BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 8
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 8 (Perea and Skinner)
As Amended September 6, 2013
2/3 vote. Urgency
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |54-20|(June 27, 2013) |SENATE: |29-6 |(September 11, |
| | | | | |2013) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: NAT. RES.
SUMMARY : Extends for eight to nine years (from 2015-2016 until
2024) various temporary, vehicle-related, state and local fees
and surcharges to fund vehicle-related air quality, greenhouse
gas (GHG) and related programs administered by the California
Energy Commission (CEC), the Air Resources Board (ARB), local
air districts and the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR).
Extends all registration and license fees at current levels, as
well as the existing retail fee on each new tire to address
tire-related environmental impacts. Preempts ARB's authority to
require publicly available hydrogen-fueling stations through
regulation and instead requires CEC to fund the development of
up to 100 such hydrogen stations from vehicle registration fee
revenues in the amount of up to $220 million over the next
11-plus years.
The Senate amendments:
1)Revise the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (EFMP) as
follows:
a) Delay implementation of EFMP guidelines developed by ARB
in consultation with BAR until June 30, 2015.
b) Authorize ARB to require a vehicle to undergo a smog
test to qualify for EFMP.
c) Establish that $1,500 is the minimum replacement
compensation for low-income vehicle owners and the maximum
compensation for all other vehicle owners is $1,000 in
EFMP.
d) Authorize ARB to limit EFMP eligibility based on income
to ensure that the program adequately serves persons of low
AB 8
Page 2
to moderate income.
e) Authorize ARB to require that vehicles eligible for the
EFMP have sufficient remaining life, which may include:
i) Proof of current registration;
ii) Passing a recent smog check inspection; or,
iii) Passing another test similar to a smog check
inspection.
f) Authorize ARB to include the following in EFMP
guidelines:
i) Increased emphasis on the replacement of high
polluting vehicles with cleaner vehicles or increase use
of public transit that results in increased use of the
vehicle replacement program;
ii) Increased emphasis on the reduction of greenhouse
gas emissions though increased vehicle efficiency or
transit use as a result of program; and,
iii) Increased partnerships and outreach with
community-based organizations.
2)Delete provisions requiring CEC and ARB to assess alternative
fuel use.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill:
1)Extended until January 1, 2024, the sunset dates of each of
the various fees and surcharges that support the California
Alternative and Renewable Fuel, Vehicle Technology, Clean Air,
and Carbon Reduction Act of 2007 (AB 118 (Núñez), Chapter 750,
Statutes of 2007) and the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality
Standards Attainment Program (Moyer Program) (AB 1571
(Villaraigosa), Chapter 923, Statutes of 1999), as follows:
a) $3 increase of the annual vehicle registration fee - $2
for the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle
Technology Program (ARFVTP) and $1 for the Enhanced Fleet
Modernization Program (EFMP).
AB 8
Page 3
b) $8 increase of the smog abatement fee, paid to register
vehicles that are less than six years old and therefore
exempt from smog check. The revenues are split equally
between ARFVTP and Air Quality Improvement Program (AQIP).
c) $5 increase of the fee for special identification plates
for construction equipment, farm trailers, cotton trailers,
logging vehicles, and cemetery equipment. The revenues are
split equally between ARFVTP and AQIP.
d) $10 or $20 (depending upon the even or odd year of
registration) increase of the vessel registration fee. The
revenues are split equally between ARFVTP and AQIP.
e) $0.75 from the retail fee on new tires to the Air
Pollution Control Fund for the Moyer Program and other air
emission reduction efforts.
f) $2 surcharge for local air districts on vehicle
registrations to fund emission reduction programs,
including the Moyer Program.
2)Defined "publicly available hydrogen-fueling station" as
equipment used to store and dispense hydrogen fuel to vehicles
according to industry codes and standards that is open to the
public.
3)Preempted, until January 1, 2024, ARB from enforcing
regulations related to its Clean Fuels Outlet (CFO)
regulations and the deployment of hydrogen-fueling stations.
