President Donald Trump signed Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions that overturn U.S. Environmental Protection Agency waivers of key California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations, aimed at enforcing stricter emissions and goals for selling zero-emission vehicles, and states and truck manufacturers are  rethinking their strategies.

The CRA upends plans to implement Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT), which would require manufacturers to sell an increasing percentage of zero-emission chassis, including those for school buses by 2035. The CRA also targets Advanced Clean Cars II that would require all passenger car, truck and SUV sales be zero-emission in 2035 and the Omnibus Heavy-Duty Low NOx regulations for off-road emissions.

Trump signed the CRA on Thursday, and California announced it is suing the Trump administration over the President’s approval of “illegal resolutions aiming to undo key parts of the state’s clean vehicles program,” Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta said. 

“Trump’s all-out assault on California continues, and this time he’s destroying our clean air and America’s global competitiveness in the process. We are suing to stop this latest illegal action by a President who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big polluters,” Newsom said.

Additionally, the weight of the future of zero-emission vehicles and clean air requirements will fall on states and OEMs. Many OEMs are taking a wait and see approach.

“Today’s votes in the Senate fly in the face of nearly 50 years of precedent. For decades, California and other states have had the authority to adopt vehicle emissions standards that exceed those at the federal level, and for good reason,” said Dan Lashof, senior fellow at World Resources Institute (WRI), when the CRA passed the Senate May 22. “These standards are vital in protecting people from the vehicle pollution which causes asthma attacks and other serious health problems.”

CARB Chair Liane Randolph released a statement disapproving of the CRA waivers, noting that it is a “short-sighted political move” and a strike against the long-term goal of zero-emission vehicles.

“California profoundly disagrees with today’s unconstitutional, illegal and foolish vote attempting to undermine critical clean air protections,” she wrote. “It’s an assault on states’ rights the federal administration claims to support that puts national air quality standards out of reach and will have devastating effects for the 150 million Americans who breathe unhealthy air every day. These actions are contrary to the text of the Congressional Review Act, as recognized by the nonpartisan U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Senate Parliamentarian. California will pursue every available remedy to challenge these actions and defend our right to protect the public from dangerous air pollution. Turning the clock back on both cleaner combustion engine requirements and zero-emission technology is an attack on clean air.”

Meanwhile, states that voted to adopt CARB’s regulations are postponing enforcement. Four of the 10 states that follow CARB (Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon and Vermont) have pushed back their ACT compliance timelines by a year or more.

While not a CARB-specific state, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection announced earlier this month it is extending its suspension of enforcement of its own Pennsylvania Heavy-Duty Diesel Emissions Control Program until Jan. 2, 2028.

This includes school buses and the ACT rule. Gerry Wosewick, executive director of the Pennsylvania School Bus Association, said the government agency has been working hard with partner organizations to roll back this requirement.

“This has been a legislative priority for us for quite a few years now and we have been advocating for it pretty heavily during that time,” Wosewick said. “It was actually a part of [the PSBS] legislative committee’s [strategy] plan. Since this is a regulatory issue, we have had several pieces of legislation that have been entered over multiple sessions in an effort to best address this change. Despite our lobbying efforts, we have been unsuccessful in getting any legislation through.”

With the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, MTA and others, Wosewick said there was enough pressure to address the regulation, which was key to getting it delayed.

“I oftentimes refer to it as the death by a thousand paper cuts in Pennsylvania,” he added. “While our contractors are phenomenal and find new and innovative ways to continue operations, it’s the constant small regulatory and statutory changes that keep making it more difficult to operate in the industry.”

Instead, he commented the industry should be able to work collaboratively to focus on timely emissions rollouts, as opposed to being forced to respond to regulatory drives.

