48758 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1 75 FR 62739 (Oct. 13, 2010). 

2The Presidential Memorandum is found at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/ 

presidential-memorandum-regarding-fuelefficiency-standards. 3 In addition, NHTSA will consider analyses it is 

required to conduct under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

4 75 FR 62739, October 13, 2010. 

5 75 FR 76337, December 8, 2010. 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: July 29, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20205 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 85, 86, and 600 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Parts 531 and 533 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0799; FRL–9448–7; 

NHTSA–2010–0131] 

RIN 2060–AQ54; RIN 2127–AK79 

2017–2025 Model Year Light-Duty 

Vehicle GHG Emissions and CAFE 

Standards: Supplemental Notice of 

Intent 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), and 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). 

ACTION: Supplemental Notice of Intent. 

SUMMARY: President Obama issued a 

Presidential Memorandum on May 21, 

2010, concerning the development of a 

new generation of clean cars and trucks 

through innovative technologies and 

manufacturing. The President requested 

that EPA and NHTSA, on behalf of the 

Department of Transportation, develop, 

through notice and comment 

rulemaking, a coordinated National 

Program under the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

and the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (EPCA), as amended by the Energy 

Independence and Security Act (EISA), 

to reduce fuel consumption by and 

greenhouse gas emissions of light-duty 

vehicles for model years 2017–2025. 

This notice of intent generally 

describes the joint proposal that the 

EPA and NHTSA expect to issue to 

establish the National Program for 

model years 2017–2025. The agencies 

are developing the proposal based on 

extensive technical analyses, an 

examination of the factors required 

under the respective statutes and on 

discussions with individual motor 

vehicle manufacturers and other 

stakeholders. The National Program 

would apply to passenger cars, lightduty trucks, and medium-duty 

passenger vehicles (light-duty vehicles) 

built in those model years. 

DATES: The agencies currently expect to 

issue a proposal for a coordinated 

National Program for model year 2017– 

2025 light-duty vehicles by 

September 28, 2011, and a final rule by 

July 31, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: See the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

EPA: Christopher Lieske, Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, 

Assessment and Standards Division, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 

Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 

48105; telephone number: 734–214– 

4584; fax number: 734–214–4816; 

e-mail address: 

lieske.christopher@epa.gov, or contact 

the Assessment and Standards Division; 

e-mail address: otaqpublicweb@epa.gov. 

DOT/NHTSA: Rebecca Yoon, Office of 

Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

Telephone: (202) 366–2992. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

How can I get copies of this document 

and other related information? 

NHTSA and EPA have established 

dockets for the already issued notices 

and upcoming rulemaking under Docket 

ID numbers NHTSA–2010–0131 and 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0799, 

respectively. You may read the 

materials placed in the dockets (e.g., the 

TAR and the comments submitted in 

response to the first NOI 1 by other 

interested persons) at any time by going 

to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the online instructions for accessing the 

dockets. 

You may also read the materials at the 

EPA Docket Center or NHTSA Docket 

Management Facility at the following 

locations: EPA: EPA Docket Center, 

EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744. 

NHTSA: Docket Management Facility, 

M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building, Ground 

Floor, Rm. W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

The Docket Management Facility is 

open between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

The dockets established by the 

agencies will remain open for the 

duration of the rulemaking. 

I. Background and Introduction 

Following the successful adoption of 

a National Program for greenhouse gas 

emissions (GHG) and fuel economy 

standards for model years (MY) 2012– 

2016 vehicles, the President issued a 

Memorandum on May 21, 2010 

requesting that the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), on behalf of 

the Department of Transportation, work 

together to develop a national program 

for model years 2017–2025. Specifically, 

he requested that the agencies develop 

‘‘ * * * a coordinated national program 

under the CAA [Clean Air Act] and the 

EISA [Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007] to improve fuel 

efficiency and to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions of passenger cars and lightduty trucks of model years 2017– 

2025.’’ 2 The President recognized our 

country could take a leadership role in 

addressing the global challenges of 

improving energy security and reducing 

greenhouse gas pollution, stating that 

‘‘America has the opportunity to lead 

the world in the development of a new 

generation of clean cars and trucks 

through innovative technologies and 

manufacturing that will spur economic 

growth and create high-quality domestic 

jobs, enhance our energy security, and 

improve our environment.’’ 

Since that time, the agencies have 

worked with the state of California, as 

requested by the President, to address 

all elements requested in the May 21, 

2010 memorandum. We completed an 

initial assessment of the technologies, 

strategies and underlying analyses that 

would be considered in setting 

standards for MYs 2017–2025 in 

consultation with a wide range of 

stakeholders.3 The Interim Technical 

Assessment Report (TAR) and a Notice 

of Intent (NOI) to conduct a joint 

rulemaking were concluded on 

September 30, 2010.4 Following the 

opportunity for public comment on the 

interim TAR and NOI, the agencies 

developed and published a 

Supplemental NOI (SNOI) 5 in 

December 2010 highlighting many of the 

key comments received in response to 

the September NOI, and to the TAR. The 

Supplemental NOI also discussed the 

agencies’ plans for many of the key 

technical analyses that have been and 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48759 

6NHTSA is delegated responsibility for 

implementing the Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (EPCA) fuel economy requirements assigned to 

the Secretary of Transportation. 49 CFR 1.50, 

501.2(a)(8). 

7For NHTSA, this includes the requirements of 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

8Real-world CO2 is typically 25 percent higher 

and real-world fuel economy is typically 20 percent 

lower than the CO2 and CAFE values discussed 

here. 

will be undertaken in developing the 

upcoming proposed rulemaking. 

Since the publication of the SNOI in 

December 2010, the agencies, working 

with California, have been engaged in 

discussions with individual auto 

manufacturers, automotive suppliers, 

states, environmental groups, and the 

United Auto Workers, who all have 

expressed support for a continuation of 

the National Program. The agencies 

have focused their discussions and 

efforts on developing information that 

will support the underlying technical 

assessments that will inform the 

proposed standards. 

