able alternatives are biodegradable, recyclable, or made o f recycled
content, increasing the environmental beneﬁts associated with the ban.
The prohibitions within the legislation do not favor one industry over an-
other, but rather promote a shift to more environmentally preferable solu-
tions to ensure a healthy future for all in New York State.
2. CATEGORIES AND NUMBERS AFFECTED
While the implementation of the proposed regulations is not expected
to have a substantial effect on jobs or employment opportunities, the cate-
gories of jobs that could be affected by the requirement of the law include:
(1) covered food service providers (persons engaged on the b usiness of
selling or distributing prepared food or beverages for on-premises or off-
premises consumption); (2) stores (retail or wholesale establishments other
than covered food service providers); (3) manufacturers or distributors of
disposable food containers; and (4) manufacturers or distr ibutors of
polystyrene loose ﬁll packaging. Covered food service prov iders include
retail food stores, delicatessens; grocery stores; restau rants; cafeterias;
coffee shops; hospitals, adult care facilities, and nursin g homes; and
elementary and secondary schools, colleges and universities. Title 30 and
the proposed regulations allow covered food service providers and certain
facilities to apply for a ﬁnancial hardship waiver, which would reduce any
potential ﬁnancial impacts to eligible covered food servic e providers and
facilities.
Any job impacts would likely be experienced by manufacturer s or
distributors of disposable food service containers that co ntain expanded
polystyrene foam and manufactures of polystyrene loose ﬁll packaging
because these products will be banned from being sold or distributed under
the law. The number of jobs or employment opportunities at th ese busi-
nesses that will be affected by the law and regulations is unknown, but it is
estimated to be minimal. To the extent that any manufacturers and distribu-
tors of these products are located in New York, jobs could be n egatively
impacted if these entities rely heavily on the sale and distribution of food
service containers and loose ﬁll packaging made from expanded polysty-
rene foam and do not have the ability to shift to, or increase, the produc-
tion and distribution of other products. However, manufact urers of these
products typically manufacture other packaging and produc ts and could
shift product development to those market opportunity area s over time.
Manufacturers of reusable or disposable food service conta iners that do
not contain polystyrene foam and other non-polystyrene pac kaging ﬁll
could experience an increase in sales due to purchasing shifts by regulated
entities. Although it is difﬁcult to predict the impact of the law and regula-
tions on employment, there is potential for a small number of jobs to be
created due to the need for increased alternatives to expanded polystyrene
foam disposable food service containers and polystyrene lo ose ﬁll
packaging.
3. REGIONS OF ADVERSE IMPACT
Except for New York City, to which the proposed regulations do not ap-
ply because it has its own similar law banning expanded polys tyrene
containers and polystyrene loose ﬁll packaging, all covere d entities must
adhere to the same requirements regardless of where they are located in
this State. Therefore, there is no region of the State expect ed to be
adversely impacted from the proposed regulations more than other areas
of the State.
4. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT
Section 27-3005 of the law outlines provisions related to a ﬁ nancial
hardship waiver and applying for a waiver. The proposed regu lations
implement Title 30’s ﬁnancial hardship waiver provisions b y addressing
ﬁnancial hardship waiver eligibility, applying for a waive r, approval
criteria, and renewal of a waiver in order to assist in minimi zing adverse
impacts for those entities that meet the requirements outli ned in Section
27-3005. Covered food service providers that meet certain c riteria (have
an annual gross income under $500,000 per location, do not operate 10 or
more locations in New York State, and are not operated accord ing to a
franchise agreement), as well as facilities operated by a no t-for-proﬁt
corporation or by a federal, state, or local government agency that provide
food and meals to food insecure individuals, may request from the Depart-
ment a renewable 12-month hardship waiver of the requiremen ts of Title
30. Hardship waivers may be granted for one or more disposable food ser-
vice containers to a covered food service provider that demonstrates there
is no alternative product of comparable cost that is not comp osed of
expanded polystyrene foam and that the purchase or use of an alternative
product would create an undue ﬁnancial hardship. In addition, the Depart-
ment intends to undertake efforts to minimize any potential impacts by
engaging stakeholders directly through outreach, education, and guidance
documents.
5. SELF-EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
The proposed regulations are not expected to negatively imp act self-
employment opportunities and may drive entrepreneurial en deavors for
those seeking to develop reusable food service containers, other allowable
alternative food service containers, or non-polystyrene l oose ﬁll
packaging.6. INITIAL REVIEW OF RULE
The initial review of this rule shall occur no later than in th e third
calendar year after the year in which the rule is adopted.
PROPOSED RULE MAKING
HEARING(S) SCHEDULED
Medium- and Heavy-Duty (MHD) Zero Emission Truck Annual
Sales Requirements and Large Entity Reporting
I.D. No. ENV-36-21-00004-P
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Pro-
cedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following proposed rule:
Proposed Action: Amendment of Parts 200 and 218 of Title 6 NYCRR.
Statutory authority: Environmental Conservation Law, sections 1-0101,
1-0301, 3-0303, 19-0103, 19-0105, 19-0107, 19-0301, 19-0303, 19-0305,
19-1101, 19-1103, 19-1105, 71-2103, 71-2105; Federal Clea n Air Act,
section 177 (42 USC 7507)
Subject: Medium- and heavy-duty (MHD) zero emission truck annual
sales requirements and large entity reporting.
Purpose: Annual zero emission MHD truck sales requirements for model
years 2025-2035. Report MHD volumes, operations, and locations.
