The Maine Board of Environmental Protection (Maine BEP) has now officially responded to the thousand-plus public comments it received on the controversial, California-style vehicle emissions regulations currently up for adoption by the Board.
Known as the Advanced Clean Cars II Program, these rules would require that 43 percent of new cars sold in Maine be zero-emissions vehicles (ZEVs) by model year 2027 and 82 percent by model year 2032.
After receiving 1,084 pieces of public comment concerning these proposed regulations, the Maine BEP published an extensive 36-page document responding to all the arguments that were made and the concerns that Maine residents raised.
Among the issues addressed in their response were concerns regarding the affordability of ZEVs for average Mainers, the efficiency of electric vehicle (EV) batteries in cold weather, the lack of adequate EV infrastructure throughout the state, and the expected interference with market forces.
Additionally, their response outlined the statutory authority upon which the BEP relied on in classifying the rule change as “routine technical” as opposed to “major substantive” — something that has been an major point of contention concerning this proposal from the beginning.
While “routine technical” rules do not require legislative approval, major substantive rules do.
The Maine BEP also affirmed a number of arguments made in favor of the proposed rule change, including the positive environmental impact of hastening the transition to ZEVs, the cost savings associated with owning an EV over the life of a vehicle, and the expected increase in options for Mainers looking to purchase new vehicles in the future.
Click Here to Read the Maine BEP’s Full Response to 1,000+ Public Comments
The Maine BEP Responds
Eighty-one unique arguments were addressed by the Maine BEP throughout the course of their document with answers ranging from a few sentences to a few paragraphs in length.
ZEV Affordability
With regard to the concerns raised over the affordability of ZEVs — which was noted in dozens of public comments — the BEP acknowledged that “a significant barrier to EV adoption today is the increased upfront cost of an EV compared to a conventional fossil-fuel powered vehicle.”
“However,” they continued, “as the cost of batteries continues to drop, the price of a battery-electric vehicle should eventually become the same as a combustion engine vehicle.” (emphasis added)
“And while, for now,” the BEP added, “the up-front cost is higher, [California Air Resources Board’s] analysis shows that the ‘total cost of ownership’ or ‘TCO’ of an EV compared to a conventional vehicle can be lower due to lower fuel and vehicle maintenance costs.”
In other words, the BEP is defending the practicality of the new rule by asking Mainers to trust California’s analysis of what may happen in the future.
Cold Weather Complications
A similarly widespread theme among the public comments received by the BEP was a concern over the inefficiency of EVs in colder weather.
Again, the Maine BEP acknowledged that there is merit to the issues raised by these comments, affirming the research demonstrating that “cold weather does have effects on vehicle range and charging speeds.”
“Cold temperatures, particularly those below freezing,” the Maine BEP wrote, “slow down the chemical reactions in battery cells, which reduces vehicle range and increases charging times.”
In addition to the chemical drawbacks, there are also practical drawbacks. For example, vehicles with internal combustion engines heat the cabins by using the byproduct heat from the engines. EVs can’t do this.
Instead, energy from the battery must be used to generate heat, and any energy used to heat the cabin can’t be used to power the vehicle. Consequently, cold weather limits an EV’s range even further.
To counter these concerns, the Maine BEP explained that vehicles with “more advanced battery thermal management systems” and heating systems powered by “high efficiency heat pumps” are significantly less impacted by cold weather in comparison to traditional EVs, as well as to internal combustion vehicles.
Yet again, BEP is arguing that Mainers ought to trust that a potential technological development will pan out as expected and — as a result — allow EVs to make sense in Maine at some point down the road.
Lack of Infrastructure
Another concern that arose for dozens of commenters was the lack of infrastructure in Maine to support “a large influx of EVs.” Commenters were concerned that Maine’s infrastructure “cannot be upgraded quickly enough to keep up with the rate of increase required” by the rule changes.”
In response, the Maine BEP described several plans currently in place to expand the state’s charging infrastructure in the near future.
“Maine is building out a network of electric vehicle charging stations with policies, investments, and regulatory streamlining, to ensure everyone can access reliable, convenient, and affordable charging options when at home, work, and around town, and when traveling longer distances,” the BEP wrote.