This joint Notice of Intent announces 

plans by NHTSA and EPA to propose 

strong and coordinated Federal 

greenhouse gas and fuel economy 

standards for passenger cars, light-duty 

trucks, and medium-duty passenger 

vehicles (hereafter light-duty vehicles), 

referred to as the National Program.6

Both agencies seek to propose a 

coordinated program that can achieve 

important reductions of greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions from and fuel 

consumption by the light-duty vehicle 

part of the transportation sector, based 

on technologies that will be 

commercially available and that can be 

incorporated at a reasonable cost. 

Under the joint rulemaking, EPA will 

propose GHG emissions standards 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA), and 

NHTSA will propose Corporate Average 

Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under 

EPCA, as amended by the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA). It is intended that this joint 

rulemaking proposal will reflect a 

carefully coordinated and harmonized 

approach to implementing these two 

statutes and will be in accordance with 

all substantive and procedural 

requirements imposed by law.7

The program the agencies intend to 

propose holds out the promise of 

development of a new generation of 

clean cars and trucks through 

innovative technologies and 

manufacturing that will spur economic 

growth and create high-quality domestic 

jobs, enhance our energy security, and 

improve our environment. Consistent 

with Executive Order 13563, it is the 

result of early consultation with all 

stakeholders, employs flexible 

regulatory approaches to reduce 

burdens, maintains freedom of choice 

for the public, and harmonizes federal 

and state regulations. 

The National Program would apply to 

passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and 

medium-duty passenger vehicles (lightduty vehicles) built in those model 

years. Together, these vehicle categories, 

which include passenger cars, sport 

utility vehicles, minivans, and pickup 

trucks, are responsible for 

approximately 60 percent of all U.S. 

transportation-related greenhouse gas 

emissions and fuel consumption. If 

ultimately adopted, these standards 

would represent a harmonized and 

consistent National Program pursuant to 

the separate statutory frameworks under 

which NHTSA and EPA operate. The 

approach addressed in this Notice of 

Intent, if ultimately adopted, is intended 

to allow manufacturers to build a single 

light-duty national fleet that would 

satisfy all requirements under both 

programs and would provide significant 

reductions in both greenhouse gas 

emissions and oil consumption. 

EPA and NHTSA’s current estimate is 

that the standards discussed in this 

Notice of Intent would reduce 

greenhouse gases by approximately 2 

billion metric tons and would save 

approximately 4 billion barrels of oil, 

over the lifetime of the model year 

2017–2025 vehicles. 

Key elements of a harmonized and 

coordinated National Program that the 

agencies intend to propose are the level 

and form of the standard, the available 

flexibilities and compliance 

mechanisms, and general 

implementation elements. These 

elements are outlined in the following 

sections. The agencies will continue to 

analyze all of the issues relevant to the 

proposal, and will provide their 

analyses for review and public comment 

with the upcoming proposal. This will 

include analyses on a variety of relevant 

issues, such as the costs and benefits of 

the proposal, as well as the effects that 

the proposal would have on the 

economy, manufacturers, and 

consumers. The proposal that the 

agencies intend to issue will discuss 

both the analyses that will be completed 

for the proposal as well as any plans for 

conducting additional analyses. 

II. Broad Program Overview 

A. Level of the Standards 

Consistent with the Presidential 

Memorandum of May 21, 2010, EPA and 

NHTSA intend to propose two separate 

sets of standards for model years 2017 

through 2025, each under their 

respective statutory authorities. Both the 

proposed CO2 and CAFE standards 

would be footprint-based, similar to the 

standards currently in effect through 

model year 2016, and would become 

more stringent each model year from 

2017 through 2025. 

EPA currently intends to propose 

standards that would be projected to 

achieve, on an average industry fleet 

wide basis, 163 grams/mile of CO2 in 

model year 2025 (this would be 

equivalent, on a mpg-equivalent basis, 

to 54.5 mpg if all of the CO2 emissions 

reductions were achieved with fuel 

economy technology).8 For passenger 

cars, the CO2 compliance values 

associated with the footprint curves 

would be reduced on average by 5 

percent per year from the CO2-footprint 

curves for the model year 2016 

passenger car standard through model 

year 2025. In recognition that full-size 

pick-up trucks have unique challenges 

compared to other light-duty trucks and 

passenger cars, EPA intends to propose 

a lower annual rate of improvement for 

light-duty trucks in the early years of 

the program. For light-duty trucks, the 

proposed average annual rate of CO2

emissions reduction in model years 

2017 through 2021 would be 3.5 percent 

per year. EPA intends to change the 

slopes of the CO2-footprint curves for 

light-duty trucks from those in the 

2012–2016 rule, in a manner that 

effectively means that the annual rate of 

improvement for smaller light-duty 

trucks in model years 2017 through 

2021 would be higher than 3.5 percent, 

and the annual rate of improvement for 

larger light-duty trucks over the same 

time period would be lower than 3.5 

percent. For model years 2022 through 

2025, EPA expects to propose an 

average annual rate of CO2 emissions 

reduction for light-duty trucks of 5 

percent per year. 

NHTSA currently intends to propose 

standards that would be projected to 

require, on an average industry fleet 

wide basis, 40.9 mpg in model year 

2021, and 49.6 mpg in model year 2025. 

For passenger cars, the annual increase 

in stringency between model years 2017 

to 2021 is expected to average 4.1 

percent, and to average 4.3 percent 

between model years 2017 and 2025. 

Like EPA, in recognition of the utility 

requirements of full-size pick-up trucks 

and the unique challenges to improving 

fuel economy compared to other lightduty trucks and passenger cars, NHTSA 

intends to propose a lower annual rate 

of improvement for light-duty trucks in 

the early years of the program. For lightduty trucks, the proposed overall annual 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48760 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

9Technologies may include active grill shutters, 

electric heat pumps, high efficiency alternators, 

high efficiency lights, start-stop, solar roof panels 

for battery charging on EV, PHEV or HEV with at 

least 100 watts, active transmission warm-up, and/ 

or engine heat recovery using thermo-electric for 

100 watts, and the credit for individual 

technologies could range from less than 1gm/mile 

to approximately 5 gm/mile. 

