also not reported in the SRIA.
Response:  The analysis in the ISOR has been 
updated to display annual valuation of health benefits 
of the proposed regulation. Tables presenting the 
numeric values of the total costs and total benefits to 
the TNC in each calendar year and the year–by–year 
value of monetized health benefits for the proposed 
regulation is provided in Appendix C of the ISOR.
DOF Comment:  The baseline must reflect current 
laws as well as economic assumptions consistent with 
the current recession and its aftermaths. Currently, the 
baseline does not estimate changes due to Assembly 
Bill (AB) 5 and assumes that the regulated market 
will continue to grow at pre–pandemic rates. CARB 
should formulate assumptions to evaluate impacts 
based on the proper baseline. The SRIA may then 
include a sensitivity analysis to address uncertainties 
and to assess impacts under scenarios that deviate 
from the baseline.
Response:  The baseline used by CARB assumes 
compliance with AB 5. CARB estimates that, on CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
396balance, the effects of AB 5 may be neutral with regard 
to TNC growth and TNC labor supply. CARB is not 
aware of any data that points to the medium– and 
long–run impacts of AB 5 that contradicts its estimate.
In the baseline, CARB considers the effects of the 
current pandemic and economic recession. The SRIA 
baseline assumes a much lower average annual growth 
rate from 2020 to 2023 than the historical average 
for the industry. However, there is no data available 
that points to the broader medium– and long–run 
impacts of these two events on the ride hailing sector. 
Due to the uncertainty surrounding these events, the 
SRIA included a sensitivity analysis of the proposed 
regulation (Appendix H of the SRIA) to explore 
the potential range of economic impacts that could 
result. In addition, staff have incorporated additional 
flexibilities and crediting structures into the proposed 
regulation, such as the banking of over–compliance 
credits noted above, which could serve as a compliance 
buffer for a TNC if a future year market condition is 
challenging.
COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE 
PRIVATE PERSONS OR BUSINESSES  
(Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision (a)(9))
In developing this regulatory proposal, CARB 
staff evaluated the potential economic impacts on 
representative private persons or businesses. CARB 
is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative 
private person or business would necessarily incur in 
reasonable compliance with the proposed action.
EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS  
(Cal. Code Regs., title 1, §  4, 
subdivisions (a) and (b))
The Executive Officer has also determined under 
California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 4, that 
the proposed regulatory action would not directly 
affect small businesses because small TNC companies 
would not need to meet the annual electrification and 
GHG targets, along with the reporting requirements.
CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES  
(Gov. Code, §  11346.5, subdivision (a)(13))
Before taking final action on the proposed regulatory 
action, the Board must determine that no reasonable 
alternative considered by the Board, or that has 
otherwise been identified and brought to the attention 
of the Board, would be more effective in carrying out 
the purpose for which the action is proposed, would 
be as effective and less burdensome to affected private 
persons than the proposed action, or would be more 
cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other 
provisions of law.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CARB, as the lead agency for the proposed regulation, 
has concluded that this action is exempt from CEQA, 
as described in CEQA Guidelines § 15061, because the 
action is both an Action Taken by Regulatory Agencies 
for Protection of the Environment (as described in 
CEQA Guidelines § 15308 for “class 8” exemptions); 
and it is also exempt as described in CEQA Guidelines 
§ 15061(b)(3) (“common sense” exemption) because it 
can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility 
that the proposed action may result in a significant 
adverse impact on the environment. A brief explanation 
of the basis for reaching this conclusion is included in 
Chapter VII of the ISOR.
SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION REQUEST
Consistent with California Government Code 
section 7296.2, special accommodation or language 
needs may be provided for any of the following:
● An interpreter to be available at the hearing;
● Documents made available in an alternate format 
or another language; and
● A disability–related reasonable accommodation.
To request these special accommodations or 
language needs, please contact the Clerks’ Office 
at cotb@arb.ca.gov  or (916) 322–5594 as soon as 
possible, but no later than ten business days before 
the scheduled Board hearing. TTY/TDD/Speech to 
Speech users may dial 711 for the California Relay 
Service.
Consecuente con la sección 7296.2 del Código de 
Gobierno de California, una acomodación especial 
o necesidades lingüísticas pueden ser suministradas 
para cualquiera de los siguientes:
● Un intérprete que esté disponible en la audiencia;
● Documentos disponibles en un formato alterno u 
otro idioma; y
● Una acomodación razonable relacionados con 
una incapacidad.