It was also noted that future technological developments for EV batteries are expected to “allow for much quicker charging speeds” and better “facilitate off-site charging,” such as at grocery stores or the workplace.
Here again, the BEP is telling Mainers that promised developments will ultimately make a currently-unfeasible plan tenable in the future.
Market Interference
Dozens of commenters’ shared their belief that “any changeover to EVs should be market driven” and that “government should not interfere with the free market system.”
“Commenters further state,” the BEP summarized, “that if EVs are a reasonable transportation alternative, people will buy them of their own free will with no need for artificial market constraints.”
In response, the BEP argued that the rule change “would allow Maine to accelerate the transition in a way that is both convenient and affordable for residents and allows the state to meet its climate and environmental goals.”
“First, it would keep Maine on track to meet its statutorily mandated greenhouse gas emission limits, which require the state to reach ‘net zero’ emissions by 2045,” the BEP wrote. “Second, it would provide a signal to manufacturers to further increase ZEV production and to expand the types of ZEVs offered to potential buyers.”
The Maine BEP did not offer any further response to the commenters’ concerns regarding the possibility of an artificially-paced, government-driven transition to EVs.
Positive Environmental Impact
“The Department agrees with the commenters’ statement that the [Advanced Clean Cars II] program will reduce air pollution in Maine,” the BEP wrote in their response.
Although the BEP acknowledged that “Maine’s [greenhouse gas] emissions are small on a global scale,” it argued that “climate change is a worldwide problem that requires collective action across the globe.”
“Reducing transportation emissions will also have co-benefits for the local environment, economy, and public health of Maine,” the BEP continued. “Further, it will also send a positive signal to other states and countries that transportation decarbonization is achievable and that Maine is willing to back up its public commitments.”
Increased Consumer Choice
“The Department agrees that the proposed rule will mean that consumers have increased choice when making decisions about what vehicle will best suit their needs,” the Maine BEP argued, in defense of a rule that will limit consumer choice.
“Rather than restricting consumer choice, the [rule change] will expand the number of EVs available for consumers as the market continues to transition to ZEVs,” BEP stated.
“The proposed rule provides many choices for the vehicle consumer,” the BEP continued. “Additionally, the market choices for ZEVs will continue to increase with a wide variety of ZEV models available and many more planned in the next few years.”
Although the BEP noted that gasoline-powered vehicles will continue to be available to consumers throughout the implementation period of this rule, not much was said about the impact that the Advanced Clean Cars II Program would have on the range of options available to those interested in traditional internal combustion vehicles.
Routine Technical v. Major Substantive
Maine BEP Executive Analyst William F. Hinkel told the Maine Wire that the Maine BEP does not have the authority to reclassify this rule change from “routine technical” to “major substantive.”
According to the Maine Administrative Procedure Act — which governs agency rule changes such as the one in question — this burden fundamentally rests upon the State Legislature.
This statute defines “major substantive rules” as those which are determined to meet certain criteria “in the judgement of the Legislature,” meaning that neither the Maine BEP nor the Maine DEP has the authority to make such a determination.
In 2005, the Legislature voted to repeal the portion of the provision under which the Advanced Clean Cars II Program was proposed that would have required vehicle emissions rules to be categorized as major substantive.
Consequently, the rule change currently under consideration by the Maine BEP has been classified as routine technical.
Earlier this month, Rep. Joshua Morris (R-Turner) attempted to introduce a bill for the next legislative session titled “An Act to Enhance Legislative Oversight of Rules Regulating Electric Vehicles,” but Democrat lawmakers on the Legislative Council blocked it from progressing.
Although Rep. Morris did appeal their decision, Democrat members once again prevented the bill from moving forward in the legislative process.
“I believe that we are the ones elected to represent the people,” Morris said at the Legislative Council hearing. “As you know, the Board of Environmental Protection has instituted new rules around electric vehicles that I think are very stringent and don’t really make sense, but I think we should be the ones who have final say over the matter.”
“It shouldn’t be decided by bureaucrats, it should be decided by the people who elect us and their representatives,” Morris said. “That’s what they sent us here to do.
“I certainly think that the rules should be repealed,” Morris concluded, “but I believe at the very least that something that massive and that impactful on Maine citizens should be decided by us — the legislature — not by an unelected board.”