---

Related: Despite Federal Funding in Peril, California State Funding for EVs Continues
Related: CARB Uses $33M in Funding to Target Other Zero-Emissions School Travel
Related: The State of Green School Buses
Related: Report Highlights Shift in Federal Policy from EVs to Conventional Fuels

---

Back at the federal level, the budget reconciliation bill passed by the House of Representatives May 22 is a comprehensive piece of legislation proposing significant changes, including scaling back the tax credits for clean energy included in the Inflation Reduction Act.

WRI noted that if the cuts in the current iteration of the bill are passed, “average Americans will see severe consequences: Businesses will face more red tape and uncertainty; it will be more difficult and costly to meet growing electricity demand; consumers will see skyrocketing electricity prices; workers will lose jobs; and local governments will encounter barriers to implementing programs that benefit their communities and save money,” it said in a statement.

The organization added that it would erase much of the $400 billion in investment and savings that clean energy tax credits have generated thus far.

“The proposed sudden elimination of the credits, which support low and no emission vehicle technologies, including the Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicle Credit (45W) and the Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit (30C), will not only hinder the transition to cleaner vehicles and healthier communities but will pose immediate logistical and financial challenges to school districts, municipalities and others who have already made plans and budget decisions predicated on being able to access these credits,” WRI said. “Moreover, eliminating these credits means we are limiting consumer choice and ceding competitiveness in this growing market to China.”

The article has been updated to reflect Trump signing the CRA. 

The post Update: Congress Shifts Tide in Regulatory Demands for Clean Energy appeared first on School Transportation News.

A school bus aid in Howard County, Maryland, was accused of sexual assault against students, reported WBAL TV 11.

According to the news report, 80-year-old Albert Rice, Jr. was charged with sexual assault and a fourth-degree sex offense after he was accused of hurting two students.

Police said detectives received reports that Rice allegedly hit a non-verbal student on a school bus. Surveillance video was pulled and police found evidence of Rice hitting a 13-year-old non-verbal student and inappropriately touching another 13-year-old student.

According to charging documents obtained by local news reporters, video of the incident showed the teen first struck Rice, who responded by hitting the teen in the face while she was secured in a seatbelt. The charging documents also state that Rice admitted to investigators that he was frustrated with the victim when he hit her.

Detectives stated via the article that Rice is an aide for a school bus that transports students to to the Linwood Center, a non-public special education program in Ellicott City. He is reportedly not employed by the school but by transportation company Bowen Bus Services. Rice has been an aide for two and a half years. The school declined to comment further.

It is unclear when the incident occurred. However, back in February, Rice was reportedly suspended over an unspecified incident. Police say via the article there are no indications of other victims but anyone with information can contact the department. The investigation is ongoing.

---

Related: Wisconsin School Bus Driver Arrested
Related: Louisiana School Bus Driver Arrested Amid Sexual Assault Charges
Related: Virginia School Bus Aide Arrested for Alleged Assault
Related: 3-Year Prison Sentence for School Bus Aide Convicted in Choking Death

The post Maryland School Bus Aid Charged with Sexual Assault appeared first on School Transportation News.

This article was originally published by Spotlight Delaware.

In early December, a new website appeared online urging Sussex County residents to contact their councilmembers and tell them to deny a permit required for a proposed offshore wind farm. 

The website – StopOffshoreWind.com – materialized days before the Sussex County Council would vote on the permit, which would allow for construction of an electrical substation needed by US Wind Inc. to build its massive ocean-based power plant. 

StopOffshoreWind.com included the names and contact information for Sussex County Council members, as well as an online message form that sat underneath the phrase, “Write a Letter to your Sussex County Councilmembers.” 

“Tell the Sussex County Council to DENY this permit,” the website stated.

What it did not show were the names of the people or companies that had created and funded it. 

Spotlight Delaware has since learned that the website was the creation of a coalition of Maryland wind farm opponents, funded and led by the government of Worcester County, Md. 

Sitting just south of Sussex County along the Atlantic coastline and within Maryland’s Eastern Shore, Worcester County is home to Ocean City, Md., a summer beach hotspot that is the primary driver of the county’s tourism-centered economy. 