Public hearing(s) will be held at: 2:00 p.m., Nov. 9, 2021 via electronic
webinar.
Instructions on how to “join” the hearing webinar and provid e an oral
statement will be published on the Department’s proposed re gulations
webpage for 6 NYCRR Part 218 by September 8, 2021. The propose d
regulations webpage for 6 NYCRR Part 218 may be accessed at: h ttps://
www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/propregulations.html
Persons who wish to receive the instructions by mail or telephone may
call the Department at (518) 402-9003. Please provide your ﬁ rst and last
name, address, and telephone number and reference the Part 2 18 public
comment hearing.
The Department will provide interpreter services for heari ng impaired
persons, and language interpreter services for individual s with difﬁculty
understanding or reading English, at no charge upon written request
submitted no later than October 19, 2021. The written request must be ad-
dressed to ALJ Michele M. Stefanucci, NYS DEC Ofﬁce of Hearings and
Mediation Services, 625 Broadway, 1st Floor, Albany, NY 12233-1550 or
emailed to ALJ Stefanucci at ohms@dec.ny.gov.
Interpreter Service: Interpreter services will be made available to hearing
impaired persons, at no charge, upon written request submitted within rea-
sonable time prior to the scheduled public hearing. The writ ten request
must be addressed to the agency representative designated in the paragraph
below.
Accessibility: All public hearings have been scheduled at places reason-
ably accessible to persons with a mobility impairment.
Substance of proposed rule (Full text is posted at the follow ing State
website: https://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/propregu lations.html
#public): The New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-
tion (Department) is proposing to amend 6 NYCRR Part 218 and Section
200.9. Section 200.9 is a list that cites Federal and Califor nia codes and
regulations that have been referenced by the Department while amending
Part 218. The purpose of the amendment is to revise the existing low emis-
sion vehicle (LEV) program to incorporate California’s Adv anced Clean
Truck (ACT) medium- and heavy-duty zero emission vehicle (Z EV)
standards. The Department is amending Sections 218-1.1, Ap plicability;
218-2.1, Prohibitions; 218-4.1, ZEV percentages; and addi ng a new 218-
4.2, Large Entity Reporting Requirement. The remaining Sections in Part
218 are unchanged.
Section 218-1.1(a) is amended to include ZEV standards for 2 025 and
subsequent model year medium-and heavy-duty trucks and to c orrect
miscellaneous typographical errors.
Section 218-2.1(a) is amended to update the sections being incorporated
by reference from the California Code of Regulations.
Section 218-4.1 is amended to incorporate California’s lat est (ZEV)
standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The proposed ACT amend-
ments would introduce ZEV sales requirements for all manufacturers that
sell vehicles in weight classes 2b through 8 (gross vehicle w eight rating
(GVWR) > 8,500 lbs.) in New York. The sales requirement would be a
percentage, varying by model year, vehicle class, and vehic le type of the
manufacturer’s annual New York sales volume for that model year. Start-
ing with MY 2025 in New York, manufacturers would incur deﬁci ts for
each vehicle sold that must be met with credits generated fro m selling
medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs or near zero emission vehicles (NZEVs).
Medium- and heavy-duty ZEV and NZEV credits may be generated ,NYS Register/September 8, 2021 Rule Making Activities
11banked, and traded in New York by manufacturers. Credits would have a
limited lifetime to ensure medium and heavy-duty ZEVs are sold in New
York. Manufacturers subject to the sales requirement must report sales in-
formation and credit trade information annually to the Department to dem-
onstrate compliance.
Section 218-4.2 is being added. The proposed ACT amendments include
a one-time large entity reporting requirement that applies to large ﬂeet
owners. Subject entities must report information regarding vehicle owner-
ship and operation, as well as company-wide information about their New
York locations and how they and their contractors move freig ht and
perform other services. The extent of reporting will vary based on size of
the company and truck ownership. State and local government agencies
would also be required to report.
Text of proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be
obtained from: Jeff Marshall, P.E., NYSDEC, Division of Air Resources,
625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-3255, (518) 402-8292, email :
air.regs@dec.ny.gov
Data, views or arguments may be submitted to: Same as above.
Public comment will be received until: November 17, 2021.
Additional matter required by statute: Pursuant to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, a Short Environmental As sessment
Form, a Negative Declaration, and a Coastal Assessment Form have been
prepared and are on ﬁle.
Summary of Regulatory Impact Statement (Full text is posted at the fol-
lowing State website: https://www.dec.ny.gov/regulatio ns/
propregulations.html#public):
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC
or the Department) proposes to amend Title 6 of the New York Co des,
Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 218, “Emissions Standards for Mo-
tor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines”, and Part 200, “Gene ral
Provisions”. These amendments further the goals of reducing air pollution
from motor vehicles, including criteria pollutants and gre enhouse gases
(GHGs), by incorporating California’s medium- and heavy-d uty zero
emission vehicle (ZEV) regulation, known as “Advanced Clea n Trucks”
(ACT). The amendments are consistent with the requirements of the
Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, Chapter 1 06 of the
Laws of 2019 (CLCPA or Climate Act), to further reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions in the State. The CLCPA emphasizes reducing green-
house gas emissions and co-pollutants in disadvantaged com munities
including requiring all state agencies to not disproportio nately burden
disadvantaged communities when considering and issuing pe rmits, licen-
ses, and other administrative approvals and decisions.
The proposed amendments establish annual ZEV sales requirements in
New York State for truck manufacturers. Manufacturers will be required
to meet a certain sales percentage of ZEV trucks, which will vary among
vehicle weight classes, beginning with model year (MY) 2025 , and
increasing annually through MY 2035.
