The Regulatory Roaches In Tesla’s ZEV Credit Soup


  • On Wednesday of last week, I speculated that Tesla might be counting on a billion-dollar regulatory credit bonanza in the last half of 2018.
  • Reader comments led me to a twitter feed that mentioned a recent proposal to withdraw a prior EPA waiver that enabled adoption of California’s ZEV mandates.
  • The proposed withdrawal of California’s waiver is, in fact, a joint action by the EPA and the NHTSA under Federal statutes that prohibit inconsistent state-level regulation.
  • While California has promised to litigate, I believe the joint EPA-NHTSA action is justified and the proposed waiver withdrawal will eventually become effective.
  • I also believe the issuance of the proposal on August 2nd created enough uncertainty to immediately render Tesla’s accumulated and future ZEV credits worthless.
  • Over the years, some of the best ideas for my blog have come from thoughtful reader comments. It’s good to know the tradition continues.

    Last Wednesday I speculated that Tesla (TSLA) might be counting on a billion-dollar regulatory credit bonanza in the last half of 2018. It was almost painful to write that after years of strident criticism I’d purchased Tesla calls.

    Mercifully, a thoughtful reader directed me to a twitter stream from “People’s [email protected]
    ” that discussed a pending Environmental Protection Agency, or “EPA,” proposal that would put an end to California’s state level zero-emission vehicle, or “ZEV,” mandates.

    I investigated.

    I learned that the EPA plans to withdraw a 2013 waiver of Federal preemption that was granted pursuant to the express authority if Section 209(b)(1)(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1963, or “CAA.” I also learned that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or “NHTSA”, plans to issue a formal finding that California’s GHG and ZEV mandates are preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, or “EPCA,” which has no waiver provisions.

    Reviews

    • Total Score 0%
    User rating: 0.00% ( 0
    votes )



    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *