Proposed Amendments to theZero Emission VehicleProgramMarch 27, 2008Overview• Current ZEV program• Regulatory process• Summary of proposed amendments• Issues• Summary and staff recommendationProgram Goals• Achieve significant air quality benefits• Push research, development anddeployment of zero emission vehicles• Encourage ZEV commercializationthrough introduction of ZEV-enablingtechnologyCurrent ZEVProgram30 %PZEV“10%” Mandate42% by volume2 %AT PZEV11%~1%ZEVZEV Program (2012 – 2014)Current ZEVProgramExisting ZEV “Gold”Requirements1Fuel Cell VehiclesYears50,0002015 – 201725,0002012 – 20142,5002009 – 20112502005 – 20081Alternative Compliance PathCurrent ZEVProgramProgram Achievements• Introduced Bronze in 1998• Promoted hybrid electric vehiclesthrough Silver provision in 2001• Focused research and developmentof battery electric and fuel cellvehiclesCurrent ZEVProgramProgram Achievements1672,000ConventionalBronze - PZEV109,000Hybrid/CompressedNatural GasSilver – AT ZEV26,000Neighborhood electric4,400Battery electric160Fuel cellGold - ZEVQuantityVehicle TypeCurrent ZEVProgram1Estimated placements through 2006Timeline• Expert Panel review 2006 – 2007• ZEV Status Report, May 2007• Public workshop, July 2007• ZEV concept paper, November 2007• Initial Statement of Reasons,February 8, 2008RegulatoryProcessRationale for ProposedAmendments• Respond to Board’s direction atMay 2007 hearing– Align program requirements to reflectExpert Panel’s findings and marketstatus– Create opportunities for emergingtechnologies– Simplify program requirementsRegulatoryProcessZEV Challenges• More development needed before goldvehicles ready for commercialization• Existing requirements– force premature, large scale fuel cell production– limit flexibility and technology options• Pace of future development difficult topredict, requiring regular course correctionsRegulatoryProcessSummary of SignificantAmendmentsSummary of Proposed Amendments:Significant Changes• Creation of New Path (2012 andonward)• Revise credit system• New categories for emerging goldtechnologiesSummary ofProposedAmendmentsSummary of Proposed Amendments:Other Changes• Revise Silver credits• Increase credits for NEVs• Extend Travel Provision• Extend transition for intermediatevolume manufacturers• Increased transparency ofmanufacturer creditSummary ofProposedAmendmentsCreation of “New Path”1990 to 2004 2012 forward“Alt” PathBase Path“New Path”Original Path2005 to 2011Battery EVs /NEVsbattery, fuelcell, plug-inhybridfuel cell/banked creditResult:Summary ofProposedAmendmentsGold Requirements50,00025,000CurrentRequirementsminimum 25,000gold with 83,333Silver +minimum 2,500gold with 75,000Silver +AllowableOption2015 – 20172012 – 2014Summary ofProposedAmendmentsSilver Plus Category• Silver earning one or morecredits• Use of ZEV fuel• Examples:– Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles– Hydrogen internal combustionengine vehiclesSummary ofProposedAmendmentsGold and Silver+ OptionSummary ofProposedAmendments50,00025,000Gold Only25,000+83,0002,500+75,000Minimum Goldwith Silver Plus1=108,000=77,500Total Vehicles2015 – 20172012 – 20141Assumes a 22-mile electric range blended HEV. Number of vehicleswill vary if vehicle has different credit values.Two New ZEV Types• Type I.5– City battery electric vehicle– 75 to 100 mile range• Type IV– Advanced fuel cell vehicle– Minimum 200 mile range/fast refuelingcapableSummary ofProposedAmendmentsCredit Per VehicleFuel cellvehicle(200 mile)54321Fuel cell vehicle(current)BEV(100 mile)NEVPZEVBEV(50 mile)Blended HEV(22 mile)0Summary ofProposedAmendmentsAT PZEVBEV(75 mile)Significance of CreditsCompliance example: 2,500 FCV200neededNEVII.5IIIIIIVnot allowed0.3NEV6,2502BEV 505,0002.5BEV 754,1673BEV 1003,1254FCV 1002,5005FCV 200Number of VehiclesCreditZEV TypeSummary ofProposedAmendmentsTreatment of Battery ElectricVehicles in the Alt Path000Proposed Cap50 percentType I50 percentType IIN/AType I.5Current CapSummary ofProposedAmendmentsIncrease Credits for NEVs• Double existing credit per vehiclefrom 0.15 to 0.30• Reflects positive environmentalbenefits– Reduced cold starts– Zero emissions for short trips• Limited functionality and rangeSummary ofProposedAmendmentsGoldvehiclesproducednot metnot metCarryBackOnly used formeetingSilver Plus,Silver andBronzerequirementsGoldZEVcreditearnedCarryForward201420132012201120102009Carry Forward/Carry BackRetains Full CreditSummary ofProposedAmendmentsPublic Disclosure ofProduction and Credit Data• All production data to be madepublic beginning in 2009• Release of ZEV credit bankbalances in model year 2010• Disclosure will allow morecomplete participation by allstakeholdersSummary ofProposedAmendmentsSection 177 (Travel)Provision• Other states able to adopt LEV/ZEVregulationsBEV 7520172011FCV20172014ProposedN/AN/AExistingFCV 200BEV 100BEV 50ZEVProvision Sunset YearSummary ofProposedAmendmentsTransition for IVMs33%25%0%SilverFull ZEVProgram13+67%0%10 to 12Ramp Up 275%100%Bronze0%0%Gold7 to 9Ramp Up 11 to 6“Lead Time”YearsSummary ofProposedAmendmentsSummary and StaffRecommendationExpected Number of Vehicles– for the purpose of meeting the requirementsEffects*Includes probable credit use1,260,0001,260,000700,000Bronze153,00095,000107,000Silver83,00075,00030,000Silver+50,0005,0000Or Gold CityEVs25,0002,500250Gold Fuel CellVehicles2015-20172012-20142009-2011*TypeNumber of Gold and SilverPlus for 2012 to 2017EffectsProposalExisting75,000075,000Maximum useof FCVs185,83375,000Total158,3330Silver Plus27,50075,000GoldMinimum useof FCVsAir Quality Impacts(tons in thousands)5,5507Average EmissionReduction15,45010ProposedAmendments21,00017Current RegulationCO2ROG + NOxEffectsIssuesMinimum Number of GoldZEVs In 2012 and BeyondStaff proposal:Allows 25,000 vehicle gold requirement to be reduced to2,500 if backfilled with silver plus vehiclesIssue:Should minimum number of ZEVs (“floor”) be increased?Pro:Accelerate commercialization of ZEVsAccelerate fueling infrastructureCon:FCVs not ready for commercializationCosts too highIssuesCredits for FCVs Relative toBEVsStaff Proposal:FCVs get 4 or 5 credits; BEVs get 2-3.Issue:Should credit for FCVs relative to BEVs be increased?Pro:Helps assure continued investment in FCVs despitehigher cost than BEVsHelps overcome greater barriers to commercializationCon:Continued investment in FCV seems certainEmission benefit doesn’t justify differenceIssuesPublic Disclosure ofProduction and Credit DataStaff proposal:All production data to be made public beginning in2009; release of specified ZEV credit bank balancesinmodel year 2010Issue:Should trades be made public?Pro:Provide all interested parties with all data for analysisCon:Could compromise and reduce tradesDisclose could impact credit monetary valueIssuesTransition for IntermediateVolume ManufacturersStaff proposal:Extend phase-in from 6 to 12 years, with silverrequirement ramping up over last 6 yearsIssue:Should phase-in be shortened?Pro:All but one IVM already demonstrating ZEVsRequirement known for a long timeCon:May cause BMW to abandon H2ICE developmentIssuesNumber of ZEVs Required inOther States (“Travel”)Staff Proposal:ZEV numbers not affected by other states until 2014forBEVs and 2017 for FCVsIssue:Should Silver Plus vehicles be included within thisprovision?Pro:Softens introduction ramp of new technologyCon:Reduces numbers of vehicles in CaliforniaTechnology ready for full commercializationInfrastructure not an issueIssuesStaff Recommendation• Approve the proposed amendments– Increase air quality benefits– Encourage emerging technologies– Maintain progress in transformingCalifornia’s vehicle fleet to zeroemissionsAdditional Activities• Alternative Fuel Incentive Program• AB 118• California Fuel Cell Partnership• California Hydrogen Highway Network• Driveclean.ca.govStaff Presentation Concluded