It may well be too late for California, but sales of motorhomes in eight other states could be spared the Golden State’s fate. Commercial trucking associations have banded together and are pleading with eight state governors (and one governor-elect) to slow down the implementation of ACT—California’s Advanced Clean Trucks regulation. If those states listen, it might affect the potential motorhome sales shutdown in those states.
On December 17, eight state trucking associations issued a letter to governors in states adopting Advanced Clean Trucks rules, expressing their concerns regarding the new requirements.
ACT regulation creates motorhome sales shutdown in other states
As we revealed in early November, California regulators have stood by the ACT regulation. As we wrote at the time, “California’s Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) regulation, which aims to promote zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), will effectively create a near-total ‘ban’ on motorhome sales in the state. Other states that follow California’s ACT regulation will see a similar shutdown. The regulation doesn’t directly spell out a ban on motorhomes. But it does force medium- and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers to increase the percentage of ZEVs they sell each year. Result? These manufacturers simply turned off the supply of old-fashioned internal combustion engine chassis. They’ve done this simply because they don’t have a supply of chassis fit for motorhome use.”
Unless something unforeseen happens, new sales of motorhomes in California will dry up in 2025. But other states, ones that adopt those same California regulations, will see the same problem. Since ACT affects big trucks, the big trucking associations are trying to get those states to slow the regulation down. The states include Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.
Of those states, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Washington are slated to start the rule in 2025. Vermont jumps on board in 2026, and the rest in 2027. The coalition of trucking associations wants the states not to quash the ACT regulation entirely, but to delay implementation. The letter cites the fact that engine manufacturers just don’t have the technology yet to make the ACT regulations feasible.
Even if e-motorhomes could be built, there’s another big problem
Additionally, under ACT, putting herds of zero-emissions big trucks—and by extension, e-motorhomes—on the roadways has another big problem: not enough charge stations. They cite New York as a big example. The Empire State adopted the ACT regulation in 2021. But since the state took on the regulation, it has built ZERO charging stations suitable for medium- or heavy-duty trucks. Those futuristic electric Class A motorhomes are similarly afflicted. “And while truck operators in Washington, California and Oregon appreciate the continued attempt to secure federal funding for an EV truck charging corridor along Interstate 5, the reality is that it will take years to complete,” the letter states. “We need this infrastructure now.”
Truck dealers in New York felt the impact of the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) regulation before it even took effect. Burr Truck, based in Vestal, N.Y., told Land Line that it has already lost 200 diesel truck orders. This is due to a new requirement from Volvo, which stipulates that the dealership must sell one battery-electric truck before it can order or sell 13 diesel trucks.
Just how the states will respond to the trucking industry call remains to be seen. If they do push off implementation of the ACT regulation, it could conceivably ease the squeeze on conventional chassis, making them available to the RV industry. It could avert a motorhome sales shutdown.
For a full report on the trucking association letter, click here.
##RVT1190b
Great report Russ and Tina. And thank you for keeping us all up to date on this important issue !
Let’s hope that maybe even California will get the message that they are a bit out of touch in their line of thinking.
When I paid my exorbitant vehicle registration last spring by mail to the California DMV it was a major surprise when the new registration sheet came back as fully paid but no sticker for the license plate. It said the diesel coach was not registered with California Air Resource Board (CARB). After three days of trying to understand their voluminous site I gave up but sent them a message that as a retired aerospace technical writer if I ever created a document like theirs I would have been fired. Weeks later, after reading posting by others, tried again. I assumed a test was required. End result: paid $30 plus trip to DMV to get sticker.
Thanks for that update Gary Blackburn. This is one reason I read RVT, peer to peer information. Real world experiences informing others.
As an addendum to my comment, it is the CARB via California legislation that is requiring zero emission vehicles. Existing trucks, everything from delivery vans to cross-country haulers, will not be able to register if beyond a given age until they replace older engines with new low soot, no smoke, and and no CO2 emission engines. Anyone who has disabled any portion of existing pollution control equipment will be in a world of trouble and expense. At least complying RVs and trucks can remain in California even though no new ones can be brought in and registered.
It’s all about the mega dollar revenues..
Thank you, Russ and Tina! This certainly bears watching. Some pretty easily seen upheaval may be on the horizon. Happy new year and safe travels! 🙂
So, all those big EVs will have to carry a generator with them to recharge? Oh wait, they won’t meet the emissions standards either. Solar panels, maybe?
Very very very long extension cords.
This legislation certainly impacts RV’ers but imagine the impact on U-Haul.
Their larger moving trucks fit in this classification as do the many local delivery trucks that rely on the F-53 and Freightliner class chassis. Yikes!
Why can’t F53 chassis be sold? Ford, GM, and Ram all have EVs made by their company.
If I understand all the articles right, the affected OEM’s don’t offer any products in that vehicle class to create the needed carbon credits and that’s the root of the conundrum.
Said differently, with no hybrid or EV equivalent of the F-53 chassis to “dilute” the numbers in that vehicle class, there’s to be no further sales. That’s why the trucking industry is upset over what many think is just an RV issue.
The legislation covers ALL vehicles with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or greater with a few exemptions.
Here’s more information from the RVIA