1 ADVANCED CLEAN CARS SUMMARY

1. Background

Despite significant progress in reducing smog

- forming and particulate matter criteria emissions from the passenger vehicle fleet, California needs further reductions in order

to meet health

- based State and federal a mbient air quality standards. In addition, climate change continues to pose a serious threat to the economic well

- being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California.

To address the challenge presented by climate change, vehicle gr eenhouse gas (GHG) emissions must be drastically reduced if we are to meet our goal of an 80 percent reduction by 2050. This 40 year outlook is a far longer time horizon than those employed by the federal agencies under the Clean Air Act, or the requireme nts to develop the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. Policies developed under this longer policy timeframe also deliver a continuous policy message to both the manufacturers and consumers that California is committed to significant changes to clean up the cars and lights trucks we drive. W e have to start now. There is no time to

lose.

O ver the past three years California has worked with federal agencies to ensure that the stringent greenhouse gas standards, if adopted , will achieve the dra matic reductions

that meet California‟s needs. T ogether t hese standards will provide consumers with the next generation of vehicles, designed to reduce multiple pollutants, while preserving vehicle choice and saving money.

California’ s Advanced Clean Car s Program Continuing its leadership role in develop ing innovative and ground breaking emission control programs, Air Resources Board ( ARB ) staff has developed the Advanced Clean Cars program, a pioneering approach of a „package‟ of regulations, a l though se parate in construction are related in terms of the synergy developed to address both ambient air quality needs and address climate change.

The Advanced Clean Cars program combines the control of smog

, soot causing pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025

. A nd assures the development of environmentally superior cars that will continue to deliver the performance

, utility, and safety vehicle owners have come to expect.

The ZEV program will act as the focused technology of the Advanced Clean Cars program by requiring manufacturers to produce increasing numbers of ZEVs and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018

- 2025 model years.

Consumer labeling patterned on Californi a‟s revolutionary e nvironmental performance

l abel will provide important emissions information in a graphical, easy

- to

- read and understand format for comparing new vehicle emissions.2

In addition, the Advanced Clean Cars program includes amendments to the C lean Fuels Outlet regulation that will assure ultra

- clean fuels such as hydrogen are available to meet vehicle demands brought on by these amendments to the ZEV program.

Driving Technology and Improving the Economy

California is a clear leader in innovati on and venture capital investment, which will benefit from the Advanced Clean Cars package. California received over half of all

clean

- tech venture capital investment s in the U.S. in the last quarter, [1] a nd is well poised to continue to serve as an econo mic hub for technology and job creation related

to clean vehicles in the coming years.

These regulations, especially the z ero e mission v ehicle rules , are creating the jobs of

the twenty

- first c entury now in California. Three innovative automakers have op ened shop in California, and are pushing the market forward and creating jobs in the

S tate. Tesla Motors has resurrected auto manufacturing in California, purchasing and retooling the former NUMMI plant in Fremont, California to produce its Model S

sedan. Manufacturing at the Tesla facility is expected to create about 1,000 manufacturing jobs, up to a quarter of those lost when the NUMMI facility closed. [2] Just last week, CODA Automotive opened its new global headquarters in Los Angeles, which

will allo w the company to grow significantly in coming years. The company also has an assembly plant in Benicia, California, where final assembly of its sedan occurs. Southern California is also home to the global headquarters of ZEV producer Fisker Automotive, as well as engineering and design facilities for many larger automakers and their clean cars programs.

In addition to the automakers, the job and economic center of the plug

- in electric vehicle charging sector is in California. In the tradition of the S tat e‟s innovation driven economy, these companies are helping to develop the early market for ZEVs with novel financing and charging option s. Vehicle operating and total cost savings that will materialize as a result of the Advanced Clean Cars program will a lso increase consumer purchasing power

. This effectively puts more cash in Californians‟ pockets, pumping money back into the local economy, with the resulting effect of increasing economic output and job creation in the S tate overall

. As the standards r amp up, economic modeling suggests an increasing positive economic impact to the S tate ; consumer savings on fuel and operating costs will lead to thousands of additional jobs

in the S tate this decade, and tens of thousands in the next.