Para solicitar estas comodidades especiales o 
necesidades de otro idioma, por favor llame a la 
oficina del Consejo al cotb@arb.ca.gov  o ( 9 1 6) 3 22–
5594 lo más pronto posible, pero no menos de 10 días 
de trabajo antes del día programado para la audiencia 
del Consejo. TTY/TDD/Personas que necesiten este 
servicio pueden marcar el 711 para el Servicio de 
Retransmisión de Mensajes de California.CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2021, VOLUME NUMBER 14-Z
397
AGENCY CONTACT PERSONS
Inquiries concerning the substance of the proposed 
regulatory action may be directed to the agency 
representative Gloria Pak, Air Resources Engineer, 
Low Emission Vehicle Regulations Section, at (951) 
550–0631, or (designated back–up contact) Shobna 
Sahni, Air Resources Supervisor I, Low Emission 
Vehicle Regulations Section, at (626) 450–6104.
AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS
CARB staff has prepared a Staff Report: Initial 
Statement of Reasons (ISOR) for the proposed 
regulatory action, which includes a summary of the 
economic and environmental impacts of the proposal. 
The report is entitled: “Proposed Clean Miles Standard 
Regulation.”
Copies of the ISOR and the full text of the proposed 
regulatory language, may be accessed on CARB’s 
website listed below, on March 30, 2020. Please 
contact Chris Hopkins, Regulations Coordinator, 
at Chris.Hopkins@arb.ca.gov  or (916) 445–9564 if 
you need physical copies of the documents. Because 
of current travel, facility, and staffing restrictions, 
the California Air Resources Board’s offices have 
limited public access. Pursuant to Government Code 
section 11346.5, subdivision (b), upon request to the 
aforementioned Regulations Coordinator, physical 
copies would be obtained from the Public Information 
Office, California Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, 
Visitors and Environmental Services Center, First 
Floor, Sacramento, California, 95814.
Further, the agency representative to whom non–
substantive inquiries concerning the proposed 
administrative action may be directed is Chris 
Hopkins, Regulations Coordinator, Chris.Hopkins@
arb.ca.gov . The Board staff has compiled a record 
for this rulemaking action, which includes all the 
information upon which the proposal is based. This 
material is available for inspection upon request to the 
contact persons.
HEARING PROCEDURES
The public hearing will be conducted in accordance 
with the California Administrative Procedure Act, 
Government Code, title 2, division 3, part 1, chapter 
3.5 (commencing with section 11340).
Following the public hearing, the Board may take 
action to approve for adoption the regulatory language 
as originally proposed, or with non–substantial or 
grammatical modifications. The Board may also 
approve for adoption the proposed regulatory language 
with other modifications if the text as modified is 
sufficiently related to the originally proposed text that the public was adequately placed on notice and 
that the regulatory language as modified could result 
from the proposed regulatory action. If this occurs, 
the full regulatory text, with the modifications clearly 
indicated, will be made available to the public, for 
written comment, at least 15 days before final adoption.
FINAL STATEMENT OF  
REASONS A V AILABILITY
Upon its completion, the Final Statement of Reasons 
(FSOR) will be available and copies may be requested 
from the agency contact persons in this notice, or may 
be accessed on CARB’s website listed below.
INTERNET ACCESS
This notice, the ISOR and all subsequent regulatory 
documents, including the FSOR, when completed, 
are available on CARB’s website for this rulemaking 
at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/rulemaking/2021/
cleanmilesstandard .
TITLE 16.  PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 
BOARD
The Physician Assistant Board (Board) proposes to 
adopt the proposed regulation described below after 
considering all comments, objections, and recommen -
dations regarding the proposed action.
PUBLIC HEARING
The Board has not scheduled a public hearing on 
this proposed action. However, the Board will hold 
a hearing if it receives a written request for a public 
hearing from any interested person, or his or her au -
thorized representative, no later than 15 days prior to 
the close of the written comment period. A hearing 
may be requested by making such request in writing 
addressed to the individuals listed under “Contact 
Persons” in this Notice.
WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD
Any interested person, or his/her authorized rep -
resentative, may submit written comments rele -
vant to the proposed regulatory action to the Board. 
Comments may also be submitted by facsimile (FAX) 
at (916) 263–2671 or by e–mail to jasmine.dhillon@
dca.ca.gov . The written comment period closes at 5:00 
p.m. on Tuesday, May 18, 2021. The Board will con -
sider only comments received at the Board’s office by 
that time. Submit comments to the persons listed un -
der “Contact Persons” below.