The proposed amendments also establish a one-time large ent ity ﬂeet
reporting requirement. Subject entities will be required t o submit a one-
time report to the Department detailing information that will help identify
future strategies to accelerate adoption of zero emission m edium- and
heavy-duty vehicles.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s 2017
National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data estimated that on-road medium-
and heavy- duty vehicles emitted approximately 13.6 million tons of GHG
(when measured in CO2e GWP100, rather than the GWP20 require d by
the Climate Act) in New York. The CLCPA deﬁnes “carbon dioxide equiv-
alent” (CO2e) as a measurement of global warming potential (GWP) based
on a twenty-year timeframe (GWP20), rather than a one hundre d-year
timeframe (GWP100). The transportation sector accounts fo r at least 27
percent of all GHG emissions in New York State when measured pursuant
to the Climate Act and Part 496. Diesel fuel and biodiesel, mainly used by
medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, accounts for 21.5 percent of all on-road
transportation sector GHG emissions, when measured pursua nt to the
Climate Act and Part 496.
The 2017 NEI data estimated that on-road medium- and heavy- d uty
vehicles emitted approximately 40,765 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
3,345 tons of ﬁne particulate matter (PM2.5) in New York. Medium- and
heavy-duty vehicles account for approximately 46 percent of total on-road
vehicle NOx emissions while making up a smaller percentage of vehicles.
New York State has a statewide diesel PM10 ambient concentra tion
from on-road medium- and heavy duty vehicles of approximate ly 0.265
micrograms/meter3 (µg/m3) , which is one of the highest in th e nation.
PM2.5 emissions from on-road mobile sources in the New York C ity
region contribute to approximately 320 deaths and 870 hospi talizations
and emergency department visits. Of the 320 deaths attribut ed to PM2.5
emissions, 170 deaths can be associated with buses and trucks.
The proposed ACT amendments would introduce ZEV sales requi re-
ments for all manufacturers that sell vehicles in weight classes 2b through8 (gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) > 8,500 lbs.) in New Yor k. The
sales requirement would be a percentage, varying by model ye ar, vehicle
class, and vehicle type of the manufacturer’s annual New York sales vol-
ume for that model year. Starting with MY 2025 in New York, manufactur-
ers would incur deﬁcits for each vehicle sold that must be met with credits
generated from selling medium- and heavy-duty ZEVs or near zero emis-
sion vehicles (NZEVs).
Medium- and heavy-duty ZEV and NZEV credits may be generated ,
banked, and traded in New York by manufacturers. Credits would have a
limited lifetime to ensure medium and heavy-duty ZEVs are sold in New
York. Manufacturers subject to the sales requirement must report sales in-
formation and credit trade information annually to the Department to dem-
onstrate compliance.
Large entities that operate medium and heavy-duty trucks in New York
would be required to submit a one-time reporting requirement. Large enti-
ties would include, but not be limited to, retailers, manufacturers, reﬁners,
drayage terminal operators, utility providers, refuse com panies, and
government agencies.
The Department has estimated the emission reduction beneﬁt s associ-
ated with the proposed adoption of California’s ACT regulation from two
sources:
1. By comparing the annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) of medium-
and heavy- duty trucks for New York State to California, a scaling factor
can be developed. The Department applied the calculated scaling factor of
0.32 to California’s ACT Attachment D emission reductions t o estimate
New York State emission reductions.
2. The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT ) utilized
EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES3) model at the county
scale using 2017 National Emissions Inventory representative counties to
evaluate New York State’s adoption of several California me dium- and
heavy-duty vehicle regulations, including ACT.
Using the ﬁrst source, the Department estimates that New York’s adop-
tion of ACT would achieve emission beneﬁts of 18,635 tons of NOx, 349
tons of PM2.5, and 5.52 million metric tons of GHG expressed in carbon
dioxide equivalents with a global warming potential based o n a one
hundred-year timeframe (CO2e, GWP100) from 2025-2040. Cal ifornia’s
ACT rulemaking estimates emissions reductions using a 100- year GWP
which is standard practice. New York’s Climate Act requires emissions be
calculated using a 20-year GWP. Estimating emissions from i nternal
combustion engines using a 20-year GWP would increase the em issions
reductions realized from the proposed ACT.
The second source estimated that New York’s adoption of ACT w ould
achieve emission beneﬁts of 16,210 tons of NOx, 230 tons of PM2.5, and
17.91 million metric tons of CO2e, GWP100 from 2025-2040.
Where appropriate, costs and beneﬁts associated with New Yo rk’s
proposed adoption of California’s ACT regulation were esti mated by ap-
plying the VMT-based scaling factor to California values. The scaling fac-
tor was applied to incremental ZEV cost, Phase 2 GHG complian ce sav-
ings, large entity reporting costs, sales and excise tax, vehicle maintenance
costs, maintenance bay upgrade costs, midlife service costs, electric vehi-
cle supply equipment infrastructure and maintenance costs, and transition
and workforce development costs.
The incremental cost of requiring medium- and heavy-duty ZE V sales
in New York is estimated at $2.9 billion from 2025-2040. The Department
believes there will be no additional certiﬁcation costs for manufacturers to
comply with ACT in New York. The Department estimates Phase 2 GHG
compliance savings of $201 million to New York for 2025-2040.
Large ﬂeet owners and those large companies that contract for transpor-
tation services will be required to report vehicle information and how they
are operated. The Department estimates the cost of the one-t ime ACT
reporting requirement in New York to be $4.8 million.
Vehicles purchased in New York are subject to state and local sales tax
applied to the vehicle purchase price. The Department estimated combined
state/local sales tax of 8.45 percent. Class 8 vehicles are subject to an ad-
ditional 12 percent federal excise tax. The Department estimates sales and
excise tax costs in New York to be $295 million from 2025-2040.
An overall total fuel cost savings is expected due to the replacement of
diesel and gasoline fuel with the cost of electricity and hydrogen fuel. The
Department estimates an overall savings of $4.07 billion co nsidering all
fuel costs in New York from 2025-2040.
Vehicle maintenance costs consist of labor and parts for routine mainte-
nance and repairs. The maintenance costs for battery electric vehicles are
predicted to be lower compared to diesel fueled vehicles due to fewer
moving parts and a simpler design. The Department estimates vehicle
maintenance costs to be a net savings of $1.21 billion in New Y ork from
2025-2040.
Maintenance facilities would require upgrades to safety eq uipment,
diagnostic tools, and other equipment to service electric v ehicles. New
York costs to upgrade maintenance facilities to service medium and heavy-
duty ZEVs are estimated at $180 million from 2025-2040.NYS Register/September 8, 2021 Rule Making Activities
12Midlife costs represent the cost to rebuild or replace the ma in propul-
sion components of vehicles due to wear and deterioration. These include
engine rebuild for diesel vehicles; battery pack replaceme nt for battery
electric vehicles; and fuel cell stack refurbishment for hy drogen fuel-cell
vehicles. The Department estimates midlife costs of $305 million in New
York from 2025-2040.
Fleets will need to complete signiﬁcant infrastructure upg rades to
provide fuel for battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell ve hicles. The
Department estimates electric vehicle fueling infrastruc ture installation
and maintenance costs of $3.10 billion in New York from 2025-2040.
The cost for transitioning to a new technology and its deployment is as-
sumed to be approximately 2.5 percent of the incremental cost between a
diesel truck and ZEV truck of the same class. The Department e stimates
transitional and workforce development costs in New York to be ap-
proximately $12 million from 2025-2040.
Commercial vehicles of all fuel types are subject to registr ation fees,
county use taxes, and supplemental fees depending on their fuel and vehi-
cle weight. Diesel-powered commercial vehicles weighing 8 ,501 pounds
GVWR or more are subject to an additional 3.25 percent increa se to the
listed registration fee, as required by the New York State Heavy-Duty Ve-
hicle Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA). Under ACT, ZEV
purchases would not be subject to the DERA fee applicable to s imilar
weight diesel-powered vehicles. DERA savings are estimate d to be ap-
proximately $3.4 million from 2025-2040.
ACT adoption would reduce state and local tax and fee revenue from
gasoline and diesel sales, while increasing revenue from el ectricity. The
Department estimated the ﬁscal impact on tax and fee revenue for New
York State as a -$250 million offset to beneﬁts for 2025-2040.
The Department estimated the health beneﬁts of reduced NOx a nd
PM2.5 emissions derived from ACT adoption in New York from tw o
sources:
1. California Air Resources Board (CARB)’s ACT Health Beneﬁts
2. Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
sponsored CO-Beneﬁts Risk Assessment (COBRA) modeling bas ed on
ICCT MOVES3 modeling of ACT in New York State (2025-2040)
The Department estimated the total number of incidents and estimated
health beneﬁts to New York using state population and the pro ximity of
residents to major roadways in accordance with the U.S. Depa rtment of
Transportation’s Transportation and Health Tool. The Depa rtment
estimates health beneﬁts to New York of $3.3 billion for 2025-2040.
The Department also considered COBRA simulations to examin e the
health impacts of ACT adoption in New York based on ICCT MOVES 3
modeling results. A COBRA simulation estimated $184 to $423 million in
monetized health beneﬁts to New York from 2025-2040.
The monetized beneﬁts of GHG reductions are estimated by con sider-
ing the social cost of carbon. The Climate Act directed the Department to
establish a value of carbon for use by state agencies. The Dep artment
evaluated the value of carbon in accordance with DEC’s Value of Carbon
guidance using a two percent discount rate. Scaling Califor nia’s CO2e
reductions results in an estimated avoided social cost of ca rbon of $632
million from 2025-2040. Using ICCT MOVES3 modeling results in an
estimated avoided social cost of carbon of $2.06 billion from 2025-2040.
Since the Department couldn’t separate CARB’s CO2e value in to the
component gases we have taken a conservative approach of cal culating
the value of carbon by applying the value of CO2 to the CO2e met ric.
Estimating the value for the individual gases in the CO2e met ric would
likely result in a higher value.
Fleet owners, however, are not required to purchase ZEV trucks under
the proposed ACT adoption. If ﬂeet owners choose to purchase electric
trucks, they would incur costs after the point of sale, as well as costs relat-
ing to electric vehicle infrastructure. The proposed amend ments would
reduce overall costs as reduced operational costs signiﬁca ntly outweigh
higher upfront vehicle purchase price and infrastructure c osts. Battery-
electric technologies are expected to reach total cost of ow nership parity
with diesel-powered vehicles by the 2024 MY for some applications.
New York State has several programs to promote the transitio n of the
transportation sector to cleaner energy including the New Y ork Truck
Voucher Incentive Program administered by the New York Stat e Energy
and Research Development Authority, the New York City Clean Trucks
Program administered by the New York City Department of Tran sporta-
tion, and a medium- and heavy-duty ﬂeet make-ready pilot pro gram pur-
suant to a New York State Public Service Commission order.