4)Required ARB, on or before June 30, 2014, and every year
thereafter until 2024, to aggregate and make available all of
the following:
a) The number of hydrogen-fueled vehicles that motor
vehicle manufacturers project to be sold or leased over the
next three years.
b) The total number of DMV-registered hydrogen-fueled
vehicles.
1)Required ARB, on or before June 30, 2014, and every year
thereafter until 2024, based on the information made
available, to do both of the following:
AB 8
Page 4
a) Evaluate the need for additional publicly available
hydrogen-fueling stations for the subsequent three years.
b) Report findings to the CEC on the need for additional
public hydrogen-fueling stations.
1)Required CEC to allocate $20 million annually until 2024 to
fund the number of stations identified, not to exceed 20% of
the monies appropriated by the Legislature from the ARFVTP
Fund, until there are at least 100 publicly available
hydrogen-fueling stations in California.
2)Allowed CEC, in consultation with ARB, upon determination that
the full amount is not needed to fund the number of hydrogen
stations, to allocate any remaining monies to other ARFVTP
projects.
3)Required CEC, in consultation with the ARB, to award funds
based on best available data, in accordance with a strategy
that supports the deployment of an effective and efficient
hydrogen fueling station network.
4)Authorized CEC to defer allocating the moneys as needed to
keep the number of fueling stations appropriate for the
fueling needs of hydrogen vehicles.
5)Authorized, upon consultation with ARB in determining that the
private sector is establishing publicly available hydrogen
fueling stations without the need for government support, CEC
to cease funding for the hydrogen fueling stations.
6)Required, on or before December 31, 2015, and annually
thereafter until 2024, ARB and CEC to jointly review and
report on progress toward establishing a hydrogen fueling
network, as specified.
7)Authorized CEC to design grants, loan programs, and other
forms of financial assistance, and authorizes CEC to enter
into an agreement with the State Treasurer's Office to provide
financial assistance to further the development of the
hydrogen fueling network.
8)Established that funds appropriated to CEC for the purposes of
hydrogen fueling stations be available for encumbrance by CEC
AB 8
Page 5
for up to four years from the date of the appropriation and
for liquidation up to four years after expiration of the
deadline to encumber.
9)Required ARB, no later than July 1, 2014, to convene a working
group to evaluate the policies and goals for the Moyer Program
and programs established pursuant to AB 923.
10)Required a benefit-cost score preference that reflects the
expected or potential greenhouse gas emission reduction per
dollar awarded by CEC for ARFVTP and the reasonably expected
or potential criteria pollutant emission reductions per dollar
awarded by ARB for AQIP.
11)Required CEC and ARB to ensure that revenues from specified
fees imposed on vehicles that are used for purposes of the
ARFVTP and AQIP are expended in compliance with Section 3 of
Article XIX of the California Constitution, which limits
permissible uses of vehicle fee and taxes to specified
transportation-related purposes.
12)Specified that consumer incentives for light-duty vehicles
shall not be greater than compensation given under EFMP.
13)Added intelligent transportation systems as a category of
projects eligible for funding under the ARFVTP.
14)Extended the authorization to fund projects reducing oxides
of nitrogen, particulate matter, and reactive organic gases
under the Moyer Program, until January 1, 2024.
15)Provided that the measure is an urgency statute allowing the
bill to take effect immediately upon enactment.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that AB 118 is funded through temporary increases in
vehicle registration fees ($3), smog abatement fees ($8), boat
registration fees ($10/20), and special identification plate
fees ($5). Collection of these fees is authorized until 2016.
AB 118 supports three major programs:
a) The ARFVTP, administered by CEC, provides grants and
other financial incentives to accelerate the development
and deployment of clean, efficient, low carbon alternative
AB 8
Page 6
fuels and technologies. ARFVTP is funded by $2 of the
vehicle registration fee and receives approximately $100
million per year total.
b) The AQIP, administered by ARB in consultation with local
air districts, funds projects that reduce criteria air
pollutants, improve air quality, and provide research for
alternative fuels and vehicles, vessels, and equipment
technologies. AQIP is funded by smog abatement fees, boat
registration fees, and special identification plate fees
and receives between $30-36 million per year.
c) The EFMP, under which ARB, in consultation with BAR,
pays to permanently remove cars and small trucks from
operation through voluntary retirement by their owners.
EFMP is funded by $1 of the vehicle registration fee and
receives approximately $30 million per year.
2)Establishes the Moyer Program, administered by ARB and local
air districts, to fund the incremental cost of
cleaner-than-required vehicles, engines, and equipment. The
primary objective of the program is to achieve air quality
emission reductions that would not otherwise occur through
regulations or other legal mandates. The Moyer Program is
funded by vehicle registration surcharges adopted by local air
districts in nonattainment areas.
3)Expands the Moyer Program (AB 923 (Firebaugh), Chapter 707,
Statutes of 2004) to cover additional pollutants and engines,
imposes a $1 fee on tire sales to fund the Moyer Program and
CalRecycle, and establishes air quality improvement programs
through local air districts. AB 923's provisions sunset on
January 1, 2015.
4)Requires ARB to adopt a statewide GHG emissions limit
equivalent to 1990 levels by 2020 and to adopt rules and
regulations to achieve maximum technologically feasible and
cost-effective GHG emission reductions (AB 32 (Núñez), Chapter
488, Statutes of 2006).
5)Requires ARB to adopt regulations that achieve the maximum
feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from
motor vehicles (AB 1493 (Pavley), Chapter 200, Statutes of
2002).
AB 8
Page 7
6)Requires CEC and ARB to adopt a state plan to increase the use
of alternative transportation fuels, including setting
alternative fuel goals for 2012, 2017 and 2022 (AB 1007
(Pavley), Chapter 371, Statutes of 2005). The AB 1007 "State
Alternative Fuels Plan" (December 2007) recommended goals for
alternative fuel use of 9% by 2012, 11% by 2017 and 26% by
2022.
7)Requires, pursuant to ARB 's CFO regulations, certain owners
and lessors of retail gasoline stations to equip an
appropriate number of their stations with clean alternative
fuels. ARB's recent amendments to the regulations focused
primarily on providing outlets for hydrogen fuels.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1) Annual revenues of $180 million (special fund) for various
AB 118 programs until 2024, of which $20 million be directed
for the construction and operation of a hydrogen fueling
network in FY 13-14, FY 14-15, and FY 15-16 and up to $20
million in the remaining years.
2) Annual tire fee additional revenue of approximately $34
million (special fund) for the Carl Moyer Program beginning
January 1, 2015 through 2024.
3) Annual costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to
the ARB, CEC, and Bureau of Automotive Repair to continue to
administer various air quality and alternative fuel programs
and associated reporting requirements which will be fully
covered by the surcharge extensions.
COMMENTS :
Author's statement .
Californians suffer from the worst air pollution in
the nation, with over 90 percent of residents living
in counties with unhealthy air during some parts of
the year, exposing them to unhealthy air that
contributes to respiratory problems, heart disease,
stroke, cancer and a reduced life span. Air pollution
also imposes burdens on our economy by increasing
hospital admissions, emergency room visits and missed
AB 8
Page 8
work days. According to a recent study, the economic
benefits of the (San Joaquin Valley) region meeting
air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter
would top $6 billion per year in reduced health,
missed work and school, and premature death; this is
equivalent to a payment of $1,600 per person per year.
In addition, California faces the challenge of
meeting several state and federal air quality and
emission reduction mandates by the mid-2020s. As the
state works to comply with these mandates,
California's clean transportation and air quality
investment programs are set to expire in 2014 and
2015. AB 8 seeks to expand California's clean air and
clean vehicle incentive programs, in order to meet
clean air, public health, climate and economic
development goals.