10This corresponds to 0.001125 gallon/mile. 

rate of fuel economy improvement in 

model years 2017 through 2021 would 

be 2.9 percent per year. NHTSA expects 

to change the slopes of the fuel economy 

footprint curves for light-duty trucks 

from those in the 2012–2016 rule, which 

would effectively make the annual rate 

of improvement for smaller light-duty 

trucks in model years 2017 through 

2021 higher than 2.9 percent, and the 

annual rate of improvement for larger 

light-duty trucks over the same time 

period lower than 2.9 percent. For 

model years 2022 through 2025, NHTSA 

expects to propose conditional 

standards with an overall annual rate of 

fuel economy improvement for lightduty trucks of 4.7 percent per year. For 

the first time, NHTSA expects to 

propose that manufacturers may include 

air conditioning system efficiency 

improvements as a means to comply 

with fuel economy standards, and 

NHTSA also expects to increase the 

stringency of standards by the amount 

industry is expected to improve air 

conditioning system efficiency. NHTSA 

notes that the intended proposed rates 

of increase in stringency for CAFE 

standards are lower than EPA’s 

intended proposed rates of increase in 

stringency for GHG standards. As in the 

MY 2012–2016 rulemaking, this is for 

purposes of harmonization and in 

reflection of certain statutory constraints 

in EPCA/EISA. For example, NHTSA’s 

standards do not reflect the inclusion of 

air conditioning system refrigerant and 

leakage improvements. 

The coefficients and industry-wide 

curves that NHTSA and EPA intend to 

propose are included as Appendix B. 

The agencies believe that the 

standards discussed above could be met 

with improvements in conventional 

gasoline and hybrid vehicle 

technologies and an increased market 

share of more advanced technologies 

including electric vehicles and plug-in 

hybrid electric vehicles. 

B. Mid-Term Review 

Given the long time frame at issue in 

setting standards for MY2022–2025 

light-duty vehicles, and given NHTSA’s 

obligation to conduct a separate 

rulemaking in order to establish final 

standards for vehicles for those model 

years, EPA and NHTSA intend to 

propose a comprehensive mid-term 

evaluation and agency decision-making 

as described in Appendix A to this 

Notice of Intent. Up to date information 

will be developed and compiled for the 

evaluation, through a collaborative, 

robust and transparent process, 

including public notice and comment. 

The evaluation will be based on (1) A 

holistic assessment of all of the factors 

considered by the agencies in setting 

standards, including those set forth in 

the rule and other relevant factors, and 

(2) the expected impact of those factors 

on the manufacturers’ ability to comply, 

without placing decisive weight on any 

particular factor or projection. The 

comprehensive evaluation process will 

lead to final agency action by both 

agencies. 

Consistent with the Agencies’ 

commitment to maintaining a single 

national framework for regulation of 

vehicle emissions and fuel economy, the 

Agencies fully expect to conduct the 

mid-term evaluation in close 

coordination with the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). Moreover, the 

Agencies fully expect that any 

adjustments to the standards will be 

made with the participation of CARB 

and in a manner that ensures continued 

harmonization of state and Federal 

vehicle standards. 

C. Key Program Elements 

EPA and NHTSA have more recently 

sought extensive input from automobile 

manufacturers regarding design 

elements for the MY 2017–2025 

National Program. In achieving the level 

of standards described above for the 

2017–2025 program, the agencies expect 

automakers’ use of advanced 

technologies to be an important element 

of transforming the vehicle fleet. To 

facilitate this transformation, the 

agencies are considering a number of 

incentive programs to encourage early 

adoption and introduction into the 

marketplace of advanced technologies 

that represent ‘‘game changing’’ 

performance improvement, including 

electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric 

vehicles and fuel cell vehicles, and 

hybrid electric large pickups. In 

addition, the agencies recognize that, as 

with the MY 2012–2016 program, there 

are technologies with the potential to 

achieve real-world CO2 and fuel 

consumption reductions that are not 

captured by the standard test 

procedures. The agencies intend to 

propose a program approach to further 

encourage manufacturer investments in 

these ‘‘off-cycle’’ technologies. 

1. Off-Cycle Credits 

As in the MY 2012–2016 program, the 

objective of the off-cycle credits 

program is to promote the early market 

penetration of tailpipe CO2/fuel 

consumption reducing technologies that 

are not appropriately accounted for in 

the current test procedure. Many 

automakers indicated that they had a 

strong interest in pursuing off-cycle 

technologies, but the process outlined in 

the 2012–2016 program should be 

refined and simplified so as to provide 

more certainty as to the types of 

technologies the agencies would 

consider, and so the process could be 

simplified. The agencies intend to 

propose to expand and streamline the 

2012–2016 off-cycle credit provisions, 

including an approach by which the 

agencies would provide credit for a 

subset of beneficial off-cycle 

technologies to encourage early 

penetration of these technologies. 

For the NPRM, EPA and NHTSA 

intend to develop a minimum credit 

value on a subset of technologies for 

which we have sufficient data. We 

expect this list to include at least six 

defined technologies, if not more.9 The 

total number of technologies will be 

dependent on the available data. In 

order to make use of the pre-defined 

credit list of off-cycle technologies, a 

manufacturer must utilize the 

technology on a minimum percentage of 

the company’s vehicles. EPA and 

NHTSA will continue to assess the 

appropriate level and will propose a 

level in the NPRM. The specific 

percentage values may vary by off-cycle 

technology, and will consider the 

applicability of the technology across 

vehicle type. Under the planned 

proposal, the total gram/mile credit 

from the predefined list for any given 

model year would not exceed a 10 gram/ 

mile 10 impact on the company’s 

combined fleet average. This limit 

would only apply to the total for 

technologies where the company 

chooses to use the agency provided 

credit values. Automakers can apply for 

additional credits beyond the minimum 

credit value of listed technologies if 

they have sufficient supporting data. 