The proposed ACT amendments include a one-time large entity report-
ing requirement that applies to large ﬂeet owners. Subject e ntities must
report information regarding vehicle ownership and operat ion, as well as
company-wide information about their New York locations and how they
and their contractors move freight and perform other services. The extent
of reporting will vary based on size of the company and truck ownership.
State and local government agencies would also be required to report.
The proposed amendments will affect tax revenue at the state and locallevel. Sales tax revenues are likely to increase due to the higher purchase
costs of zero-emissions trucks. Fuel tax revenue will be reduced as gaso-
line and diesel vehicles will be displaced with electric and hydrogen fuel
vehicles reducing the amount of gasoline and diesel dispensed in the state.
The proposed amendments are not expected to cause a change in over-
all employment in New York. Motor vehicle and parts manufact uring
represents a small portion of employment in New York. Busine sses that
sell gasoline and diesel fuel in New York State may be negativ ely
impacted. Businesses involved in the manufacturing of elec tric vehicle
batteries, fuel-cell technologies, and electric vehicle parts are likely to be
positively impacted. Businesses involved in installation, maintenance, and
repair of electric vehicle charging infrastructure and hyd rogen fueling
infrastructure are likely to be positively impacted.
The ACT regulation would take effect beginning with MY 2025 fo r
vehicles with GVWR greater than 8,500 lbs. The sales requirements would
increase annually until MY 2035. Entities subject to the one -time large
entity reporting requirement would be required to report by April 1, 2023.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. Effect of rule:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservatio n
(Department) is adopting amendments to 6 NYCRR Section 200. 9 and 6
NYCRR Part 218 to incorporate California’s Advanced Clean T ruck
(ACT) standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, which be came ef-
fective March 15, 2021 in California. These changes apply to manufactur-
ers’ requirements for the manufacture and sale of medium- an d heavy-
duty zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) sold in New York. The prop osed
revisions may have an adverse impact on businesses involved in manufac-
turing, selling, servicing, or purchasing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles.
State and local governments are also consumers of medium- and heavy-
duty vehicles that will be regulated under the adopted amend ments.
Therefore, local governments who own or operate vehicles in New York
State are subject to the same requirements as owners of private vehicles in
New York State. The adopted changes are revisions to the curr ent low
emission vehicle (LEV) standards. New York State has had the California
on-road motor vehicle emissions program in effect since model year 1993
for passenger cars and light-duty trucks, with the exception of model year
1995, medium-duty vehicles since model year 2004, and heavy -duty
vehicles for model years 2005 through 2007 and the Departmen t is un-
aware of any adverse impact to small businesses or local governments as a
result of previous revisions. Section 177 of the federal Cle an Air Act
requires New York to maintain standards identical to California’s in order
to maintain the LEV program.
2. Compliance requirements:
There are no speciﬁc requirements in the proposed regulation which ap-
ply exclusively to small businesses. Local governments may be subject to
the one-time large entity reporting requirement if they operate at least one
medium- or heavy-duty vehicle. The large entity reporting r equirements
are effective statewide. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicle ma nufacturers
will be required to submit annual compliance reports to the Department to
demonstrate compliance with the proposed regulations. The reporting
requirements are expected to be similar to existing light-d uty reporting
requirements. Professional services are not anticipated t o be necessary to
comply with the rules.
3. Professional services:
There are no professional services needed by small business or local
government to comply with the adopted rule.
4. Compliance costs:
The proposed amendments include a one-time large entity rep orting
requirement that applies to large ﬂeet owners, government a gencies, and
companies that contract for transportation related servic es. The extent of
reporting will vary based on size of the company and truck own ership.
Businesses with a single facility category and with few vehicles can expect
to complete their reporting in 4 to 10 hours. Businesses with a moderate
amount of facilities and vehicles can expect to complete their reporting in
20 to 30 hours. Businesses with a large amount of facilities can expect to
complete their reporting in approximately 40 hours. The cost to the busi-
ness is expected to be the number of hours expected multiplied by the cost
for stafﬁng per hour and the lost revenue from the employee as signed to
collect information. The cost of the one-time large entity reporting for all
New York entities combined is estimated to be approximately $4.8 million.
New York State currently maintains personnel and equipment to
administer the LEV program. No additional costs will be incurred by local
governments for the administration of this program.
5. Economic and technological feasibility:
Most commercial medium- and heavy-duty vehicles operate le ss than
100 miles per day and operate from ﬁxed locations. There are n umerous
models of medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission vans, trucks and buses
from several manufacturers currently available, which are ideally suited to
serve local and last-mile operations. It is expected that a growing number
of ZEVs across all vehicle classes will become suitable for more applica-
tions as technology advances.NYS Register/September 8, 2021 Rule Making Activities
13The proposed amendments would reduce costs to the state’s ov erall
trucking ﬂeet as the savings from reduced operational costs of ZEVs
signiﬁcantly outweigh the higher upfront vehicle purchase price (without
application of incentives) and infrastructure costs. For b attery-electric
vehicles, the total cost of ownership is lower compared to diesel vehicles.
Cost parity is anticipated to be achieved for a growing number of classes
by 2035 as battery prices fall and technology improves. Incentives are cur-
rently available to offset some or all of the higher vehicle capital costs and
some of the early infrastructure costs to help ﬂeets begin tr ansitioning to
ZEVs now.
Several funding programs are available to support the use of advanced
technologies administered by state agencies, federal agen cies, and local
air districts. Two such programs are the New York Truck V ouch er Incen-
tive Program (NYTVIP) administered by the New York State Energy and
Research Development Authority and the New York City Clean T rucks
Program administered by the New York City Department of
Transportation. Currently, NYTVIP offers vouchers, or dis counts to the
initial purchase price, to eligible New York ﬂeets that purchase Class 4-8
battery-electric and fuel cell vehicles. Vouchers for batt ery-electric and
fuel cell vehicles currently cover 95 percent of the incremental cost of the
electric vehicle. The incremental cost is the cost differen ce between the
ZEV and a comparable diesel vehicle, up to a certain cap depending on ve-
hicle class, per vehicle.
The New York City Clean Trucks Program also offers rebate incentives
for Class 4-8 heavy-duty battery-electric vehicles that would be registered
in the nine county New York Metropolitan Area and operated wi thin, or
near, New York City Industrial Business Zones that are locat ed near
disadvantaged communities. The New York City Clean Trucks P rogram
electric vehicle incentives are aligned with NYTVIP.
The New York Public Service Commission has also approved a
Medium- and Heavy-Duty Fleet Make-Ready Pilot Program. The Pilot
Program focuses on disadvantaged communities and offers in centives to
mitigate the cost of developing Electric Vehicle charging c apacity for
qualifying medium- and heavy-duty vehicle ﬂeets. The incen tives cover
up to 90 percent of the utility-side make-ready costs.
6. Minimizing adverse impact:
The proposed changes apply statewide. The regulation attempts to min-
imize adverse impacts on medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers
by offering various compliance ﬂexibility mechanisms. The se include
weight class modiﬁers, near zero emission vehicle (NZEV) cr edit provi-
sions, and credit averaging-banking-trading (ABT) programs. The weight
class modiﬁer provides ﬂexibility allowing manufacturers to produce more
ZEVs in one vehicle class to avoid having to produce a small nu mber of
ZEVs in other groups. Credit is also given for NZEVs through model year
2035. Credits may be banked, traded, and sold among vehicle classes and
to other manufacturers. The regulation is not expected to ha ve adverse
impacts on medium- and heavy-duty vehicle dealers. The Depa rtment is
minimizing the reporting requirement for large entities that own or operate
medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by requiring entities to only report once.
There will be no adverse impact on local governments who own or oper-
ate vehicles in the state because they are subject to the same requirements
as those imposed on owners of private vehicles. This rulemaking is not a
local government mandate pursuant to Executive Order 17. Th is regula-
tion contains exemptions for emergency vehicles, and milit ary tactical
vehicles and equipment.
7. Small business and local government participation:
The Department plans on holding a virtual public hearing aft er the
amendments are proposed. Small businesses and local govern ments will
have the opportunity to attend this public hearing. Additionally, there will
be a public comment period in which interested parties can submit written
comments.
8. For rules that either establish or modify a violation or pe nalties as-
sociated with a violation:
In accordance with NYS State Administrative Procedures Act (SAPA)
Section 202-b, this rulemaking does not include a cure period because the
Department is undertaking this rulemaking to maintain iden ticality with
Section 177 of the Clean Air Act.
Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
1. Types and estimated numbers of rural areas:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservatio n
(Department) is adopting amendments to 6 NYCRR Section 200. 9 and 6
NYCRR Part 218 to incorporate California’s Advanced Clean T ruck
(ACT) standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, which be came ef-
fective March 15, 2021 in California.
There are no requirements in the adopted regulation which ap ply only
to rural areas. These changes apply to manufacturers’ requirements for the
manufacture and sale of medium- and heavy-duty zero emission vehicles
(ZEVs) sold in New York. The proposed revisions may have an ad verse
impact on businesses involved in manufacturing, selling, s ervicing, or
purchasing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles.The adopted changes are revisions to the current low emission vehicles
(LEV) standards. New York State has had the California on-ro ad motor
vehicle emissions program in effect since model year 1993 for passenger
cars and light-duty trucks, with the exception of model year 1995,
medium-duty vehicles since model year 2004, and heavy-duty vehicles for
model years 2005 through 2007; the Department is unaware of any adverse
impact to rural areas as a result. The beneﬁcial emission red uctions from
the program accrue to all areas of the state.
2. Reporting, recordkeeping, other compliance requiremen ts; and
professional services:
There are no speciﬁc requirements in the proposed regulation which ap-
ply exclusively to rural areas. Under the proposed amendments, large enti-
ties that operate medium and heavy-duty trucks in New York wo uld be
required to submit a one-time reporting requirement of aggr egated and
binned data for representative facilities. Entities would also be able to
report binned, representative information about the vehic le types owned.
Large entities would include, but not be limited to; retaile rs, manufactur-
ers, reﬁners, hotels, drayage terminal operators, utility providers, refuse
companies, federal, state, and local government agencies, and other types
of large employers. Professional services are not anticipa ted to be neces-
sary to comply with the proposed rules.
Medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers will be requi red to
submit annual compliance reports to the Department to demon strate
compliance with the proposed regulations. The reporting requirements are
expected to be similar to existing light-duty reporting req uirements.
Professional services are not anticipated to be necessary t o comply with
the rules.
3. Costs:
The adopted revisions are expected to result in additional costs for New
York State consumers of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. The one-time
large entity reporting requirement is estimated to have a total cost of $4.8
million for all subject entities in New York State. Consumers of medium-
and heavy-duty vehicles will also face increased upfront pu rchase costs
for new zero emission vehicles, primarily from the cost of ba ttery packs.
Increased purchase costs are expected to be offset in part by state and
federal purchase rebates and reduced operation and maintenance costs rel-
ative to gasoline and diesel fueled vehicles. Medium- and he avy-duty
vehicles are anticipated to achieve cost parity with conven tionally fueled
vehicles by 2035 without state or federal rebates.
Medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers will likely s ee in-
creased costs to produce and deliver compliant vehicles to t he New York
market. These costs are anticipated to be passed thought to c onsumers in
the form of increased purchase prices. Dealerships will be r equired to
ensure that the vehicles they sell are California certiﬁed. Starting with the
1993 model year for light-duty vehicles, the 2004 model year for medium-
duty vehicles, and the 2005 model year for heavy-duty vehicl es, most
manufacturers have included provisions in their ordering m echanisms to
ensure that only California certiﬁed vehicles are shipped t o New York
dealers. The implementation of the regulation is not expected to be burden-
some in terms of additional reporting requirements for dealers.
4. Minimizing adverse impact:
The proposed changes apply statewide. The regulation attempts to min-
imize adverse impacts on medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers
by offering various compliance ﬂexibility mechanisms. The se include
weight class modiﬁers, near zero emission vehicle (NZEV) cr edit provi-
sions, and credit averaging-banking-trading (ABT) programs. The weight
class modiﬁer provides ﬂexibility allowing manufacturers to produce more
ZEVs in one vehicle class to avoid having to produce a small nu mber of
ZEVs in other groups. Credit is also given for NZEVs through model year
2035. Credits may be banked, traded, and sold among vehicle classes and
to other manufacturers. The regulation is not expected to ha ve adverse
impacts on medium- and heavy-duty vehicle dealers. The Depa rtment is
minimizing the reporting requirement for large entities that own or operate
medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by requiring entities to only report once.
5. Rural area participation:
The Department plans on holding a virtual public hearing to provide in-
formation on the proposed regulation and solicit public com ments. Ad-
ditionally, there will be a public comment period in which interested par-
ties can submit written comments.
Job Impact Statement
1. Nature of Impact:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservatio n
(Department) is adopting amendments to 6 NYCRR Section 200. 9 and 6
NYCRR Part 218 to incorporate California’s Advanced Clean T ruck
(ACT) standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, which be came ef-
fective March 15, 2021 in California.
The proposed amendments to the regulations may adversely im pact
jobs and employment opportunities in New York State. New Yor k State
has had the California on-road motor vehicle emissions program in effect
since model year 1993 for passenger cars and light-duty truc ks, with theNYS Register/September 8, 2021 Rule Making Activities
14exception of model year 1995, medium-duty vehicles since mo del year
2004, and heavy-duty vehicles for model years 2005 through 2 007. The
Department is unaware of any signiﬁcant adverse impact to jo bs and
employment opportunities as a result of previous revisions.
2. Categories and numbers affected:
The proposed revisions may have an adverse impact on busines ses
involved in manufacturing, selling, servicing, or purchasing medium- and
heavy-duty vehicles. Medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manuf acturers are
expected to incur costs to comply with the regulation. The pr oposal will
require an increasing percentage of annual medium- and heavy-duty vehi-
cle sales be zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) for model years 2025 through
2035. There is currently little, or no, medium- and heavy-du ty vehicle
manufacturing in New York State. As a result, no signiﬁcant job losses in
this sector are expected within the State. Most, if not all, m edium- and
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers will have to allocate res ources to pro-
duce a greater quantity of California compliant zero emissi on medium-
and heavy-duty vehicles to supply the New York market along w ith as-
sociated record keeping, reporting, and warranty costs.
Dealerships will be able to sell California certiﬁed vehicl es to buyers
from states bordering New York. Since vehicles must be California certi-
ﬁed in order to be registered in New York, New York residents will not be
able to buy non-complying vehicles out-of-state but may be a ble to buy
complying vehicles out-of-state. These businesses compet e within the
state and generally are not subject to competition from out- of-state
businesses. Therefore, the regulation is not expected to impose a competi-
tive disadvantage on afﬁliated businesses, and there would be no change
from the current relationship with out-of-state businesses.
Ancillary businesses such as gas stations, repair shops, and parts retail-
ers may be adversely impacted as the medium- and heavy-duty v ehicle
ﬂeet transitions from gasoline and diesel fueled internal c ombustion
engines to battery electric and other zero emission propulsion systems. It
is anticipated that any losses in these sectors will be offse t by increased
employment opportunities in ﬁelds related to electric vehi cle charging
infrastructure and training technicians to service new medium- and heavy-
duty ZEVs.
3. Regions of adverse impact:
None.
4. Minimizing adverse impact:
The regulation attempts to minimize adverse impacts on medi um- and
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers by offering various comp liance ﬂex-
ibility mechanisms. These include weight class modiﬁers, near zero emis-
sion vehicle (NZEV) credit provisions, and credit averagin g-banking-
trading (ABT) programs. The weight class modiﬁer provides ﬂ exibility
allowing manufacturers to produce more ZEVs in one vehicle c lass to
avoid having to produce a small number of ZEVs in other groups. Credit
is also given for NZEVs through model year 2035. Credits may be banked,
traded, and sold among vehicle classes and to other manufacturers.
