STATE AGENCIES ARE STILL not complying with a 2017 regulation requiring them to track and report on the carbon emissions from the vehicles they own, CommonWealth Beacon has confirmed.
That regulation, a Baker-era initiative borne out of a landmark court ruling a decade ago that found the state needed to implement stricter rules to meet mandated climate commitments, has not been followed since it took effect in 2019. The rule also spells out specific annual emissions reductions for the state’s vehicle fleet.
The emissions reports are due on March 1 each year, but none were filed again this year, according to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
Instead, the DEP — the agency charged with enforcing the rule — contends that the 2017 vehicle fleet regulation was “effectively superseded” by a 2021 executive order from then-Gov. Charlie Baker that sought to completely electrify the state’s vehicle fleet by 2050.
Baker’s order set targets for the state to procure electric vehicles and install charging stations at state facilities but doesn’t mention the 2017 regulation requiring the emission reports and reductions.
“Massachusetts continues to lead the way by electrifying our state fleet, as well as investing in public charging infrastructure, promoting EV adoption, and supporting companies, school districts, and municipalities in electrifying their fleets,” Lauren Moreschi, a spokesperson for DEP, said in a statement. “Massachusetts has consistently implemented the approach laid out in Governor Baker’s Leading by Example executive order to acquire electric vehicles for the state fleet and regularly track progress, and is exceeding those goals.”
In 2014, Conservation Law Foundation and another advocacy group filed a lawsuit against Massachusetts alongside youth plaintiffs to compel the state to do more to combat climate change. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled in their favor in 2016, finding that Massachusetts must impose more stringent regulations to cut pollution to comply with the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act, which established ambitious climate commitments.
The Baker administration, in response to that ruling, issued a suite of six rules, one of which seeks to limit emissions from the state vehicle fleet.
Now, though, the state’s interpretation that a later executive order from Baker supersedes this regulation isn’t sitting well with advocates and legal experts — and risks leaving the public in the dark about the actual pollution stemming from state vehicles.
The Baker order could in theory serve as a complement to the 2017 rule, but treating it as a full substitute is where “the state is falling short,” said Seth Gadbois, staff attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation.
“While efforts to electrify its cars and trucks are a step in the right direction, they don’t replace the legal requirement to limit pollution from state-owned vehicles and report emissions each year,” Gadbois said. “Without clear, transparent reporting, there’s no way to know whether real progress is being made or if the state is complying with the law.”
DEP provided data showing that the state is exceeding the targets laid out in Baker’s executive order. Almost 6 percent of the state fleet is now comprised of zero-emission vehicles, more than the goal of 5 percent by 2025, and there are now 621 EV charging stations at state facilities, well above the target of 350 such stations by 2025.
Still, those figures don’t speak to the explicit requirements of the 2017 regulation.
While purchasing more electric vehicles would in theory cut pollution, there is still no accounting as to whether the state’s fleet is meeting the emissions reductions laid out in the rule. Plus, if an agency used gas-powered cars more of the time relative to the EVs, that could also conflict with the goal of reducing emissions.
While state vehicles make up less than 1 percent of the cars registered in the Bay State, transportation is the largest source of emissions in Massachusetts and therefore the biggest opportunity for the state to make a dent in its quest to slash pollution by 85 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2050.
And the state’s justification for not enforcing the 2017 regulation risks placing it in legal jeopardy, said Janice Griffith, state and local government law professor at Suffolk University Law School.
“There’s no rationale for an executive order to replace an existing regulatory scheme,” Griffith said in an interview. “They would have to amend the regulations, going through a process of public hearings to change them. They can’t just automatically drop the regulations.”
DEP said that the Healey administration has allocated tens of millions of dollars for school bus electrification and electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Massachusetts, though, would still need to triple its annual rate of deploying new charging stations through 2030 and add significantly more electric cars and trucks to meet its climate targets.
The revelations over the 2017 regulation initially came to light through a court proceeding tied to a lawsuit Massachusetts filed against Exxon, in which the state accuses the company of deceiving the public and investors about the risks of climate change and the company’s role in contributing to it.
That litigation initiated in 2019 by then-Attorney General Maura Healey is now leading to questions about the state’s own efforts to reduce emissions.
Exxon took the state to court last March after Massachusetts denied the company’s record request for documents pertaining to the 2017 vehicle fleet rule. In November 2025, in defense of the state’s motion to dismiss the records case, DEP admitted that “no agencies had submitted reports under the fleets regulation.”
Sharon Weber, deputy division director for air and climate programs at DEP, confirmed in a deposition last year that DEP has no documents showing any instances of “compliance verification” or other enforcement actions in spite of the fact that no agency filed reports detailing the emissions of its vehicle fleet.
That lawsuit remains ongoing.