In addition, the agencies are planning 

to propose that companies could also 

apply for off-cycle credit for 

technologies that are not on the predefined list, based on the submission of 

sufficient supporting data. EPA and 

NHTSA intend to propose a timeline for 

the approval process, including a 60-day 

NHTSA and EPA decision process from 

the time a manufacturer submits a 

complete application. EPA and NHTSA 

also intend to propose a detailed, 

common, step-by-step process, 

including a specification of the data that 

manufacturers must submit. For offVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:11 Aug 08, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM 09AUP1

jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48761 

11The multipliers for EV/FCV would be: 2017– 

2019—2.0, 2020—1.75, 2021—1.5; for PHEV: 2017– 

2019—1.6, 2020—1.45, 2021—1.3. 12 0.001125 gallon/mile. 

cycle technologies that are both not 

covered by the pre-approved off-cycle 

credit list and that are not quantifiable 

based on the 5-cycle test cycle option 

provided in the 2012–2016 rulemaking, 

EPA and NHTSA will retain the public 

comment process described by EPA in 

the MY 2012–2016 rule. 

NHTSA and EPA also intend to 

propose that once a technology has been 

approved by the two agencies, either 

from the pre-approved list or through 

the approval process, that technology 

and its assigned credit value is available 

through MY 2025. 

2. Incentives for Electric Vehicles, Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles, and Fuel 

Cell Vehicles 

To facilitate market penetration of the 

most advanced vehicle technologies as 

rapidly as possible, EPA intends to 

propose an incentive multiplier for all 

electric vehicles (EVs), plug-in hybrid 

electric vehicles (PHEVs), and fuel cell 

vehicles (FCVs) sold in MYs 2017 

through 2021. This multiplier approach 

means that each EV/PHEV/FCV would 

count as more than one vehicle in the 

manufacturer’s compliance calculation. 

EPA intends to propose that EVs and 

FCVs start with a multiplier value of 2.0 

in MY 2017, phasing down to a value 

of 1.5 in MY 2021. PHEVs would start 

at a multiplier value of 1.6 in MY 2017 

and phase down to a value of 1.3 in MY 

2021.11 These multipliers would be 

proposed for incorporation in EPA’s 

GHG program. 

NHTSA is precluded from offering 

incentives for EVs, FCVs and PHEVs, 

except as specified by EISA, and is not 

intending to propose incentive 

multipliers comparable to the EPA 

incentive multipliers described above. 

As an additional incentive for EVs, 

PHEVs and FCVs, EPA intends to 

propose allowing a value of 0 g/mile for 

the tailpipe compliance value for EVs, 

PHEVs (electricity usage) and FCVs for 

MY 2017–2021, with no limit on the 

quantity of vehicles eligible for 0 g/mi 

tailpipe emissions accounting. For MY 

2022–2025, 0 g/mi will only be allowed 

up to a per-company cumulative sales 

cap based on significant penetration of 

these advanced vehicles in the 

marketplace. EPA intends to propose an 

appropriate cap in the NPRM. 

3. Incentives for ‘‘Game Changing’’ 

Technologies Performance for Full-Size 

Pickup Truck Including Hybridization 

The agencies recognize that the 

standards under consideration for MY 

2017–2025 will be most challenging to 

large trucks, including full size pickup 

trucks. The agencies’ goal is to 

incentivize the penetration into the 

marketplace of ‘‘game changing’’ 

technologies for these pickups, 

including their hybridization. The 

agencies intend to solicit information on 

technologies that offer significant 

increases in fuel efficiency and 

reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. 

We intend to propose a credit for 

manufacturers that employ significant 

quantities of hybridization on full size 

pickup trucks, by including a pervehicle credit available for mild and 

strong hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). 

This provides the opportunity to begin 

to transform the most challenging 

category of vehicles in terms of the 

penetration of advanced technologies, 

allowing additional opportunities to 

successfully achieve the higher levels of 

truck stringencies in MY 2022–2025. 

The agencies intend that access to this 

credit is conditioned on a minimum 

penetration of the technology in a 

manufacturer’s full size pickup truck 

fleet, with defined criteria for a full size 

pickup truck (e.g., minimum bed size 

and minimum towing capability). The 

agencies intend to propose that mild 

HEV pickup trucks are eligible for a 10 

g/mi 12 credit during 2017–2021 if the 

technology is used on a minimum 

percentage of a company’s full size 

pickups, beginning with at least 30% of 

a company’s full size pickup production 

in 2017 and ramping up to at least 80% 

in 2021. Strong HEV pickup trucks 

would be eligible for a 20g/mi credit 

during 2017–2025 if the technology is 

used on at least 10% of the company’s 

full size pickups. The agencies will 

propose specific definitions of mild and 

strong HEV pickup trucks, but expect to 

include stop/start, regenerative braking, 

minimum motor power, minimum 

battery voltage value and minimum 

energy storage capacity, or similar types 

of objective metrics. The agencies 

expect that a ‘‘mild’’ HEV will include 

moderate hybridization and not just 

start/stop, and that a ‘‘strong’’ HEV will 

include launch assist. 

The agencies also intend to propose a 

performance based incentive credit for 

full size pickup trucks which achieve a 

significant reduction below the 

applicable target. This credit could also 

be on the order of 10–20 gm/mile 

vehicle. The same vehicle would not 

receive credit under both the HEV and 

the performance based approaches. 

4. Air Conditioning Credits 

As with the MY2012–2016 program, 

manufacturers will be able to earn 

credits for improvements in air 

conditioning (A/C) systems, both for 

efficiency improvements (reduces 

tailpipe CO2 and improves fuel 

consumption) and for leakage or 

alternative, lower GWP (global warming 

potential) refrigerant use (reduces 

hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) emissions). 

EPA intends to propose that the 

maximum A/C credit available for cars 

is 18.8 grams/mile CO2 and for trucks is 

24.4 grams/mile CO2. The test methods 

used to calculate these credits will be 

very similar to those of the MY2012– 

2016 program. 

