EPA Approves California’s Controversial Harbor Craft Emissions Rule Despite Industry Safety Concerns

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has approved the majority of California’s waiver requests for its controversial Commercial Harbor Craft (CHC) rule, marking a significant shift in maritime emissions regulations despite strong industry opposition.

The January 6, 2025 decision authorizes California to enforce specific provisions of the 2022 CHC Amendments under the Clean Air Act, affecting a wide range of vessels including pilot boats, research vessels, workboats, and commercial fishing vessels.

The rule, initially approved by CARB in March 2022, requires tugboats and commercial harbor craft to be equipped with EPA Tier 4 engines and Diesel Particulate Filters (DPFs). However, the mandate has sparked significant controversy within the maritime industry, particularly regarding safety and feasibility concerns.

Industry stakeholders, including the American Waterways Operators and maritime labor unions, have raised serious safety concerns about DPFs, citing their extremely high operating temperatures and potential fire risks. The U.S. Coast Guard has previously issued warnings about these safety issues.

The economic implications are equally concerning. Industry experts estimate compliance costs could reach $5 million per vessel, with implementation requiring at least 18 months – far exceeding the six-month timeframe stipulated in the rule. With California housing three of the nation’s busiest container ports, there are fears the regulation could trigger supply chain disruptions and increased costs for consumers nationwide.

Environmental advocates, however, celebrate the decision. “The impacts of toxic emissions from harbor craft are felt along the coasts of California,” said Teresa Bui, Climate Policy Director at Pacific Environment. “This rule has spurred innovation and we are already seeing the regulation become reality.”

The controversy intensified following Governor Gavin Newsom’s veto of Assembly Bill 1122, which would have required additional safety measures for DPF systems. Newsom defended his decision, emphasizing the need to balance environmental goals with industry concerns.

Unlock Exclusive Insights Today!

Join the gCaptain Club for curated content, insider opinions, and vibrant community discussions.

Sign Up