Greenhouse Gas Emi ssions Recognizing the increasing threat of climate change to the well

- being of California‟s citizens and the environment, in 2002 the L egislature adopted and the Governor signed AB 1493 (Chapter 200, Statutes 2002, Pavley)

. AB 1493 directed ARB to adopt the

maximum feasible and cost

- effective reductions in GHG emissions from light

- duty

[1] See: http://www.ey.com/US/en/Newsroom/News

- releases/Large

- Energy

- Storage

deals

- push

- US

- VC

- investment

- in

- cleantech

[2] See: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/business&id=74533883

vehicles. Vehicle GHG emissions included carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) that are emitted from the tailpipe, as well as emissions of HFC134a, the refrigerant then used in most vehicle air conditioning systems.

As directed by AB 1493, ARB adopted what is commonly referred to as the Pavley regulations, the first in the nation to require significant reductions of GHGs from motor

vehicles. These regulations, covering the 2009

- 2016 and later model years, call for a

17 percent overall reduction in climate change emissions from the light

- duty fleet by

2020 and a 25 percent overall reduction by 2030. They also formed the foundation for

the federal G HG and fuel economy programs for light

- duty vehicles for 2012

- 2016 model years.

After the Board adopted the Pavley regulations, the L egislature adopted and the Governor signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Chapter 488, Statutes 2006, Nuñez/Pavley

. ) AB 32 charges ARB with the responsibility of monitoring and regulating GHG emissions in the State. AB 32 also directed ARB to prepare a

s coping p lan outlining the State‟s strategy to achieve the maximum feasible and

cost

- effective reducti ons in furtherance of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by

2020. Measure T1 of the s coping p lan anticipates an additional 3.8 million metric tons

of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO 2 e) reduction from the passenger vehicle fleet by 2020 beyond the redu ctions from the 2009

- 2016 AB 1493 standards.

In addition, in 2005, in order to mitigate the long

- term impacts of climate change, the

Governor issued Executive Order S

- 3

- 05. Among other actions, the Executive Order called for reducing GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This ambitious yet achievable reduction path and goal are considered necessary to stabilize the long

- term climate.

ZEV Program Although originally part of the LEV program, ARB established the ZEV program as a

stand

- alone regulation in 1999, in recognit ion of the increasing matur ity of zero emission technologies and the critical role they can play in achieving California‟s air quality goals

. Since then, the program has been modified several times to address the pace of development of zero emission technologies.

At its March 2008 hearing, the Board directed staff to redesign the 2015 and later model year ZEV program by strengthening the requirement and focusing primarily on zero emission technologies

– battery electric v ehicles, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles

– in order to ensure that these low GHG technology vehicles transition from the demonstration phase to full commercialization in a

reasonable timeframe to meet long

- term emission re duction goals . The proposed amendments to the ZEV program are presented in a separate package, also part of this passenger vehicle rulemaking, as discussed next.4

Preparing for the f

uture ; Moving b eyond Advanced Clean Cars Beyond 2025, the driving force for lowering emissions in California will be climate change. In order to meet our 2050 GHG goal, the new vehicle feet will need to be primarily composed of advanced technology vehicles such as electric and fuel cell vehicles by 2035 in order to have near ly an entire advanced technology fleet

– that is,

both new and used vehicles

– by 2050. Accordingly, the Advanced Clean Cars program coordinates the goals of the LEV, ZEV, and Clean Fuels Outlet programs in order to lay

the foundation for the commercializ ation and support of these ultra

- clean vehicles.

Figure 1 shows the cumulative on

- road passenger vehicle fleet mix for one scenario developed by staff that achieves California‟s 2050 GHG emission reduction goal. Importantly, ZEV sales must constitute nea rly 100 percent of new vehicles in 2040 for ZEVs to constitute approximately 87 percent of the on

- road fleet by 2050.

Figure 1. On Road Light

- Duty Vehicle Scenario to Reach 2050 Goal

2. Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) Program

2.1 Criteria Emission Standard s

In order to achieve further criteria emission reductions from the passenger vehicle fleet, staff is proposing several amendments representing a significant strengthening of the LEV program. The major elements of the proposed LEV III program are:

 A re duction of fleet average emissions of new passenger cars (PCs),
light

- duty trucks (LDTs) and medium

- duty passenger vehicles (MDPVs) to
super ultra

- low

- emission vehicle (SULEV) levels by 2025

.5

 The replacement of separate NMOG and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) st andards
with combined NMOG plus NOx standards . The combined ROG+NOx
standard will decline from 0.100 for passenger cars and light

- duty truck 1s
and 0.119 for light

- duty truck 2s and medium duty passenger vehicles in
2015 to 0.030 for all vehicle categorie s by 2030

.

 An increase of full useful life durability requirements from 120,000 miles to
150,000 miles, which guarantees vehicles operate longer at these extremely

low emissi on particulate levels.

 A backstop to assure continued production of super ultra

- lo w

- emission
vehicles after PZEVs as a category are moved from the Zero

- Emission
Vehicle program to the LEV program in 2018

.

 More stringent particulate matter (PM) standards for light

- and medium

- duty

vehicles

.

 Zero fuel evaporative emission standards for PC s and LDTs, and more
stringent evaporative standards for medium

- duty vehicles (MDVs)

.

2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards

For the 2017

- 2025 model year standards, ARB proposes to use the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) approach and adopt separate standards for

CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O. The proposed GHG emission standards would reduce new passenger vehicles carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from their model year 2016 levels by approximately 34 percent by model year 2025, from about 251 to abo ut 166 gCO 2 /mile, based on the projected mix of vehicles sold in California. The basic structure of the standards includes two categories

– passenger cars and light

- duty

trucks

– that are consistent with federal categories for light

- duty vehicles. The st andard targets would reduce car CO 2 emissions by about 36 percent and truck CO 2 emissions by about 32 percent from model year 2016 through 2025. Figure 2 illustrates the basic target emission trends that are projected from the car and truck standards.6 Fi gure 2 . Target Emission Reductions from GHG Standards

The CH 4 and N 2 O standards will reflect the same stringency as the original GHG

standards. The net result is , like the current 2009

- 2016 California GHG standards, the proposed 2017

- 2025 standards ac count for all major sources of vehicle GHG emissions, including upstream emissions associated with vehicle fuels. In addition, California is proposing to align its vehicle air conditioning system requirements with federal requirements

.

2.3 Maximum Feasi ble and Cost

- Effective Technologies

Vehicle manufacturers need sufficient lead time to implement new technologies across their vehicle lines both from a feasibility and cost

- effectiveness standpoint. Manufacturers will be resource challenged over the nex t 15 years as they strive to develop and implement technologies ranging from advanced gasoline and diesel engines to electric and fuel cell vehicles, while at the same time lowering criteria emissions of their combustion engines. The phase

- in of the Advan ced Clean Cars program requirements recognizes this by providing manufacturers with significant lead time and considerable compliance flexibility.

Criteria Emissions The technology for controlling vehicle emissions is well understood and m anufacturers

hav e a wide range of emission control technologies available to achieve

“near

- zero

- at

- the

- tailpipe ( SULEV ) emissions. Many of these technologies are already being used today on vehicles meeting LEV II requirements

, and staff anticipates that with ongoing imp rovements to the effectiveness of these technologies, particularly catalyst technology, manufacturers will be able to meet the proposed requirements for

smog forming emissions under the LEVIII element of the Advanced Clean Cars package . For some vehicles, specifically the heavier vehicles with larger displacement engines, additional emission control componentry such as secondary air and hydrocarbon absorbers may be required to achieve the proposed emission levels.7

Greenhouse Gas Emissions The proposed GHG standards are also predicated on many existing and emerging technologies that increase engine and transmission efficiency, reduce vehicle energy loads, improve auxiliary and accessory efficiency, and recognize increasingly electrified vehicle subsyste ms with hybrid and electric drivetrains. Many technologies reduce both criteria emissions and GHGs, with this synergy enhancing technologies, cost

e ffectiveness and demonstrating the importance of California analyzing the passenger vehicle fleet program a s a whole.