For the first time, NHTSA expects to 

propose that manufacturers may include 

air conditioning system efficiency 

improvements as a means to comply 

with fuel economy standards. NHTSA 

expects to not allow the use of A/C 

system credits that affect leakage or 

alternative, lower GWP refrigerant use, 

because those changes do not affect fuel 

efficiency. NHTSA also expects to 

increase the stringency of standards by 

the amount industry is expected to 

improve air conditioning system 

efficiency. NHTSA intends to propose 

that the maximum A/C credit available 

for cars is 0.000563 gallon/mile and for 

trucks is 0.000810 gallon/mile. The test 

methods used to calculate these credits 

will be the same as EPA’s. 

5. Treatment of Compressed Natural Gas 

(CNG), Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles 

(PHEVs), and Flexible Fuel Vehicles 

(FFVs) 

EPA intends that CO2 credits for plugin hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and 

bi-fuel compressed natural gas (CNG) 

vehicles will be based on the 

recognition that, once a consumer has 

paid several thousand dollars to be able 

to use a fuel that is considerably 

cheaper than gasoline, it is very likely 

that the consumer will seek to use the 

cheaper fuel as much as possible. 

Accordingly, for CO2 emissions 

compliance, EPA expects to use the 

Society of Automotive Engineers 

‘‘utility factor’’ methodology (based on 

vehicle range on the alternative fuel and 

typical daily travel mileage) to 

determine the assumed percentage of 

operation on alternative fuel and 

percentage of operation on CNG for both 

PHEVs and bi-fuel CNG vehicles, along 

with the CO2 emissions test values on 

the alternative fuel and gasoline. 

EPA does not expect to extend this 

method to flexible fueled vehicles 

(FFVs) using E–85 and gasoline, since 

there is not a significant cost differential 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48762 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

13 49 U.S.C. 32902(d). Implementing regulations 

may be found in 49 CFR part 525. 

between an FFV and conventional 

gasoline vehicle and historically 

consumers have only fueled these 

vehicles with E85 a very small 

percentage of the time. Therefore, 

treatment of E85 FFVs will continue as 

the MY2016 program, based on actual 

usage of E85 which represents a realworld reduction attributed to alternative 

fuels. 

In the NHTSA program for MYs 2017– 

2019, NHTSA expects that the fuel 

economy of dual fuel vehicles will be 

determined in the same manner as 

specified in the MY 2012–2016 rule, 

and as defined by EISA. Beginning in 

MY 2020, EISA does not specify how to 

measure the fuel economy of dual fuel 

vehicles, and it is expected NHTSA will 

propose to use the EPA ‘‘utility factor’’ 

methodology for PHEV and CNG 

vehicles to determine how to proportion 

the fuel economy when operating on 

gasoline or diesel fuel and the fuel 

economy when operating on the 

alternative fuel. For FFVs, NHTSA 

expects to propose to use the same 

methodology as EPA to determine how 

to proportion the fuel economy, which 

would be based on actual usage of E85. 

NHTSA expects to continue to use 

Petroleum Equivalency Factors and the 

incentive multipliers that are used in 

the MY 2012–2016 rule, however with 

no cap on the amount of fuel economy 

increase allowed. 

6. Credit Banking and Trading 

The agencies will propose to continue 

the 5-year credit carry forward and 3- 

year credit carry back provisions of the 

MY2012–2016 program, with one key 

exception under the EPA program. To 

facilitate the transition to the 

increasingly more stringent standards, 

EPA intends to propose a one-time 

credit carry forward beyond 5 years, 

such that any credits generated from 

MY2010 through 2016 will be able to be 

used any time through MY 2021. This 

provision would not apply to early 

credits generated in MY 2009. NHTSA’s 

program will continue the 5-year carryforward and 3-year carry-back as 

required by statute. 

As with the MY 2012–2016 program, 

EPA intends to continue to allow 

manufacturers to make unlimited 

transfers between their car and light 

truck fleets, and unlimited credit 

trading between manufacturers. NHTSA 

intends to continue to allow unlimited 

credit trading between manufacturers, 

and credit transferring up to the limits 

allowed by statute, consistent with the 

approach in the MY 2012–2016 

program. 

7. Exclusion of Emergency and Police 

Vehicles 

Under EPCA, manufacturers are 

allowed to exclude emergency vehicles 

from their CAFE fleet and all 

manufacturers have historically done so. 

In the MY 2012–2016 program, EPA’s 

GHG program does apply to these 

vehicles. However, after further 

consideration of this issue, EPA intends 

to propose that an exclusion is 

appropriate because of the unique 

features of vehicles designed 

specifically for law enforcement 

purposes, which have the effect of 

raising their GHG emissions. 

8. Small Businesses and Small Volume 

Manufacturers 

As EPA did for the MY 2012–2016 

program, EPA intends to propose to 

continue to exclude small businesses 

from the GHG standards, for any 

company that meets the Small Business 

Administration’s definition of a small 

business. For vehicle manufacturers, the 

definition of small business is any firm 

with less than 1,000 employees. EPA 

believes this exemption is appropriate 

since these businesses make up less 

than 0.1% of total U.S. vehicle sales, 

and there is no significant impact on 

emission reductions. 

EPCA provides NHTSA with the 

authority to exempt from the generally 

applicable CAFE standards 

manufacturers that produce fewer than 

10,000 passenger cars worldwide in the 

model year each of the two years prior 

to the year in which they seek an 

exemption.13 If NHTSA exempts a 

manufacturer, it must establish an 

alternate standard for that manufacturer 

for that model year, at the level that the 

agency decides is maximum feasible for 

that manufacturer. The exemption and 

alternative standard apply only if the 

exempted manufacturer also produces 

fewer than 10,000 passenger cars 

worldwide in the year for which the 

exemption was granted. 

For small volume manufacturers, 

which EPA defines as manufacturers 

with U.S. annual sales of less than 5,000 

vehicles, EPA intends to propose to 

bring these manufacturers into the 

program for the first time, and allow 

them to petition for alternative 

standards. 

D. Conclusion 

This document outlines the key 

program elements of a National Program 

that EPA and NHTSA plan to propose 

for model year 2017–2025 light-duty 

vehicles. The agencies’ efforts to 

develop this program have been fully 

consistent with the President’s May 21, 

2010 Memorandum. The agencies have 

coordinated extensively with California, 

and held extensive discussions with 

stakeholders to ensure our proposal is 

based on the most robust technical 

analysis possible. The agencies plan to 

issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

by the end of September 2011. 