And, many of the local business owners there believe the sight of wind turbines 15 miles offshore would make the beaches less attractive to tourists.

Zach Bankert, executive director of the Ocean City Development Corporation, said his group had led local opposition to offshore wind development in past years. But, with a staff of just two employees, he said the operation was too small to be effective, which is why the county’s Office of Tourism and Economic Development recently took it over. 

“When the county came in and said, ‘Hey, you know, we might have some funds for this, we’d like to kind of take this over’ … It was a no-brainer for us,” he said. 

US Wind Inc.’s proposal is to build a wind farm with more than 100 turbines off the Delmarva coastline – just south of the Delaware, Maryland state line. It would send electricity ashore in Delaware with cables buried near the mouth of the Indian River.

When announcing a federal approval in September, the Biden Administration said the wind farm could produce up to 2 gigawatts of electricity, enough to power about 700,000 homes. 

But coastal opponents say that electricity comes at too high a price, claiming wind turbines will drive tourists away, damage coastal environments and devastate fisheries. 

StopOffshoreWind.com also claims that the windfarm will allow “foreign investors” to collect federal subsidies – references to U.S. government incentives provided to wind energy projects, and to US Wind’s ownership.

In emailed responses to questions from Spotlight Delaware, Worcester County Tourism Director Melanie Pursel said the local government authorized up to $100,000 in public money to fund what she called a coalition of local offshore wind opponents.

According to county records, the money specifically is for a contract with a Washington, D.C.-area public relations firm called Bedrock Advocacy Communications. 

Pursel also noted in her early January email that Ocean City’s municipal government intended to match the county’s contribution. Last week, the Ocean City Council approved during a regular meeting a measure to distribute up to $100,000 to an “offshore wind opposition public relations campaign.” 

During the meeting, City Manager Terry McGean said the campaign would target state lawmakers in Maryland and “other issues” that may arise in Delaware. 

Ocean City Mayor Richard “Rick” Meehan said Bedrock Advocacy had already done a “really good job,” noting his belief that the group “played a significant role” in the Delaware county’s denial of US Wind’s substation permit. 

“We’re all in,” Meehan said about the $100,000 appropriation. “And I’d hate to miss an opportunity to really capitalize, which might be the right timing to really get our messaging out.”

Winding up the opposition

US Wind is a subsidiary of Renexia SpA, an Italian energy infrastructure company. The American investment giant, Apollo Global Management, also owns a stake in the company. 

In response to critics, US Wind spokeswoman Nancy Sopko said in an emailed statement that the opposition’s campaign is filled with “blatant misinformation designed to frighten people.” 

Asked for details to support the claims, Sopko pointed to what she called doctored photos from a website called SaveOceanCity.org, which is run by Bankert’s Ocean City Development Corporation. 

“The complete disregard for facts, accuracy, and settled science is irresponsible and dangerous,” Sopko said. 

She also asserted that state leaders in Maryland and Delaware have been “full-throated” in their support for the wind project in a region that “needs more electricity to keep the lights on, grow the economy, and support local jobs.”

The opposition to the US Wind project is nominally being led by a political nonprofit, called Stop Offshore Wind Inc.

It was formed in Delaware on Dec. 5, around the time that StopOffshoreWind.com appeared. State business records show that Florida attorney Andrew L. Asher created the company. 

Asher, a solo practitioner, previously served as general counsel for the BGR Group, a powerful lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. Its biggest clients in recent years include Qualcomm Inc. and the governments of Bahrain and India.   

He continues to work for BGR Group in an “of counsel” capacity, according to his website. Asher did not respond to requests for comment. Pursel said Asher’s role in Stop Offshore Wind was limited to the creation of the entity, describing it as strictly administrative. 

She further said that while “several county staff members” are working with the nonprofit, the entity “is not controlled” by Worcester County.

“Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is a 501(c)4 organization formed by a coalition of concerned citizens, community-based organizations, business organizations and local governments to raise awareness about the potential negative impacts of the US Wind proposed project,” said Pursel, who also calls herself a spokeswoman for the Stop Offshore Wind Coalition. 

As a 501(c)4, Stop Offshore Wind Inc. is not required to disclose its donors. 

Pursel said it had raised $11,000 from private donors as of late December, with much of the money donated during a Dec. 4 fundraiser. 

A flyer for the fundraiser, which charged $150 a head, said the money raised would pay for “a bold, multi-channel media blitz” opposing industrial wind farms in Ocean City. 

Prior to the Sussex County vote, Stop Offshore Wind did not list any governmental funding ties. Following inquiries from Spotlight Delaware, the website now has an “about us” page that lists its affiliation with Ocean City and Worcester County. 

What led to all of this? 

On Dec. 17, days after StopOffshoreWind.com appeared, the Sussex County Council voted to reject the windfarm’s substation building permit application.

The 4-to-1 vote in opposition came after the Sussex County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the county approve the permit. Three of the voting council members are leaving office in early 2025. Of those, two voted against the permit. 

It is not clear if the StopOffshoreWind.com website influenced the council’s vote. Members of the county council would not comment on this story due to a pending appeal against the decision. 

Still, the vote followed mounting public opposition in Sussex County to offshore wind. On the day of the vote, dozens of residents appeared at the county council meeting, with many asking to speak in opposition to the project. 

The council did not allow comments, stating the public record had closed following a July meeting when they discussed, then tabled, the permit application.  

Following the vote, US Wind CEO Jeff Grybowski said his company’s plan to build the offshore wind farm is “unchanged.”

“We know that the law is on our side and are confident that today’s decision will not stand,” Grybowski said.

On Dec. 26, US Wind’s subsidiary Renewable Development LLC appealed Sussex County’s permit denial through a petition asking a Delaware Superior Court judge to review the matter. 

In the petition, the company’s attorneys called the council’s decision “irregular, arbitrary, capricious,” and “not supported by substantial evidence.”

On the heels of Sussex County’s rejection, Worcester County announced its own move to hinder US Wind’s plans: it would use eminent domain to buy two West Ocean City properties targeted as US Wind’s operations and maintenance facilities.  

“If there ever was a worthy use of eminent domain, this is it,” Worcester County Chief Administrative Officer Weston Young said in a press release.

Also in the press release, Worcester County linked to two websites that it said provided more information “about efforts to protect Maryland’s Coast from ocean industrialization.” Those sites are StopOffshoreWind.com and SaveOceanCity.org. The latter represents the Ocean City Development Corporation’s opposition to offshore wind farms.

What’s on the horizon? 

With a pending appeal and a Trump administration that opposes offshore wind, uncertainty looms over the US Wind project – as well as other wind farms proposed for the Delmarva peninsula. 

According to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Danish wind farm developer Ørsted intends to build up to 72 wind turbines 16 miles off the coast of Rehoboth Beach. 

In early June, the company submitted its plans to the federal government, and they currently are under review. 

This month, then-Delaware Gov. John Carney and the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control announced a 25-year agreement with US Wind. As part of the agreement, US Wind must give Delaware utilities $76 million worth of renewable energy credits throughout the life of the project to help the state meet its renewable energy goals.

Through the agreement, US Wind also commits to investing $200 million to upgrade Delaware’s electricity wires and other transmission infrastructure. 

In a press statement touting the agreement, state officials claim that energy from the US Wind offshore site will produce enough power to lower electric rates in Delaware by $253 million over 20 years.

“We are ready to reap the environmental, health, workforce, energy cost and community benefits from this needed transition to renewable energy,” Carney said in the statement. 

How a Maryland county tried to sway a Delaware vote on offshore wind is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.