P revious rulemakings (i.e., California‟s 2009

- 2016 and federal 2012

- 2016 standards) established an original technical basis for the proposed GHG standards. This rulemaking builds on this existing technical foundation with new technical data and the understanding of evolving state

- of

- the

- art engine, transmission, hybrid, and

electric

- drive technologies. As part of this effort, and without conceding any of California‟s separate authority, staff has been working with the USEPA and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) since early last year to develop a unified national GHG program for motor vehicles beyond 2016

. Importantly, while California proposes accepting n ational p rogram compliance at manufacturers‟ option,

Cal ifornia is only doing so because it believes the proposed standards are stringent enough to meet State GHG emission reduction goals.

2.4 Environmental Impacts

Criteria Emissions

Table 1 provide s the emission benefits for calendar years 2023, 2025, 2035 , and 2040 for reactive organic gas (ROG), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and particulate matter (PM2.5) respectively. Emission benefits are fully realized in the 2035

- 2040 timeframe when nearly all vehicles operating in the fleet are expected to be compliant with the proposed Advanced Clean Car standards. By 2035 ROG statewide emissions would be reduced by an additional 21 percent, NOx emissions by an additional 36 percent, and PM2.5 emissions by 11 percent.8

Table 1 . Statewide Emission Benefits of the Ad vanced Clean Car Program: Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) , Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and Particulate Matter (PM 2.5)

Statewide ROG (tons/day)

Calendar

Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent

Reduction

2023 193.2 190.1 3.1 2%

2025 179.1 173.4 5.8 3%

2035 144.9 114.1 30.8 21%

Statewide NOX (tons/day)

Calendar

Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent

Reduction

2023 201.3 186.7 14.7 7%

2025 183.7 162.3 21.3 12%

2035 136.8 88.0 48.9 36%

Statewide PM2.5 (tons/day)

Calendar

Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent

Reduction

2023 28.2 27.4 0.8 3%

2025 28.6 27.5 1.1 4%

2035 30.5 27.2 3.3 11%

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The Advanced Clean Cars program would provide major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Table 2 shows the greenhouse gas emission benefits in 2020, 2025, 2035, and 2050. By 2025, CO 2 equivalent emissions would be reduced by 13 m illion m etric

t ons (MMT) per year, which is 12 percent from baseline levels. The reduction increa ses in 2035 to 31 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 40 MMT/Year , the equivalent of taking 8 million cars off the road and a reduction of 33 percent from baseline leve ls. Viewed cumulatively over the life of the regulation (2017

- 2050), the proposed Advanced

Clean Cars regulation would reduce emissions by more than 850 MMT CO 2 Equivalent

, roughly double the total greenhouse gas emissions of California in 1990

.

Table 2 . CO 2 - Equivalent (CO 2 e) Emission Benefits from Advanced Clean Car Regulations

Statewide CO 2 e Emissions (Million Metric Tons / Year)

Calendar

Year Adjusted

Baseline with

Rebound Proposed

Regulation with

Rebound Benefits Percent

Reduction

2020 111.7 108. 5 3.2 3%

2025 110.9 97.0 13.8 12%

2035 116.1 84.2 31.9 27%

2050 132.4 89.2 43.3 33%9

2.5 Cost Effectiveness

Criteria Emissions

Staff based its cost

- effectiveness analysis on the projected increase in vehicle price assuming all new vehicles meet the SU LEV emission standard in 2025. Table 3 lists the average incremental costs for light

- duty LEV III vehicles in 2025

.

Table 3 . Average Incremental Costs for Light

- Duty LEV III Vehicles in 2025

Category Initial MY2008 certification level Engine size Average price ($/vehicle) Average

price ($/vehicle) Average

price to

consumer ($/vehicle) 4

- cyl 6

- cyl 8

- cyl

PC/LDT1 (up to 8,500 lbs) LEV $96 $160 $299 $148
$60

$86

ULEV $52 $90 $194 $74

SULEV $0 $1 $2 $0

LDT2 (8,500 to 14,000 lbs) LEV $96 $160 $299 $183
$135

ULEV $52 $90 $194 $128

SULEV $0 $1 $2 $0

The analysis concluded that the average cost

- effectiveness of light

- duty vehicles meeting the LEV III program exhaust requirements relative to the 2008 fleet is approximately $5.00 per poun d of Non

- Methane Organic Gases ( NMOG ) and Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx ) reduced. Staff also concluded that, since the proposed particulate matter ( PM ), that is, fine soot and other particle standards would be met by engine modifications during the normal cours e of engine development, no incremental increase in vehicle price would occur as a result. This cost estimate is likely conservative because the baseline 2008 fleet emissions are higher than the 2010 fleet emissions when LEV II is fully phased

- in. In addi tion, the 2025 fleet is projected to include a greater portion of down sized four and six cylinder engines that incur the lower costs to meet SULEV emissions. Stationary source controls can range up to $10 per pound of

emissions reduced.