The regulation is not expected to have adverse impacts on medium- and
heavy-duty vehicle dealers. Dealerships will be required to ensure that the
vehicles they sell are California certiﬁed. Starting with t he 1993 model
year for light-duty vehicles, the 2004 model year for medium -duty
vehicles, and the 2005 model year for heavy-duty vehicles, most manufac-
turers have included provisions in their ordering mechanis ms to ensure
that only California certiﬁed vehicles are shipped to New Yo rk dealers.
The implementation of the regulation is not expected to be burdensome in
terms of additional reporting requirements for dealers. There would be no
change in the competitive relationship with out-of-state businesses.
5. Self-employment opportunities:
None that the Department is aware of at this time.
New York State Gaming
Commission
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
Lasix Administrations on Race Day
I.D. No. SGC-09-21-00014-A
Filing No. 909
Filing Date: 2021-08-19
Effective Date: 2021-10-08
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Pro-
cedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:Action taken: Amendment of sections 4043.2(b) and 4120.2(b) of Title 9
NYCRR.
Statutory authority: Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law,
sections 103(2), 104(1), (19), 301(1) and (2)
Subject: Lasix administrations on race day.
Purpose: To enhance the safety and integrity of pari-mutuel racing.
Text or summary was published in the March 3, 2021 issue of the Regis-
ter, I.D. No. SGC-09-21-00014-P.
Final rule as compared with last published rule: No changes.
Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained
from: Kristen M. Buckley, New York State Gaming Commission, One
Broadway Center, P.O. Box 7500, Schenectady, NY 12301-7500 , (518)
388-3332, email: gamingrules@gaming.ny.gov
Initial Review of Rule
As a rule that does not require a RFA, RAFA or JIS, this rule wil l be
initially reviewed in the calendar year 2026, which is no later than the 5th
year after the year in which this rule is being adopted.
Assessment of Public Comment
Three comments were received from private practicing veterinarians at
Finger Lakes Racetrack. These were from Bryan Hobson, Brend an Wor-
rell and Robin Zack, who works with Dr. Hobson. Another comment was
received from Beth Albrecht, chief examining veterinarian employed by
Finger Lakes. All four suggested that rules for Finger Lakes should be dif-
ferent than other racetracks due to unique circumstances, such as the dif-
ﬁculty in recruiting veterinarians to work on-track or the lack of familiar-
ity by a third-party with the horses to be treated. The three p rivate
practicing veterinarians also raised ﬁnancial considerat ions, indicating
that their practices relied upon the revenue derived from Lasix administra-
tion and that the loss of revenue might make their respective practices
unsustainable. These three also suggested the State author ize third-party
veriﬁcation, wherein a third-party accompanies the privat e veterinarian
during the veterinarian’s rounds to observe the administra tion and verify
that no wrongdoing occurs. In addition, Dr. Hobson’s comment indicated
disagreement with the Commission’s language in the Regulat ory Impact
Statement included in the published proposed rulemaking.
The Commission notes that the third-party Lasix administra tion stan-
dard has been adopted by numerous states and notes that while a veriﬁca-
tion system is used in ﬁve jurisdictions (Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, West
Virginia and Washington state), three of those states (Minn esota, Illinois,
Washington) simply require the administering veterinaria n to swear that
appropriate administration occurred, while the remaining two (Indiana
and West Virginia) require the administration to occur before a regulatory
ofﬁcial.
The Commission recognizes the potential ﬁnancial implicat ions and
suggests that the three comments from private-practice vet erinarians
underscore the necessity for the third-party administration, because a busi-
ness model that places a veterinarian’s entire practice in j eopardy due to
the loss of income from race-day medication is unsustainabl e, conﬂicts
with the current nation-wide industry philosophy of medica tion reform
and is not ultimately in the best long-term interest of the sport. The Com-
mission also notes that with the impending establishment of the federal
Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, the future general use of Lasix
appears likely to be limited.
The Commission disagrees with Dr. Hobson and stands by its explana-
tory information provided in the Regulatory Impact Statement.
Vieden Zahariev, the assistant general manager of Finger La kes Race-
track, submitted a comment. Mr. Zahariev made a ﬁnancial arg ument
against the proposal, indicating that the ﬁnancial burden o f independent
veterinarians or veterinary technicians would provide no s igniﬁcant
beneﬁt. Mr. Zahariev also argued that third-party Lasix adm inistration
monitoring would be sufﬁcient, noting that in 2019 the National Thorough-
bred Racing Association (“NTRA”) recommended this third-p arty moni-
toring as an option in a review of Finger Lakes.
The Commission believes that Mr. Zahariev is overbroad in hi s state-
ment about the NTRA. The Commission reviewed the 2019 NTRA Safety
Audit and ﬁnds the NTRA did not endorse the Finger Lakes monit oring
practice and speciﬁcally raised concern that Finger Lakes veterinarians all
provided varying descriptions of how their monitoring programs worked,
noting that the explanation provided by two veterinarians were “com-
pletely incorrect.”
The Commission notes that third-party Lasix administration monitoring
is not authorized in either the National Uniform Medication Program or
the ARCI Model Rule. The Commission further notes that the NTRA has
representation on the RMTC, with the NTRA’s president and chief execu-
tive ofﬁcer serving in the capacity of RMTC chair, which sugg ests a
conﬂict in interpretation is unlikely.
Peter Kanter, the racetrack veterinarian at Buffalo Raceway and Batavia
Downs, questioned the need for the rule and raised a concern that adoption
of the rule could prohibit him from performing surgery.NYS Register/September 8, 2021 Rule Making Activities
15