EPA Sends Two California Marine Waivers to Congress for Review

The Environmental Protection Agency said on July 22, 2026, that it transmitted two California marine-emissions waiver decisions to Congress for possible review under the Congressional Review Act. The action gives lawmakers an opportunity to consider the decisions, but it does not itself repeal, suspend or cancel the underlying California requirements.

The measures concern California’s Ocean-Going Vessels At-Berth rule, also described by EPA as CARB at Berth, and the Commercial Harbor Craft Amendments. They address emissions from ocean-going vessels while docked at California ports and from commercial harbor craft operating in California waters and port areas.

What the two measures address

The at-berth requirements involve pollution controls that can include shore power or other port-electrification systems while ocean-going vessels are docked. The harbor-craft amendments establish emissions requirements for vessels such as workboats and other commercial craft.

EPA argues that the requirements could increase maritime compliance costs, strain port infrastructure and add pressure to national supply chains. The agency also says the harbor-craft requirements could threaten maritime jobs and raise prices for goods shipped by sea. Those are EPA’s stated concerns, not established outcomes. The July 22 transmittal did not determine that shipping prices or employment will definitely change.

Why California can set stricter standards

The Clean Air Act generally limits states’ ability to impose their own emissions standards for vehicles and certain engines. Sections 209(b) and 209(e), however, create special pathways for California.

Under Section 209(b), California can seek a waiver of federal preemption for stricter motor-vehicle emissions standards. EPA generally must grant the waiver unless it finds that California’s determination was arbitrary and capricious, that the state does not need the standards to address compelling and extraordinary conditions, or that the standards conflict with federal law.

Section 209(e) provides a related authorization process for certain nonroad engines and vehicles. The marine measures in the latest EPA action involve that broader nonroad emissions framework, but the legal treatment of each measure depends on the specific rule and authorization at issue.

Other states may adopt qualifying California motor-vehicle standards under Section 177 when the statutory conditions are met. That does not automatically mean every state can adopt California’s marine requirements. The authority and the specific measures involved must be examined separately.

What Congress can do next

The Congressional Review Act allows Congress to consider agency rules through expedited procedures. If Congress passes a joint resolution of disapproval and the president signs it, the rule would have no force or effect under the act. EPA’s transmittal gives Congress an opportunity to begin that process; it is not itself a congressional decision.

The legal question is contested. The Congressional Research Service has noted disagreement over whether Clean Air Act waiver decisions qualify as “rules” under the Congressional Review Act. That issue could be tested through congressional action or litigation.

The July action follows EPA’s June 12 transmittal of four other California vehicle and equipment waivers. In 2025, Congress and the president overturned three California vehicle-waiver rules, creating a recent precedent for the strategy while questions remain about how it applies to the marine decisions.

Why the dispute matters nationally

California’s ports and shipping network are tied to national commerce, so changes in vessel requirements, shore-power systems and port infrastructure could affect companies that operate across state lines. EPA says those compliance issues could add pressure to shipping networks and the prices of goods moved by sea. Whether those effects occur, and how large they would be, remains unresolved.

What to watch

The next developments could include joint resolutions in Congress, committee or floor action, responses from California and maritime groups, and court filings. Readers should also watch whether the rules continue operating during any review and whether ports or shipping companies announce changes to compliance plans or infrastructure investments.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.