Background on AB 118, Moyer and related programs . In 2007, AB
118 established three new programs intended to promote vehicle
and fuel technology that reduces air pollution and GHG emissions
statewide. These programs are the ARFVTP, AQIP and EFMP.
ARFVTP funds projects by various public and private groups that
"develop and deploy innovative technologies that transform
California's fuel and vehicle types to help attain the state's
climate change policies." The CEC prepares an investment plan,
in coordination with a stakeholder advisory committee, which
outlines the ARFVTP's funding priorities. AB 118 requires the
advisory committee to include representatives from state
agencies; fuel and vehicle technology consortia; labor,
environmental, and community-based justice and health
organizations; academic groups; consumer advocates; workforce
training groups; and private industry. Once an investment plan
is completed, CEC receives and solicits bids for projects,
awarding funds based on eligibility criteria.
Monies appropriated to the ARFVTP come from temporary increases
in smog abatement fees, vehicle registration fees, vessel
registration fees and certain other vehicle fees. According to
the CEC, $360 million of ARFVTP funds have been awarded to
projects such as the construction of electric vehicle charging
stations, the deployment of natural gas-powered vehicles and the
production of biofuels.
AQIP, administered by ARB, provides financial incentives for
AB 8
Page 9
public and private groups and individuals to adopt smog and
diesel particulate pollution reducing technology that
concurrently reduces GHG emissions. Two of AQIP's flagship
projects, the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) and the Hybrid
and Zero Emissions Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Program,
represent the program's largest funding commitments. AQIP also
provides incentives for biofuels research, hybrid truck testing,
lawn and garden equipment replacement, zero-emission all-terrain
agricultural work vehicle rebates, advanced technology
demonstration and hybrid off-road equipment pilot projects.
The Legislature appropriates about $30-40 million annually to
AQIP. These funds are derived from fees on smog abatement,
vehicle registration, vessel registration and specialty
identification plates. Since 2009, ARB has spent approximately
$126 million on AQIP programs, with $49.7 million going to CVRP
and $64.4 million to hybrid and zero emission truck and bus
vouchers.
The EFMP supplements BAR's vehicle retirement program known as
the Consumer Assistance Program. Through joint administration
by local air districts and BAR, eligible low-income consumers
whose vehicles fail smog check tests may receive financial
assistance to voluntarily retire their vehicles and/or replace
them with vehicles meeting certain emission and model-year
requirements. During fiscal year 2011-12, approximately $34
million of EFMP funds were expended for the retirement of 25,741
vehicles.
The Moyer Program was established in 1998 to promote compliance
with federal Clean Air Act requirements. Through the Moyer
program, local air districts provide funding incentives for
heavy-duty vehicles and equipment owners to adopt
emissions-reducing technology. To be eligible for funding,
projects must meet a cost-effectiveness criterion and reduce
nitrogen oxide and fine particulate emissions. In 2004, AB 923
expanded the Moyer Program's covered emissions to include
reductions in particulate matter and reactive organic gasses.
AB 923 also increased the new tire fee to fund the expansion.
Projects that air districts have funded through the Moyer
Program include engine retrofitting and replacement for
heavy-duty vehicles, off-road equipment, locomotives, diesel
marine vessels and stationary agricultural vehicles.
Funds for the Moyer Program are primarily derived from fees on
AB 8
Page 10
vehicle registration and new tire purchases. Local air
districts that administer the program are also required to
provide matching funds to implement projects. To date, $652
million has been expended through the Moyer Program to retrofit
or replace 36,480 engines.
ARB's Lower-Emission School Bus Program (LESBP), adopted
pursuant to ARB's administrative authority, funds the
replacement or retrofitting of old school buses to reduce
schoolchildren's exposure to toxic air pollutants. From the
program's inception in 2000 until 2007, the Legislature
appropriated over $100 million to the LESBP for the replacement
of 600 school buses and the retrofitting of about 3,800 diesel
school bus engines. After voters passed Proposition 1B in 2006,
the LESBP received bond money of approximately $196 million for
expenditure until June 30, 2014. Under the new funding scheme,
the program has funded 578 school bus replacements and 2,287
retrofits to date.
AB 118 and AB 923, however, contained provisions that would
sunset the funding sources for the aforementioned programs.
Under terms of AB 923, all changes to the LESBP and Moyer
program, from the expansion of covered emissions to the tire fee
and registration surcharge increases, will be repealed on
January 1, 2015. Meanwhile under AB 118, the fee increases
funding ARFVTP, AQIP, and EFMP are set to expire on January 1,
2016.
Another stop on the hydrogen highway - ARB trades stick for
carrot . On January 26, 2012, ARB considered amendments to the
CFO regulation as part of its Advanced Clean Cars package. The
amendments were intended to ensure that there was sufficient
hydrogen fueling infrastructure necessary to meet forecasted
fuel cell vehicle deployment. The required stations would have
helped to ensure sufficient availability of hydrogen after fuel
cell vehicles had become commercially available (i.e., large
volumes). The CFO amendments would have required that oil
refiners assure that hydrogen fueling stations were available to
the public once certain triggers were met (10,000 fuel cell
vehicles in a regional air basin or 20,000 fuel cell vehicles
statewide). The ARB has withheld finalizing the amendments
because, in its view, a better way to achieve the goals of the
regulation was developed through legislation, which, they
believe, is embodied in this bill. According to ARB:
AB 8
Page 11
AB 8 would direct $20 million from the AB 118 program
for each of the first three years to develop the
hydrogen infrastructure. AB 8 would also authorize
the CEC to allocate up to an additional $20 million
annually after July 1, 2016, as necessary, to
construct at least 100 publicly available hydrogen
fueling stations in California. The dedication of
funding for 100 hydrogen stations in lieu of requiring
the development of such stations administratively as
proposed through the CFO regulation provides a
stronger, more certain path to achieving the state's
air quality and climate change goals. Guaranteeing
funding for infrastructure upfront will support the
initial commercial launch of vehicles, which is in
advance of the triggers as proposed in the
regulations. By contrast, the regulation would have
only provided for hydrogen fueling stations after a
significant volume of vehicles were on the road.
Adequate funding for hydrogen stations effectively
achieves the goal of the proposed regulation,
therefore rendering the regulatory changes
unnecessary.
Sierra Club California objects to the repeal of ARB's authority
to enforce any element of the CFO regulation and contends that
it "undermines the integrity of the rulemaking process?It
suggests that, if one of the regulated entities is dissatisfied
with the outcome, that entity can march over to the Capitol and
get the Legislature to simply throw out the rule?"
In response, ARB contends that the bill provides greater
certainty that the minimum fueling infrastructure will be in
place to support the initial commercial launch of fuel cell
vehicles, which are necessary for achieving the state's
long-term air quality and climate change goals. Furthermore,
the amendments to the regulation were controversial and would
have been litigated, potentially delaying their implementation.
ARB believes that the bill represents a collaboration among
stakeholders and is a more certain and productive way to achieve
the goals of the proposed regulation amendments.
The give and take of AB 118 . Everyone benefits from clean air,
but some of the beneficiaries are more equal than others in the
programs funded by this bill, particularly the AB 118 programs.
The vast majority (over 90%) of funds for both the ARFVTP ($93
AB 8
Page 12
million in FY 2011-12) and AQIP ($31 million in FY 2011-12) come
from annual registration fees paid through DMV by vehicle
owners. AB 118 applies a registration fee increase of $3 for
all vehicles, plus an $8 increase in the smog abatement fee that
applies to newer vehicles that are exempt from smog check. $2
of the registration fee goes to ARFVTP and $1 to EFMP. The $8
is split between ARFVTP and AQIP.
The registration fee increase is flat - that is it is collected
without regard to a vehicle's value. So a car valued at $500
pays the same as a car valued at $100,000. AB 118 was a
majority vote fee bill enacted prior to Proposition 26 (the bill
passed the Senate with a bare majority 21 votes). This bill,
being a two-thirds vote, could scale the fee to make it roughly
proportional to vehicle value and give lower-income drivers a
break.
What does AB 118 fund? Listed below, for example, are the 10
largest ARFVTP awards, totaling $102 million (Overall, CEC has
made over 180 awards totaling $360 million):
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Rank |Recipient | Project | Amount | Description |
| | | Type | | |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 1 |CALSTART |Alternativ|$18 |Administrator of various |
| | |e Fuel |million |alternative fuel vehicle |
| | |Vehicle | |programs and projects. |
| | |Developmen| | |
| | |t | | |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 2 |Air |Hydrogen |$11.2 |Construct 6 new hydrogen |
| |Products |Fueling |million |fueling stations and 2 |
| | |Stations | |upgrade stations at core |
| | | | |early market fuel cell |
| | | | |vehicle sales regions in |
| | | | |Southern California. |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 3 |High Mt |Biogas |$11.0 |Landfill gas to |
| |Fuels | |million |bio-liquified natural gas |
| |(Waste | | |project at Ventura County |
| |Mgmt and | | |Landfill. |
| |Linde) | | | |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
AB 8
Page 13
| 4 |California|Technology|$10.3 |Provide employee training |
| | | Training |million |funds to California |
| |Employment| | |businesses with new |
| | Training | | |alternative fuel, fuel |
| |Panel | | |infrastructure or vehicle |
| | | | |products. |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 5 |Propel |E85 |$10.1 |Construct and operate 101 |
| | |Retail |million |E85 retail ethanol stations |
| | |Stations | |throughout California. |
| | | | | |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 6 |Tesla |Electric |$10.0 |Expand production capacity |
| |Motors |Car |million |for the Model X cross-over |
| | | | |electric SUV. |
| | | | | |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 7 |San |Natural |$9.3 |Purchase 202 heavy-duty |
| |Bernardino|Gas |million |natural gas trucks and |
| | | | |construct two |
| |Associated| | |publicly-accessible |
| | | | |liquefied natural gas |
| |Government| | |fueling stations at the |
| |s | | |Ryder facilities in San |
| | | | |Bernardino and Orange |
| | | | |Counties. |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 8 |ETEC/Nissa|Electric |$8.0 |Install 2,300 level 2 |
| |n |Chargers |million |chargers and 30 DC fast |
| | | | |chargers in San Diego as |
| | | | |part of the DOE EV Project. |
| | | | | Support deployment of |
| | | | |5,000 EVs in San Diego |
| | | | |region. |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
| 9 |California|Training |$7.3 |Funding for EDD employee |
| | |and |million |and skills development |
| |Employment|Skills | |activities. Identify |
| | |Developmen| |regional needs for skills |
| |Developmen|t | |development and training to |
| |t | | |support advanced technology |
| |Department| | |fuel production, fueling |
| | | | |infrastructure and vehicle |
| | | | |manufacture. |
|-----+----------+----------+--------+----------------------------|
AB 8
Page 14
| 10 |Quallion |Electric |$6.9 |Develop pilot scales, |
| | |Battery |million |automated manufacturing |
| | | | |line for lithium-ion |
| | | | |battery cells and battery |
| | | | |packs. |
| | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CVRP offers rebates up to $2500 for electric vehicles (EVs).
Listed below are rebates by vehicle type and model as of
December 31, 2012, according to ARB:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Vehicle Type and Model |Number of | Total |Percentage |
| | Rebates | Dollars | of Total |
| | | Allocated | Dollars |
| | | | Allocated |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Light-Duty Zero-Emission | 8,305 |$ | 66.61%|
|Vehicles | | 24,805,117 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Nissan 2011-2012 Leaf | 6,720 |$ | 56.16%|
| | | 20,911,580 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Tesla 2012 Model S | 449 |$ | 3.01%|
| | | 1,122,500 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|smart USA 2011 ED Cabriolet | 338 | $ 663,000 | 1.78%|
|and Coupe | | | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Ford 2012-2013 Focus Electric | 269 | $ 672,500 | 1.81%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Tesla 2009-2011 Roadster | 154 | $ 655,000 | 1.76%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Mitsubishi 2012 i-MiEV | 95 | $ 190,000 | 0.51%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|BMW 2011 1 Series Active E | 70 | $ 52,500 | 0.14%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Toyota 2012 RAV4 EV | 67 | $ 167,500 | 0.45%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Honda 2013 Fit EV | 48 | $ 120,000 | 0.32%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Th!nk City 2011 | 47 | $ 111,037 | 0.30%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
AB 8
Page 15
|CODA 2012 Sedan | 35 | $ 87,500 | 0.23%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Honda 2010-2011 FCX-Clarity | 10 | $ 45,000 | 0.12%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Mercedes-Benz 2011-2012 | 2 | $ 5,000 | 0.01%|
|F-Cell | | | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Wheego LiFe 2011 | 1 | $ 2,000 | 0.01%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Plug-In Hybrid Electric | 7,489 |$ | 30.13%|
|Vehicles | | 11,220,900 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Chevy 2012 Volt Low Emission | 3,777 |$ | 15.21%|
|package | | 5,664,450 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Toyota 2012 Prius Plug-In | 3,677 |$ | 14.78%|
|Hybrid | | 5,503,950 | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Ford CMAX Energi | 35 | $ 52,500 | 0.14%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Commercial Zero-Emission | 49 | $ 980,000 | 2.63%|
|Vehicles | | | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Smith 2009-2010 Newton1-9 | 39 | $ 780,000 | 2.09%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Navistar 2010 eStar 300 | 10 | $ 200,000 | 0.54%|
|series | | | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Zero-Emission Motorcycles | 121 | $ 135,100 | 0.36%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Zero 2009-2011 DS | 103 | $ 112,300 | 0.30%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Brammo 2010-2012 Enertia | 13 | $ 15,900 | 0.04%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Vetricx 2007-2011 | 5 | $ 6,900 | 0.02%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Neighborhood Electric | 87 | $ 97,150 | 0.26%|
|Vehicles | | | |
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|GEM 2009-2012 | 51 | $ 51,550 | 0.14%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Miles EV 2009-2010 ZX40S-AD | 35 | $ 44,100 | 0.12%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
|Vantage 2010 EVX1000 | 1 | $ 1,500 | 0.00%|
|------------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------|
AB 8
Page 16
| Total| 16,051 |$ |100.00% |
| | | 37,238,267 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The top EV by far is the Nissan Leaf, at 6,720 rebates as of
December 31, 2012. The current net price for the Leaf (after
$7500 federal tax credit and $2500 CVRP rebate) can be as low as
$20,000. The number two EV is the Tesla Model S (449 rebates as
of December 31, 2012, though Tesla now reports over 3000 sold
including 2013), with base prices ranging from $70,000 to over
$100,000. Survey data indicates that the typical CVRP recipient
earns over $150,000 a year, drives 15-30 miles per day and owns
at least one other non-EV car. According to the DMV, the smog
abatement fee that funds CVRP is not collected from owners of
EVs.
AB 118 lacks adequate measurement and verification of GHG and
criteria pollutant benefits . Though AB 118 is not a regulatory
program, the bill was enacted to support development of vehicle
technologies that reduce GHG emissions, in furtherance of
achieving the state's climate change goals. However, AB 118's
funding programs, such as ARFVTP, lack the measurement and
verification of emissions benefits that would be expected of a
regulatory program. It is not clear from information supplied
by the CEC about ARFVTP awards whether the actual GHG emission
reductions of funded projects are ever accounted for, much less
factored into the initial decision to award funds.
Analysis Prepared by : Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
FN: 0002747