CA SB 496
deadAdvanced Clean Fleets Regulation: appeals advisory committee: exemptions.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Quick answers
Did CA SB 496 pass?
No. CA SB 496 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process (2026-02-02). Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
What is CA SB 496 about?
Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to adopt and implement motor vehicle emission standards, in-use performance standards, and motor vehicle fuel specifications for the control of air contaminants and sources of air pollution that the state board has found necessary, cost effective, and technologically feasible. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the state board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases and requires the state board to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions from those sources. Pursuant to its authority, the state board has adopted the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation, which imposes various requirements for transitioning local, state, and federal government fleets of medium- and heavy-duty trucks, other high-priority fleets of medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and drayage trucks to zero-emission vehicles. The Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation authorizes entities subject to the regulation to apply for exemptions from its requirements under certain circumstances. This bill would require the state board to establish the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation Appeals Advisory Committee by an unspecified date for purposes of reviewing appeals of denied requests for exemptions from the requirements of the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation. The bill would require the committee to include representatives of specified governmental and nongovernmental entities. The bill would require the committee to meet monthly and would require recordings of its meetings to be made publicly available on the state board's internet website. The bill would require the committee to consider, and make a recommendation on, an appeal of an exemption request denial no later than 60 days after the appeal is made. The bill would require specified information relating to the committee's consideration of an appeal to be made publicly available on the state board's internet website. The bill would require the state board to consider a recommendation of the committee at a public meeting no later than 60 days after the recommendation is made. This bill would exempt from the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation or any similar regulation vehicles reasonably anticipated to respond to emergency situations, or that support those efforts. The bill would prohibit the state board from requiring a state or local government fleet owner to provide documentation showing an executed zero-emissions vehicle purchase agreement in order to count an internal combustion engine vehicle as a zero-emissions vehicle purchase for purposes of postponing a zero-emissions vehicle transition mandate in the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation.
Who sponsors CA SB 496?
Hurtado is the primary sponsor of CA SB 496, joined by 3 cosponsors.
Description
Existing law requires the State Air Resources Board to adopt and implement motor vehicle emission standards, in-use performance standards, and motor vehicle fuel specifications for the control of air contaminants and sources of air pollution that the state board has found necessary, cost effective, and technologically feasible. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes the state board as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources emitting greenhouse gases and requires the state board to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions from those sources. Pursuant to its authority, the state board has adopted the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation, which imposes various requirements for transitioning local, state, and federal government fleets of medium- and heavy-duty trucks, other high-priority fleets of medium- and heavy-duty trucks, and drayage trucks to zero-emission vehicles. The Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation authorizes entities subject to the regulation to apply for exemptions from its requirements under certain circumstances. This bill would require the state board to establish the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation Appeals Advisory Committee by an unspecified date for purposes of reviewing appeals of denied requests for exemptions from the requirements of the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation. The bill would require the committee to include representatives of specified governmental and nongovernmental entities. The bill would require the committee to meet monthly and would require recordings of its meetings to be made publicly available on the state board's internet website. The bill would require the committee to consider, and make a recommendation on, an appeal of an exemption request denial no later than 60 days after the appeal is made. The bill would require specified information relating to the committee's consideration of an appeal to be made publicly available on the state board's internet website. The bill would require the state board to consider a recommendation of the committee at a public meeting no later than 60 days after the recommendation is made. This bill would exempt from the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation or any similar regulation vehicles reasonably anticipated to respond to emergency situations, or that support those efforts. The bill would prohibit the state board from requiring a state or local government fleet owner to provide documentation showing an executed zero-emissions vehicle purchase agreement in order to count an internal combustion engine vehicle as a zero-emissions vehicle purchase for purposes of postponing a zero-emissions vehicle transition mandate in the Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-19
- Latest action
- 2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Hurtadoauthor
- Archuletacoauthor
- Niellocoauthor
- Alaniscoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-19
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,reading-1,referral-committee
2025-02-20
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 22.
2025-02-26
Referred to Coms. on E.Q. and TRANS.
referral-committee
2025-03-11
Set for hearing April 2.
2025-04-03
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 634.) (April 2).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-07
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-08
Set for hearing April 22.
2025-04-23
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 15. Noes 0. Page 843.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-04-25
Set for hearing May 5.
2025-05-05
May 5 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2025-05-16
Set for hearing May 23.
2025-05-23
May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
2026-02-02
Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
failure
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Transportation]
2025-04-02 · pass · 8-0
Member-level votes (8)
- Pérez: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Hurtado: yes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-22 · pass · 15-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Gonzalez: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Limón: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Seyarto: yes
Placed on suspense file
2025-05-05 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Wahab: yes
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 496. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.