Appendix A—Mid-Term Evaluation for 

MY 2022–2025 LDV Rules 

Given the long time frame at issue in 

setting standards for MY2022–2025 lightduty vehicles, and given NHTSA’s obligation 

to conduct a separate rulemaking in order to 

establish final standards for vehicles for 

those model years, EPA and NHTSA will 

conduct a comprehensive mid-term 

evaluation and agency decision-making as 

described below. Up to date information will 

be developed and compiled for the 

evaluation, through a collaborative, robust 

and transparent process, including public 

notice and comment. The evaluation will be 

based on (1) A holistic assessment of all of 

the factors considered by the agencies in 

setting standards, including those set forth in 

the rule and other relevant factors, and (2) 

the expected impact of those factors on the 

manufacturers’ ability to comply, without 

placing decisive weight on any particular 

factor or projection. The comprehensive 

evaluation process will lead to final agency 

action by both agencies. 

Consistent with the Agencies’ commitment 

to maintaining a single national framework 

for regulation of vehicle emissions and fuel 

economy, the Agencies fully expect to 

conduct the mid-term evaluation in close 

coordination with the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). Moreover, the 

Agencies fully expect that any adjustments to 

the standards will be made with the 

participation of CARB and in a manner that 

ensures continued harmonization of state and 

Federal vehicle standards. 

∑ EPA will conduct a mid-term evaluation 

of the later model year light-duty GHG 

standards (MY2022–2025). The evaluation 

will determine whether those standards are 

appropriate under section 202(a) of the Act. 

EPA will be legally bound to make a final 

decision, by April 1, 2018, on whether the 

MY 2022–2025 GHG standards are 

appropriate under section 202(a), in light of 

the record then before the agency. In the MY 

2017–2025 rule EPA will adopt a regulation 

requiring EPA to make such a determination 

by that date. 

∑ EPA, NHTSA and CARB will jointly 

prepare a draft Technical Assessment Report 

(TAR) to inform EPA’s determination on the 

appropriateness of the GHG standards and to 

inform NHTSA’s rulemaking for the CAFE 

standards for MYs 2022–2025. The TAR will 

examine the same issues and underlying 

analyses and projections considered in the 

original rulemaking, including technical and 

other analyses and projections relevant to 

each agency’s authority to set standards as 

well as any relevant new issues that may 

present themselves. There will be an 

opportunity for public comment on the draft 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48763 

TAR, and appropriate peer review will be 

performed of underlying analyses in the 

TAR. The assumptions and modeling 

underlying the TAR will be available to the 

public, to the extent consistent with law. 

∑ EPA will also seek public comment on 

whether the standards are appropriate under 

section 202(a), e.g. comments to affirm or 

change the GHG standards (either more or 

less stringent). The agencies will carefully 

consider comments and information received 

and respond to comments in their respective 

subsequent final actions. 

∑ EPA and NHTSA will consult and 

coordinate in developing EPA’s 

determination on whether the MY 2022–2025 

GHG standards are appropriate under section 

202(a) and NHTSA’s NPRM. 

∑ In making that determination, EPA will 

evaluate and determine whether the 

MY2022–2025 GHG standards are 

appropriate under section 202(a) of the CAA 

based on a comprehensive, integrated 

assessment of all of the results of the review, 

as well as any public comments received 

during the evaluation, taken as a whole. The 

decision making required of the 

Administrator in making that determination 

is intended to be as robust and 

comprehensive as that in the original setting 

of the MY2017–2025 standards. 

∑ In making this determination, EPA will 

consider information on a range of relevant 

factors, including but not limited to those 

listed in the draft rule and below: 

1. Development of powertrain 

improvements to gasoline and diesel 

powered vehicles. 

2. Impacts on employment, including the 

auto sector. 

3. Availability and implementation of 

methods to reduce weight, including any 

impacts on safety. 

4. Actual and projected availability of 

public and private charging infrastructure for 

electric vehicles, and fueling infrastructure 

for alternative fueled vehicles. 

5. Costs, availability, and consumer 

acceptance of technologies to ensure 

compliance with the standards, such as 

vehicle batteries and power electronics, mass 

reduction, and anticipated trends in these 

costs. 

6. Payback periods for any incremental 

vehicle costs associated with meeting the 

standards. 

7. Costs for gasoline, diesel fuel, and 

alternative fuels. 

8. Total light-duty vehicle sales and 

projected fleet mix. 

9. Market penetration across the fleet of 

fuel efficient technologies. 

10. Any other factors that may be deemed 

relevant to the review. 

fi If, based on the evaluation, EPA decides 

that the GHG standards are appropriate under 

section 202(a), then EPA will announce that 

final decision and the basis for EPA’s 

decision. The decision will be final agency 

action which also will be subject to judicial 

review on its merits. EPA will develop an 

administrative record for that review that 

will be no less robust than that developed for 

the initial determination to establish the 

standards. In the midterm evaluation, EPA 

will develop a robust record for judicial 

review that is the same kind of record that 

would be developed and before a court for 

judicial review of the adoption of standards. 

fi Where EPA decides that the standards 

are not appropriate, EPA will initiate a 

rulemaking to adopt standards that are 

appropriate under section 202(a), which 

could result in standards that are either less 

or more stringent. In this rulemaking EPA 

will evaluate a range of alternative standards 

that are potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible, and the Administrator will propose 

the alternative that in her judgment is the 

best choice for a standard that is appropriate 

under section 202(a). In the 2017–2025 

rulemaking EPA will formally adopt the 

interpretation that the provisions of section 

202(b)(1)(C) are not applicable to any 

revisions of the greenhouse standards 

adopted in this later rulemaking based on the 

mid-term evaluation. If EPA initiates a 

rulemaking, it will be a joint rulemaking with 

NHTSA. Any final action taken by EPA at the 

end of that rulemaking is also judicially 

reviewable. 

fi The MY 2022–2025 GHG standards will 

remain in effect unless and until EPA 

changes them by rulemaking. 