“It’s unfortunate that the majority of Democrats on Legislative Council do not feel such an extreme proposal from BEP does not require legislative oversight,” Morris told the Maine Wire. “By not allowing my proposal they are allowing California policies pushed by environmental extremists to become the law for hardworking Mainers.”
“The people deserve better from their elected representatives,” Morris said.
At the BEP’s meeting on October 24, board members engaged in a “deliberative session” wherein they received an update from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP) staff regarding the rule changes and discussed potential next steps in the rulemaking process for the Advanced Clean Cars II Program.
Board members Robert Duchesne, Steve Pelletier, Robert Sanford, and Barbara Vickery indicated support for further rulemaking on this proposal, while Robert Marvinney and Chair Susan Lessard expressed concerns regarding the rule’s adoption, according to Executive Analyst Hinkel. Sarah Alexander was absent at the October 24 meeting.
Split 4-2, the Board ultimately decided to direct staff to “prepare a rulemaking adoption package” for “consideration at a future meeting.”
[RELATED: Maine Soon To Adopt California-Style Mandates for Zero-Emission Vehicles]
On December 21 at 8am, the Maine BEP will again meet to consider the adoption of these rule changes.
The meeting will be held at the Augusta Civic Center, located at 76 Community Drive.
Public comment “directly related to comments received during the formal rulemaking
comment period” or “in response to changes to the proposed rule” will be accepted orally at the meeting.
Click Here to See the Maine BEP’s Full Agenda for December 21st
…bend over Maine, here it comes! These BEP ‘environmentalists’ care nothing about what we think. They will pass these ‘rules’ regardless of any the common sense arguments raised with an your grill, phukyou attitude to boot! Maine WILL be like California!
…bend over Maine, here it comes! These BEP ‘environmentalists’ care nothing about what we think. They will pass these ‘rules’ regardless of any the common sense arguments raised with an ‘in your grill’, phukyou attitude to boot! Maine WILL be like California!
The Maine Board of Environmental Protection is a bunch of over zealous virtue signaling incompetent democrat morons that couldn’t find their collective way out of paper bag without a guidebook. They drank the Kool-Aid and believe the false narrative of global warming as opposed to understanding the fact that CO2 has zero direct effect on the climate and that higher CO2 would only green up the planet even faster and produce more O2 from the process we all learned about in 6th grade biology – photosynthesis.
In a nut shell! The BEP is ‘completely tone deaf’. Agenda driven while collecting humongous virtue signaling points. Like I said—‘Completely tone deaf’
This is gov’t meddling at its most egregious. These few do-gooders who think they know better than everyone else will jam this crap down our throats whether we like it or not. They’ve bought into the climate change hoax thinking they are saving the planet, when none of this makes one whit of difference to anything. What it will do thought is make driving a lot more expensive for you and more difficult as well. You WILL drive an ev and be happy about it. This is the bs that happens when you elect lefty do-gooders who appoint their lefty friends to bloated gov’t boards and commissions. You get what you vote for!
You can find this quite in Thomas Sowell’s “The Quest for Cosmic Justice:”
“In politics, the great non sequitur of our time is that (1) things are not right and that (2) government should make them right. Where right all too often means cosmic justice, trying to set things right means writing a blank check for a never-ending expansion of government powers. That in turn means the quiet and piecemeal repeal of the American revolution and the freedom that it signified as an ideal for everyone. It means muffling the shot heard round the world and bringing back the old idea that some are booted and spurred to ride others. That they are riding with a heady sense of moral mission and personal gratification only makes them more dangerous. Such moral and intellectual arrogance is in fundamental and irreconcilable conflict with the American creed of the common man.”
Did anyone mention that a number or EV Car battery fires have been traces to exposure to salt water? Gee….what do they call that stuff they spray the roads with when snow is expected? Brine? And other times solid road salt. Anyone have under-body damage of their vehicle from road salt? Somehow, I suppose, EV’s will be exempt from the road salt in use perhaps 4 months per year, and which sprays up from the wheels completely coasting the under-body over and over and over.
Will BEP limit the millions of people driving gas vehicles using our state for recreation and vacation from crossing the state border? After all, there are way more of them than we who live in Maine. The bottom line is Maine’s BEP appointees are not Maine elected officials who represent anyone other than their own personal ideology.