Greenhouse Gas E

missions Many of the technologies that reduce climate change emissions will also reduce the operating costs of light

- duty vehicles. Estimates of the average reduction in operating

cost s of the new vehicles range from about 4 percent for model year ( MY ) 20 17

vehicles

, to over 25 percent for MY2025 vehicles. For every dollar spent, the regulation could save consumers about $3. These savings include the expenditures on electricity and hydrogen associated with operating the greater volume of ZEVs being prop osed; in the absence of those amendments the savings would be greater. Overall, purchasers of new vehicles in 2017 and beyond would experience a significant reduction in their operating cost as a result of the proposed regulation.

2.6 Economic Impacts

The greenhouse gas element of the Advanced Clean Cars program may impact several sectors of the economy. The steps that manufacturers will need to take to comply with the Advanced Clean Cars program are expected to result in price increases for new10

vehicl es, while lead ing to reduced operating costs. However, the operating cost savings from the use of more efficient vehicles will positively impact consumers and most businesses. Based on staff‟s analysis, the net effect of the program on the economy is

exp ected to be small but positive.

ARB has made the achievement of environmental justice an integral part of its activities. Accordingly, staff evaluated the economic effects of the Advanced Clean Cars program on low

- income households. For those househol ds who purchase new vehicles, the economic effects of the regulations would be no different than on any other consumer. However, because residents in low

- income communities tend to purchase used vehicles at a higher rate than residents in middle and high income communities, staff evaluated the effects of the program on the used vehicle market and, more specifically, on low income households that purchase used vehicles.

Staff concluded that, while the Advanced Clean Cars program will cause vehicle prices

t o increase, as with other consumers, low income consumers will see a significant reduction in vehicle operating costs. The fuel savings from more efficient used vehicles far outweigh the annualized cost of purchasing the vehicle (price increase spread ove r the years of ownership

. ) Therefore, while purchase prices for used cars will increase by a small percentage

, any increase in price will be o ffset by the operating cost savings.

Table 5 below show s that whether purchasing new or used vehicles, the cons umer will experience a net monthly savings from the program.

Table 5 . Potential Impact on Monthly Loan Payment and Operating Cost Savings for New

2025 MY Vehicles and 10 Year Old Used Vehicles (2009 dollars)

New 2025 MY Vehicles Description Advanced Cl ean Cars Program Average Increase in New Vehicle Price $1,900 Increase in Monthly Loan Payment $35 Net Lifetime Savings $4,000 Monthly Operating Savings $48 Net Monthly Savings $12 Payback Period (Years) 2.9

10 Year Old Used Vehicles

Description Advanced Clean
Cars Program

Increase in Used 2025 MY Vehicle Price $440

Increase in Monthly Loan Payment $14
Net Lifetime Savings $2,000
Monthly Operating Cost Savings $36
Net Monthly Savings $22
Payback Period (years) 0.911

3. Ze ro Emission Vehicle Re gulation

Many gasoline engines now emit at near zero emission levels of smog forming

emissions. Conventional hybrid electric vehicles have been commercialized, and the number of models offered for sale is quickly expanding. Recently, battery electric

veh icles (BEV) and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) have been introduced for sale, and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCV) are expected to be sold beginning in 2015.

This movement to wards commercialization of advanced clean cars has occurred

b ecause of the ZEV regulation. Table 6 below summarizes the vehicle placements due to the ZEV regulation to date.