fi NHTSA intends to issue conditional 

standards for MYs 2022–2025 in the LDV 

rulemaking being initiated this fall for MY 

2017 and later model years. The CAFE 

standards for MYs 2022–2025 will be 

determined with finality in a subsequent, de 

novo notice and comment rulemaking 

conducted in full compliance with section 

32902 of title 49, U.S.C. and other applicable 

law. Accordingly, NHTSA’s development of 

its proposal in that later rulemaking will 

include the making of economic and 

technology analyses and estimates that are 

appropriate for those model years and based 

on then-current information. 

fi Any rulemaking conducted jointly by 

the agencies or by NHTSA alone will be 

timed to provide sufficient lead time for 

industry to make whatever changes to their 

products that the rulemaking analysis deems 

feasible based on the new information 

available. At the very latest, the three 

agencies will complete the mid-term 

evaluation process and subsequent 

rulemaking on the standards that may occur 

in sufficient time to promulgate final 

standards for MYs 2022–2025 with at least 18 

months lead time, but additional lead time 

may be provided. 

fi EPA understands that California 

intends to propose a mid-term evaluation in 

its program that is coordinated with EPA and 

NHTSA and is based on a similar set of 

factors as outlined in this Appendix A. The 

rules submitted to EPA for a waiver under 

the CAA will include such a mid-term 

evaluation. EPA understands that California 

intends to continue promoting harmonized 

state and federal vehicle standards. EPA 

further understands that California’s 2017– 

2025 standards to be submitted to EPA for a 

waiver under the Clean Air Act will deem 

compliance with EPA greenhouse gas 

emission standards, even if amended after 

2012, as compliant with California’s. 

Therefore, if EPA revises it standards in 

response to the mid-term review, California 

may need to amend one or more of its 2022– 

2025 MY standards and would submit such 

amendments to EPA with a request for a 

waiver, or for confirmation that said 

amendments fall within the scope of an 

existing waiver, as appropriate. 

Consistent with the above, EPA intends to 

propose regulations that state that no later 

than April 1, 2018, the Administrator shall 

determine whether the standards for 

MY2022–25 are appropriate under section 

202(a) of the Act, in light of the record then 

before the Administrator. An opportunity for 

public comment shall be provided before 

making such determination. If she 

determines they are not appropriate, she 

shall initiate a rulemaking to revise the 

standards, to be either more or less stringent 

as appropriate. 

In making the determination required by 

the previous paragraph, the Administrator 

shall consider the information available on 

the factors relevant to setting greenhouse gas 

standards under section 202(a) for these 

model years, including but not limited to the 

availability and effectiveness of technology, 

and the appropriate lead time for 

introduction of technology; the cost on the 

producers or purchasers of new motor 

vehicles or new motor vehicle engines; the 

feasibility and practicability of the standards; 

the impact of the standards on reduction of 

emissions, oil conservation, energy security, 

and fuel savings by consumers; the impact of 

the standards on the automobile industry; the 

impacts of the standards on safety; the 

impact of the standards on the CAFE 

standards and a national harmonized 

program; and the impact of the standards on 

other relevant factors. 

The Administrator shall make the 

determination required based upon a record 

that includes a draft Technical Assessment 

Report (TAR) addressing issues relevant to 

the standard for MY2022–25, public 

comment on the TAR, public comment on 

whether the standards for MY2022–25 are 

appropriate under section 202(a), and such 

other materials the Administrator deems 

appropriate. 

No later than November 15, 2017, the 

Administrator shall issue a draft TAR 

addressing issues relevant to the standards 

for MY2022–25. 

The Administrator will set forth in detail 

the bases for the determination required as 

described above, including her assessment of 

each of the factors listed above. 

Appendix B 

EPA Curve Coefficients 

a = Minimum CO2 Target [g/mile] 

b = Maximum CO2 Target [g/mile] 

c = Slope [g/mile per square foot] 

d = Intercept [g/mile] 

e = Minimum CO2 Target [g/mile] for CO2

Target Ceiling Curve 

f = Maximum CO2 Target [g/mile] for CO2

Target Ceiling Curve 

g = Slope [g/mile per square foot] for CO2

Target Ceiling Curve 

h = Intercept [g/mile] for CO2 Target Ceiling 

Curve 

Where: 

Target = min(min (b,max(a, c * 

footprint+d)),min(f,max(e,g*footprint+h) 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48764 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

CARS

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 

a ............................... 206 .0 194 .7 184 .9 175 .3 166 .1 157 .2 150 .2 143 .3 136 .8 130 .5 

b ............................... 277 .0 262 .7 250 .1 238 .0 226 .2 214 .9 205 .5 196 .5 187 .8 179 .5 

c ................................ 4 .72 4 .53 4 .35 4 .17 4 .01 3 .84 3 .69 3 .54 3 .40 3 .26 

d ............................... 12 .70 8 .92 6 .54 4 .20 1 .89 ¥0 .38 ¥1 .12 ¥1 .83 ¥2 .52 ¥3 .17 

e ............................... ................ 203 .4 201 .9 200 .4 198 .9 197 .4 197 .4 197 .4 197 .4 197 .4 

f ................................ ................ 274 .4 277 .0 278 .5 280 .0 281 .5 283 .0 283 .0 283 .0 283 .0 

g ............................... ................ 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 4 .72 

h ............................... ................ 10 .10 8 .60 7 .10 5 .60 4 .10 4 .10 4 .10 4 .10 4 .10 

TRUCKS

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 

a ............................... 247 .0 238 .1 226 .8 219 .5 211 .9 195 .4 185 .7 176 .4 167 .6 159 .1 

b ............................... 348 .0 347 .2 341 .7 338 .6 336 .7 334 .8 320 .8 305 .6 291 .0 277 .1 

c ................................ 4 .04 4 .87 4 .76 4 .68 4 .57 4 .28 4 .09 3 .91 3 .74 3 .58 

d ............................... 81 .10 38 .28 31 .62 27 .69 24 .64 19 .80 17 .85 15 .98 14 .21 12 .51 

e ............................... ................ 246 .4 240 .9 237 .8 235 .9 234 .0 234 .0 234 .0 234 .0 234 .0 

f ................................ ................ 347 .4 341 .9 338 .8 336 .9 335 .0 335 .0 335 .0 335 .0 335 .0 

g ............................... ................ 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 4 .04 

h ............................... ................ 80 .50 75 .00 71 .90 70 .00 68 .10 68 .10 68 .10 68 .10 68 .10 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48765 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09AU11.016</GPH>
48766 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09AU11.017</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48767 