Table 6 : Cumulative Vehicle Placement s

(1996

– 2010)

ZEV Technology Type Quantity of

Vehicles

Fuel Cell 180 Battery Electric 5,200 Neighborhood Elec tric 28,800 Hybrid or Compressed Natural Gas 380,000

Conventional Gas 1,750,000

The ZEV regulation, which affects passenger cars and light

- duty trucks, remains critically important to California‟s efforts to meet health based air quality goals. More recently, the program‟s goals have evolved to include paving the way for achieving California‟s long term climate change emission reduction goals. For these reasons, California remains committed to the commercialization of ZEV technologies.

At its last r eview of the program, the Board directed staff to strengthen the requirement over the current program and focus primarily on the zero emission drive, that is BEV, hydrogen FCV, and PHEV technologies. The goal of the Board direction was to ensure

Californi a remain s the central location for moving advanced, low greenhouse gas (GHG) technology vehicles from the demonstration phase to commercialization.

This rulemaking is an opportunity for the Board to commit to the transformation of California‟s light

- dut y vehicle fleet. As the technology forcing piece of the

Advanced Clean Car (ACC) package, the ZEV regulation along with new LEV III

smog

- forming pollutant and GHG standards can be the catalyst t o that transformative process. Proposed amendments to the re gulation therefore focus on technologies that help meet long term emission reduction goals, simplify the program where needed, and increase requirements for 2018 and subsequent model years.

3.1 Proposed Amendments to the ZEV Regulations

2009 through 2017 Mod el Year Amendments Staff‟s goal for amendments affecting the current ZEV regulation through the 2017

model year is to make minor mid

- course corrections and clarifications , and enable12

manufacturers to successfully meet 2018 and subsequent model year require ments.

The amendments include:

A. Provide Compliance Flexibility:

 Credit Expiration : Remove limitations on the use of credits (expiration dates)

.

 Intermediate Volume Manufacturer requirements : Slightly reduce the 2015 through 2017 credit requirement for intermediate volume manufacturers (IVM s

, less than 60,000 vehicles produced each year), to allow them to prepare for requirements in 2018.

 “ Travel provision ”

: Extend the provision that allows ZEVs placed in any state that has adopted the California ZEV r egulation to count towards the ZEV requirement through 2017 (i.e. extending the “travel provision” for BEVs through 2017).

B. Adjust Credits and Allowances: Increase credits for Type V (300 mile FCV) ZEV to appropriately incentivize this longer term techno logy. Add a Type H advanced technology partial zero emission vehicle (PZEV) allowance to give appropriate

credit for BEV

- like plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) , a car that is designed to run primarily on its batteries.

2018 and Subsequent Model Y ear Amendments

Staff‟s goal for the proposed amendments for 2018 and subsequent model years is to

achieve ZEV and transitional zero emission vehi cle (TZEV; most commonly a plug

- in hybrid electric vehicle) commercialization through simplifying the regulatio n and pushing technology to higher volume production in order to achieve cost reductions. The

amendments include:

A. Increase Requirement for 2018 and Subsequent Model Years. Increase requirements which push ZEVs and plug

- in hybrids to about 15 .4 percent o f new sales by 2025. This will ensure production volumes are at a level sufficient to bring battery and fuel cell technology down the cost curve and reduce incremental ZEV prices.

B. Focus Regulation on ZEVs and Plug

- in Hybrids : Remove PZEV (near

- zero emit ting conventional technologies) and advanced technology partial zero

emission vehicles (AT PZEV, typically non

- plug

- in hybrids) credits as compliance options for manufacturers because these tech nologies are now commercialized.

C. Amend Manufacturer Size Defi nitions and Ownership Requirements . Amend

I ntermediate and L arge V olume M anufacturer (LVM) size definitions to bring all but the smallest manufacturers under the full ZEV requirements by model year

2018 ; and change the percentage of ownership for combinin g manufacturers. These changes result in applying the ZEV regulation to manufacturers that represent 97 percent of the light duty vehicle market. Table 7 below shows the manufactures that will be subject to the existing and new requirements.13 Table 7 : Cur rent Manufacturer Size Status (2008

– 2010 MY Sales Averages, Rounded) Existing Large Volume

Manufacturers New Large Volume Manufacturers

Chrysler BMW

Ford Daimler

GM Hyundai

Honda Kia

Nissan Mazda Toyota Volkswagen

D. Modify Travel Provision: The so

- called t ravel p rovision allows ZEVs placed in any state that has adopted the California ZEV regulation to count towards the ZEV requirement in California. The staff proposes to e nd the t ravel p rovision for BEVs after model year 2017. Extend the t ravel p r ovision for fuel cell vehicles ( FCVs ) until sufficient complementary polices are in place in states that have adopted the California ZEV regulation. This will allow FCV technology to continue to mature, and provide time for states that have adopted Califor nia‟s ZEV regulation to build infrastructure and put in place incentives to foster FCVs.

E. Add GHG

-

ZEV Over

- Compliance Credits: Allow manufacturers who systematically over

- comply with the proposed greenhouse gas fleet standard to offset a portion of their ZEV requirement in 2018 through 2021 model years only.

3.2 Effect of Proposed Amendments

Zero Emission Vehicle Volumes As a result of staff‟s proposal, over 1.4 million ZEVs and TZEVs are expected to be produced cumulatively in California by 2025, with 500 ,000 of those vehicles being pure ZEVs (BEVs and FCVs). Figure 3 illustrates an expected compliance scenario which results in 15.4 percent of new car sales subject to the ZEV regulation.14

Figure 3 Expected ZEV Regulation Compliance for 2018 th rough 2025 Model

Years

Recently, a number of manufacturers have announced aggressive production plans for PHEVs and BEVs for the next three model years. Table 8 provides a summary of manufacturers‟ current program commitments, by technology category, a s publicly

stated. -

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Annual California Sales

Model Year 17%

14%

11%

9%

6%

3% % of 2025 Sales 15.4% of 2025

New Sales



### FCVs

BEVs



## Plug

Hybrids15 Table 8

. Future ZEVs and PHEVs Announced by Manufacturers

Manufacturer Model Type Timeframe Reference

BMW ActiveE BEV 2011 BMW, 2011a

i3 BEV 2013 BMW, 2011b

i3 Rex PHEV BMW, 2011c

i8 PHEV 2014 BMW, 2011b

BYD e6 BEV 2012 BY D, 2010

CODA ( unknown) BEV 2011 Popular Mechanics , 2011

Chrysler Fiat 500 EV BEV 2012 Chrysler, 2010

Fisker Karma PHEV 2011 Fisker, 2011

Ford C

- MAX Energi PHEV 2012 Ford, 2011a

Focus Electric BEV 2011 Ford, 2011b

Transit Connect Electric BEV in pro duction n/a

GM Cadillac ELR PHEV (unknown) GM, 2011a

Spark BEV 2012 GM, 2011b

Volt PHEV in production n/a

(unknown) FCV 2015 USA TODAY, 2010

Honda Fit EV BEV 2012 Honda, 2011

(unknown) PHEV 2012

Clarity FCX FCV in production n/a

Hyundai Tucso n IX FCV 2015 Bloomberg, 2010

Mercedes

Benz (unknown) BEV 2012 Mercedes , 2011

F

- Cell FCV in production Mercedes, 2010

Mitsubishi i BEV in production n/a

Outlander PHEV 2013 Motor Trend , 2011

Nissan LEAF BEV in production n/a

Smart fortwo ED BEV in production n/a

Tesla Model S BEV 2012 Tesla , 2011

Think City BEV in production n/a

Toyota Prius Plug

- In PHEV 2012 Toyota , 2011b

RAV

- 4 EV BEV 2012 Toyota , 2011c Scion iQ

- EV BEV 2012

(unknown) FCV 2015 Toyota , 2011d

Volkswagen e

- up! BEV 2013 Volks wagen , 2011

Wheego Whip LiFe BEV in production n/a16

3.3 Environmental Benefits

The proposed amendments will also result in an emissions benefit due mostly to increased electricity and hydrogen use, and the resulting decrease in the production and use of g asoline. Figures 6 and 7 compare well to wheel grams per mile emissions of conventional vehicle technologies and ZEV program technologies. The „fuel cycle‟

refers to the emissions related to the extraction, transportation, refining, and manufacture or ge neration of a specific fuel.

Figure 6. Well to Wheel Smog Forming E missions (ROG + NOx) C omparison

Figure 7. Well to Wheel Greenhouse Gas Emissions Comparison 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 NOx + ROG emissions (g/mi) Fuel cycle
Vehicle use (evap)

Vehicle use (exhaust)17

4. Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation

The CFO regulation requires the construction of altern ative fuel outlets for a particular fuel when there are 20,000 alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) using that fuel. Coordinating the development of alternative fuel infrastructure with AFV deployment is critically important to the successful commercializatio n of both. This is especially true for ZEVs, specifically hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, where customers rely solely on publically

available fuel to use their vehicles.

The Board is proposing changes to this program now in order to address the pending

co mmercialization of zero emission hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. As a zero emission vehicle fuel, hydrogen has many benefits beyond propelling a zero emission vehicle. It can be produced from renewable resources and used in a fuel cell vehicle; a kilogram o f hydrogen drives a car twice as far as a gallon of gasoline in a conventional car. As

shown in Table 9 below, manufacturers are projecting early commercial volumes of fuel

cell vehicles in the 20 15 to 2017 timeframe. However, a successful launch of thes e volumes of vehicles will require fueling stations.

Table 9 : Summary of ARB/CEC Auto Manufacturer Survey Results (2010) 2010 Survey 2012 2013 2014 2015

- 17

Cumulative FCVs

Statewide 312 430 1,389 53,000

FCVs in South Coast Air

Basin 240 347 1,161 34,230

4.1 Proposed Amendments to the CFO Regulation

The proposed changes to the CFO regulation include:

 Streamlining the compliance requirements . The proposed amendments include modifying the compliance requirements to be less prescriptive and more like perfor mance standards, giving the regulated party the flexibility to determine how best to meet the minimum requirements. Hydrogen infrastructure can be placed at an existing gasoline station or at a freestanding site.

 Adding a lower regional activation trigge r . Staff is proposing to add a 10,000
vehicle activation trigger that would apply to an air basin before the statewide
trigger of 20,000 is reached. The lower trigger complements auto manufacturers‟
early commercialization plans to marketing FCVs in regi onal clusters.

 Applying to zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) and ZEV fuels only . Staff is proposing
to change the types of alternative fuel vehicles captured under the regulation

from all alternative fuel vehicles (including vehicles using compressed natural18

gas and ethanol) certified as low emission vehicles to only those certified as
ZEVs when operating on a designated clean fuel.

 Adding a regulatory review for plug

- in electric vehicles . Electricity is currently
excluded from the definition of designated clean fuel in the regulation. The
proposed changes, applying to fuels used in ZEVs would include electricity,
however, since most plug

- in vehicles are expected to charge at home and public
and workplace charging is under development, Staff is proposing to add
regulatory language that requires ARB to evaluate the development and usage of
workplace and public charging infrastructure, and make recommendations for

further actions in two years.

 Changing the regulated party to be the major producer/importers o f gasoline

. California‟s seven major petroleum companies supply 93 percent of the gasoline
consumed in California, while owning only 13 percent of the retail gasoline
outlets. Changing the regulated party from owner/lessors of retail gasoline

outlets to “major refiner/importers of gasoline,” evenly spreads the requirement to
build CFOs among the parties that continue to benefit financially from California‟s
use of gasoline.

 Lowering the regulation sunset provision . Staff is proposing to lower the
requi rement to build CFOs when the number of hydrogen stations equals five
percent of the total number of retail gasoline outlets.

4.2 Impacts of Proposed Clean Amendments

Projected environmental impacts associated with this regulation are expected to be

min imal as activities will occur primarily in urban developed areas. The State will benefit from overall reductions in both greenhouse gas and criteria pollutant emissions due to the increased use of hydrogen fuel in fuel cell vehicles.

The anticipated ec onomic impacts of the regulation will mainly be felt during the onset, when hydrogen stations are expected to be less than fully utilized. As station utilization improves due to increased consumer acceptance of FCV technology and confidence in

fuel availa bility, the cost to produce hydrogen will decrease. Staff projects that, with high station utilization, fuel providers will be able to sell hydrogen at an affordable price and realize a return on their investment within three to four years. Offering hydr ogen fuel in convenient commercial settings is critical to the successful launch of zero emission vehicles, which will be the cornerstone of long term health based criteria pollutant and climate change emission reduction goals.