NHTSA CAFE Coefficients and Curves for 

Cars and Trucks 

Instructions for Calculating NHTSA CAFE 

and EPA GHG Target Curves Using the 

Coefficients 

The target curve is calculated by: 

Step 1. Calculate targets using the a, b, c, and 

d coefficients 

Step 2. Calculate targets using the e, f, g and 

h coefficients 

Step 3. The curve is defined by the more 

stringent value at each footprint calculated 

from Step 1 and Step 2 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09AU11.018</GPH>
48768 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Table A.1—CAFE Target Curve Coefficients 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09AU11.019</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48769 

PASSENGER CARS

Model 

year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 

a ....... 30.96 32.65 33.84 35.07 36.47 38.02 39.79 41.64 43.58 45.61 

b ....... 41.09 43.61 45.21 46.87 48.74 50.83 53.21 55.71 58.32 61.07 

c ....... 0.0005308 0.0005131 0.0004954 0.0004783 0.0004603 0.0004419 0.0004227 0.0004043 0.0003867 0.0003699 

d ....... 0.002573 0.001896 0.001811 0.001729 0.001643 0.001555 0.001463 0.001375 0.001290 0.001210 

e ....... ....................... 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 31.51 

f ........ ....................... 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 42.06 

g ....... ....................... 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 0.0005308 

h ....... ....................... 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 0.002010 

TRUCKS

Model 

year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 

a ....... 24.74 25.09 25.20 25.25 25.25 25.25 26.29 27.53 28.83 30.19 

b ....... 34.42 36.26 37.36 38.16 39.11 41.80 43.79 45.89 48.09 50.39 

c ....... 0.0004546 0.0005484 0.0005358 0.0005265 0.0005140 0.0004820 0.0004607 0.0004404 0.0004210 0.0004025 

d ....... 0.010413 0.005097 0.004797 0.004623 0.004494 0.004164 0.003944 0.003735 0.003534 0.003343 

e ....... ....................... 25.09 25.20 25.25 25.25 25.25 25.25 25.25 25.25 25.25 

f ........ ....................... 35.10 35.31 35.41 35.41 35.41 35.41 35.41 35.41 35.41 

g ....... ....................... 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 0.0004546 

h ....... ....................... 0.009851 0.009682 0.009603 0.009603 0.009603 0.009603 0.009603 0.009603 0.009603 

a = Fuel Economy Value for Lower Footprint Cutpoint [mpg]. 

b = Fuel Economy Value for Upper Footprint Cutpoint [mpg]. 

c = Slope [gallons per mile per square foot]. 

d = Intercept [gallons per mile]. 

e = Fuel Economy Value for Lower Footprint Cutpoint [mpg] for Floor Curve. 

f = Fuel Economy Value for Upper Footprint Cutpoint [mpg] for Target Floor Curve. 

g = Slope [gallons per mile per square foot] for Target Floor Curve. 

h = Intercept [gallons per mile] for Target Floor Curve. 

Dated: July 29, 2011 

Ray LaHood, 

Secretary, Department of Transportation. 

Dated: July 29, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator, Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2011–19905 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Office of the Secretary 

45 CFR Part 170 

RIN 0991–AB78 

Metadata Standards To Support 

Nationwide Electronic Health 

Information Exchange 

AGENCY: Office of the National 

Coordinator for Health Information 

Technology, Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Through this advance notice 

of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM), the 

Office of the National Coordination for 

Health Information Technology (ONC) is 

soliciting public comments on metadata 

standards to support nationwide 

electronic health information exchange. 

We are specifically interested in public 

comments on the following categories of 

metadata recommended by both the HIT 

Policy Committee and HIT Standards 

Committee: patient identity; 

provenance; and privacy. We also 

request public comments on any 

additional metadata categories, 

metadata elements, or metadata syntax 

that should be considered. The 

immediate scope of this ANPRM is the 

association of metadata with summary 

care records. More specifically, in the 

scenario where a patient obtains a 

summary care record from a health care 

provider’s electronic health record 

technology or requests for it to be 

transmitted to their personal health 

record. Public comment, however, is 

also welcome on the use of metadata 

relative to other electronic health 

information contexts. 

DATES: To be assured consideration, 

written comments must be received at 

one of the addresses provided below, no 

later than 5 p.m. on September 23, 2011. 

Similarly, electronic comments must be 

received by Midnight Eastern Time on 

September 23, 2011 as the Federal 

Docket Management System will not 

accept comments after this time. 

ADDRESSES: Because of staff and 

resource limitations, we cannot accept 

comments by facsimile (FAX) 

transmission. You may submit 

comments, identified by RIN 0991– 

AB78, by any of the following methods 

(please do not submit duplicate 

comments). 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments. Attachments should be in 

Microsoft Word or Excel, Adobe PDF; 

however, we prefer Microsoft Word. 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

• Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Office of the National 

Coordinator for Health Information 

Technology, Attention: Steven Posnack, 

Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Suite 

729D, 200 Independence Ave., SW., 

Washington, DC 20201. Please submit 

one original and two copies. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Office of 

the National Coordinator for Health 

Information Technology, Attention: 

Steven Posnack, Hubert H. Humphrey 

Building, Suite 729D, 200 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20201. 

Please submit one original and two 

copies. (Because access to the interior of 

the Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not 

readily available to persons without 

federal government identification, 

commenters are encouraged to leave 

their comments in the mail drop slots 

located in the main lobby of the 

building.) 

Inspection of Public Comments: All 

comments received before the close of 

the comment period will be available for 

public inspection, including any 

personally identifiable or confidential 

business information that is included in 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS