MEMORAMDUM

FROM: Byron Bunker

TO: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

SUBJECT: Emails Regarding EO12866 GHG and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Med-HeavyDuty Engines and Vehicles 2060-AP61 FRM

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathryn 

Sargeant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/07/2011 08:25 PM

Subject:MD & HD FE and GHG interagency question 12 response

Hi Chandana,

Following is our response to interagency question 12 on comparisons to the AEO2011 baseline. 

Thanks,

Byron

Agency Response 12:

The existing alternatives section already provides the reader with the ability to compare the reductions 

estimated in the AEO2011 case to the standards the agencies are finalizing. We do not intend to extend 

that presentation to include presentations of cost and benefits beyond the existing text. We have made 

this decision for several reasons. First, we are not able to make a directly comparable estimate of the 

compliance costs for the EIA 2011 estimate because the AEO2011 analysis assumes different 

technologies and has different cost estimates for the technologies we do have in common. For example, 

the EIA model does not include idle shutdown technologies or the use of diesel APUs in reaching its 

projections. Since diesel APUs represent well over half of the projected costs for combination tractors in 

our analysis, it is self evident that the two analyses cannot be directly compared for costs. 

We are similarly reluctant to make comparisons of the projected fuel economy improvements and hence 

CO2 reductions between the AEO2011 analysis and our own. The AEO2011 analysis includes two 

assumptions/projections that are substantially different and which are problematic in comparing the 

analysis. For Class 2b pickups, EIA assumes that commercial truck makers will automatically carry over 

the same level of improvement as is required in the 2012-2016 light-duty regulations. This is different 

from our joint analysis which assumes absent regulation truck OEMs would not realize improvements in 

fuel efficiency. Throughout the rulemaking process, truck OEMs in this market have been clear that these 

regulations will force the introduction of technology that would not otherwise be offered on these vehicles. 

Equally troublesome in comparing the two analyses, the AEO2011 analysis assumes that all other 

vocational trucks (many of which use the same engines and transmissions as the Class 2b pickups) will 

see an increase in fuel consumption over time. We do not see a clear basis for assuming a 15 percent 

improvement in fuel efficiency from 2b pickups (those between 8500-10,000 lbs) at the same time that 

virtually identical Class 3 pickups (those between 10,000 -14,000 lbs) are assumed to see a loss in fuel 

efficiency. This is driven in part by differences in how vehicles are grouped in our regulatory program and 

in the transportation demand model used by EIA. We understand that EIA intends to fundamentally 

revisit its HD analysis for AEO2012 to reflect more up-to-date data on heavy-duty truck technologies and 

to make the analysis approach consistent with our heavy-duty rulemaking requirements.
******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken 

Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela 

Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/08/2011 12:45 PM

Subject:Additional information on interagency questions

Hi Chandana,

Attached are updated responses to three of the interagency questions based on your previous request to 

the agencies.

· Comment #8: In addition to the aggregate table, please provide individual tables for PU&V, 

Vocational, and Line Haul.

· Comment #3: Please provide the added tables separately (ASAP) so the agencies may review the 

content.

· Comment #25 Learning: Please provide summarized results

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachment included: EO 12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines+Vehicles 2060-

AP61 FRM Response to OMB_20110708.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)
(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, 

lily.smith@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela 

Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, William 

Charmley/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathryn Sargeant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/14/2011 08:07 AM

Subject: Crediting NGVs in the HD Rule

Hi Chandana,

I am sorry that it has taken us so long to respond. Like you, the EPA and NHTSA teams have had a 

number of overlapping priorities over the last few weeks.

I believe the following description and analysis is the clearest way to understand the choices on NGV 

credits. For explanatory purposes, I have assumed that the credits would apply equally to EPA and 

NHTSA's program. To be clear, we believe our current approach based on tailpipe CO2 is the most 

appropriate and are not recommending an alternative approach.

To make the calculations more transparent, I have rounded some of the inputs. Given the purpose of the 

presentation I think this is better and will facilitate understanding. If we need to redo with more significant 

digits, we can do so.

Valuing the current CO2 based incentive.

Due to lower carbon content of natural gas we expect natural gas engines to over comply (generate 

credits) against the diesel and gasoline engine standards by 20-30%. Information submitted as 

comments by the NG industry suggest 22% compared to diesel. For this analysis, I am going to use the 

round number of 20%.

Similarly the Class 8 tractor standard is projected to achieve approximately a 20% reduction in CO2.

For our purposes here, I am going to assume that a NG tractor would fully comply without any new 

hardware added from today's NG baseline performance (1 NGV tractor = 1 2017 compliant diesel tractor). 

With these assumptions, I think we can express the value of the NGV credit and the impact of an 

individual NGV vehicle.

NGV Tractor CO2 based Incentive

Offsets compliance cost of one tractor = $6,215 

CO2 Reduction = 264 metric tons (matching tailpipe reduction of std)

SCC benefit = $5,808 (264 tons x $22/ton)

Fuel Savings = 130,740 gallons (lifetime diesel consumption fully displaced by NG)

Energy Security Benefit = $22,225 ($0.17/gallon x 130,740 gallons)

Valuing a 85% Petroleum Equivalent Approach
Current light-duty vehicle approach under EPCA would convert Natural Gas to an equivalent petroleum 

(energy) level and then would reduce the actual compliance level by 85%.

For simplicity sake I am treating the CO2 and Fuel Consumption credits as the same although the 

conversion first to PEF space would cause a offset of roughly 20 percent.

For our purposes here, I am going to assume that a NG tractor would fully comply without any new 

hardware added from today's NG baseline performance and would generate enough credits for another 5 

tractors to comply with no change (1 NGV tractor = 1 2017 compliant diesel tractor + 5 2010 baseline 

tractors). With these assumptions, we can express the value of the NGV credit and the impact of an 

individual NGV vehicle.

NGV Tractor CO2 based Incentive

Offsets compliance cost of six tractors = $37,290 

CO2 Increase = 1,056 metric tons (1 NGV tractor gets 264 reduction, 5 conventional stay at

baseline)

SCC Loss = $22,232 (1,056 tons x $22/ton)

Fuel Savings = 0 gallons (Petroleum reduction from NGV truck is offset by 5 conventional 

trucks with no reduction)

Energy Security Benefit = 0 

The two approaches can then be compared and contrasted on a per tractor basis.

1) Value of Credit: CO2 based = $6,215 per truck, 0.15 incentive = $37,290 per truck

2) CO2 Reductions: CO2 based = 264 tons (no change), 0.15 incentive = 1,056 increase in CO2 

emissions

3) SCC Benefit: CO2 based = $5,808 (no change), 0.15 incentive = $22,232 loss

4) Fuel Savings: CO2 based = 130,740 gallons, 0.15 incentive = 0 gallons

4) Energy Security Benefit: CO2 based = $22,225, 0.15 incentive = $0

Projected NGV Tractor Sales

We do not have a cross elasticity of demand for NGV tractors against diesel tractors. Hence, we can not 

project the likely increase in NGV sales.

We would be glad to discuss these results with the interagency.

Thanks,

Byron

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality
US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather 

Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathryn 

Sargeant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/14/2011 06:31 PM

Subject: Marginal Cost of Reductions by Segment

Chandana,

At our last call, there was a question about the marginal cost of control for the individual truck segments. 

This was part of a broader discussion of the relative desirability of credit trading between vehicle classes. 

Following is a summary table that I believe is responsive to the request. The cost per ton is calculated on 

the increment from alt 2 to alt 3.

2014-18 MY 

Lifetime

Alt 2 Alt 3

CO2 

Reductions 

(up + down) 

(metric ton)

Program 

Costs ($mil)

CO2 

Reductions 

(up + down) 

(metric ton)

Program Costs ($mil) Cost/ton

Pickup Trucks 

22,189,077 

 

1,800 

 

25,490,976 

 

2,700 

$ 

273 

Vocational 

21,188,323 

 

600 

 

33,711,178 

 

1,100 

$ 

40 

Tractors 

202,181,449 

 

3,300 

 

217,024,721 

 

5,000 

$ 

115 

As a point of reference, a metric ton of CO2 is about 100 gallons of diesel fuel. So you could also think of 

these ratios as Cost/100 gallon reduction.

Thanks,

Byron

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker
Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov, Amanda_I._Lee@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Todd Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathryn Sargeant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken 

Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/14/2011 06:44 PM

Subject: HD Truck Rule - Fuel Price Sensitivity

HI Chandana,

Attached is a spreadsheet showing the impact of 3 fuel price scenarios, AEO2011 Low, High, and 

Reference case. This is meant to be responsive to the question of uncertainty in the analysis. We would 

be glad to talk with your team about the best way to characterize this information.

Unfortunately, the NHTSA team has not been able to fully review this work. Normally, we would 

duplicate the analysis using our individual agency tools for comparison. We have not had time to do so 

with this quick turnaround analysis.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachment included: GHGHG MY Summary using 3 AEO fuel price cases_20110713.xlsx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)
e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

-

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov

Date: 07/15/2011 01:51 PM

Subject: Fw: Updated Slides and Worksheets

Chandana,

Can you print these for the 2;00?

Thanks,

Byron

----- Forwarded by Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US on 07/15/2011 01:53 PM -----

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Patricia Shaffer/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: John Hannon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Steven Silverman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lori 

Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/15/2011 01:36 PM

Subject: Updated Slides and Worksheets

Hi Pat,

Can you please print both the slides and the excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet has two tabs that both 

need to be printed. They are already formatted so each tab will print on one page.

Thanks

Byron

**Attachments included: Background OMB Issues 15 July 2011.pptx & NGV Comparisons v3.xlsx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)
e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, james.tamm@dot.gov

Date: 07/21/2011 12:00 PM

Subject: Slides from yesterday and underlying spreadsheets

Hi Chandana,

Attached are the slides the agencies shared with the interagency yesterday along with the two 

spreadsheets summarizing the analyses.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachments included: MD and HD GHG and FE Rule 20 July 2011 v5 with NHTSA slides.pptx; 

GHGHG MY uncertainty analysis summary_20110719.xlsx; and GHGHD Summary of Alts by class 2011-

07-19.xlsx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Lauren 

Steele/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/21/2011 05:59 PM

Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: Revised Preamble pertaining to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and 

Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles 2060-AP61

Hi Chandana,

Attached is the most up to date version of the preamble. 
Thanks,

Byron

**Attachments included: “0721 FRM Preamble EO12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty 

Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, james.tamm@dot.gov, Gloria Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/21/2011 08:54 PM

Subject:EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 Comment Responses 

RIA Chapter 9

Hi Chandana,

Attached are our responses to the questions and comments forwarded from the interagency on July 19 

and 20. The attached copy of RIA chapter 9 reflects how we intended to carry through the changes in the 

package.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachments included: 0721 Response to InterAgency comments received 7_19 and 7_20 EO 

12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61.docx 7 0721 RIA CH9 

Economic Impacts EO 12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines + Vehicles 2060-

AP61.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center
Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov

Date: 07/22/2011 02:00 PM

Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: Revised RIA pertaining to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel 

Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles 2060-AP61

Hi Chandana,

We can't quickly compile the RIA into a single document, but I can send you the most up to date versions 

of the relevant chapters. The new tables on net benefits by category start on page 20 of chapter 6. The 

new tables on cost sensitivity are in RIA chapter 9 starting on page 53.

You probably already noticed, but I sent the preamble not RIA language last night. The full RIA chapter 9 

is attached below.

Chapters 2, 5, and 7 are also attached since they may contain analysis that informs the summary tables 

in chapters 6 and 9.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachments included: 

**
******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, lily.smith@dot.gov, james.tamm@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, 

"Mancini, Dominic J." <Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov>, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/25/2011 02:32 PM

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 Draft ABT 

Paragraph

Hi Chandana,

Following is the language the agencies plan to add to the preamble on broader consideration of ABT.

Thanks,

Byron

The agencies considered even broader trading provisions, but decided that in this first phase of a new 

regulatory program, it would be prudent to start with a program that aligned with the current market 

structure and the well-established criteria pollutant trading provisions. We intend to investigate whether, 

after an initial transition period in which a new program is put in place, significant additional cost savings 

could be realized through broader trading provisions. We emphasize that reducing the cost of regulation 

through broader use of flexible approaches and market tools is a high priority for the Administration. See 

Executive Order 13563 and in particular section 1(b)(5) and section 4. Consistent with this principle, we 

intend to give serious consideration to allowing broader trading in the future and to seek public comment 

on that topic. We expect to do so after credit trading begins in 2013, the first year we expect 

manufacturers to begin certifying 2014 model year vehicles. We believe that public input will be better 

informed by the work the agencies and the regulated industry will have put into implementing this first 

phase of heavy-duty regulations. Using this input, and emphasizing the Administration’s strong 

preference for flexible approaches and maximizing the use of market tools, the agencies intend to 

consider whether broader credit trading is more appropriate in developing the next phase of heavy-duty 

regulations.

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality
US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

--

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, lily.smith@dot.gov, james.tamm@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, 

"Mancini, Dominic J." <Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov>, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/25/2011 02:32 PM

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 Draft ABT 

Paragraph

Hi Chandana,

Following is the language the agencies plan to add to the preamble on broader consideration of ABT.

Thanks,

Byron

The agencies considered even broader trading provisions, but decided that in this first phase of a new 

regulatory program, it would be prudent to start with a program that aligned with the current market 

structure and the well-established criteria pollutant trading provisions. We intend to investigate whether, 

after an initial transition period in which a new program is put in place, significant additional cost savings 

could be realized through broader trading provisions. We emphasize that reducing the cost of regulation 

through broader use of flexible approaches and market tools is a high priority for the Administration. See 

Executive Order 13563 and in particular section 1(b)(5) and section 4. Consistent with this principle, we 

intend to give serious consideration to allowing broader trading in the future and to seek public comment 

on that topic. We expect to do so after credit trading begins in 2013, the first year we expect 

manufacturers to begin certifying 2014 model year vehicles. We believe that public input will be better 

informed by the work the agencies and the regulated industry will have put into implementing this first 

phase of heavy-duty regulations. Using this input, and emphasizing the Administration’s strong 

preference for flexible approaches and maximizing the use of market tools, the agencies intend to 

consider whether broader credit trading is more appropriate in developing the next phase of heavy-duty 

regulations.

**Attachment included: EO 12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines + Vehicles 2060-

AP61 FRM Preamble 20110725.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105
(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov

Cc: Karen Orehowsky/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Patricia 

Shaffer/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/27/2011 11:58 AM

Subject: Materials for our 12:00 on Mass Reduction

Hi Chandana,

Attached are the materials for our 12:00. I will open the line in just a minute.

Thanks,

Byron

** Attachment included: E.O. 12866 Review Mass Reduction 2060-AP61.ppt**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov, lily.smith@dot.gov

Cc: Karen Orehowsky/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lori Stewart/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Patricia 

Shaffer/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/27/2011 11:58 AM

Subject: Materials for our 12:00 on Mass Reduction

Hi Chandana,
Attached are the materials for our 12:00. I will open the line in just a minute.

Thanks,

Byron

** Attachment included: EO12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines + Vehicles 2060-

AP61 FRM Response to OMB_20110628 without 12.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"Neil.Eisner@dot.gov" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>, 

"analiese.wilcox@dot.gov" <analiese.wilcox@dot.gov>, Chet France/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, John 

Hannon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Margo Oge/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Gina McCarthy/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 06/06/2011 01:06 PM

Subject: Heavy Duty FRM Briefing: June 10th at 11:30 in WHCC's Lincoln Room

Hi All,

The heavy duty final rule briefing is scheduled for 11:30AM this Friday, June 10th. It will be held in the 

Lincoln Room of the White House Conference Center. We just need full names of all attendees (no need 

for SSN, DOB, etc).

Please provide a consolidated list of full names for your agency by COB Thursday, June 9th.

We will have a call in number for anyone who cannot attend in person. Will send those details soon.

It would be great if you can send a copy of your presentation by COB Thursday so that we can distribute 

ahead of time to interagency reviewers joining by phone. 

Thanks!

Chandana 
From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"Neil.Eisner@dot.gov" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "analiese.wilcox@dot.gov" <analiese.wilcox@dot.gov>, 

Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, "Steve.Wood@dot.gov" 

<Steve.Wood@dot.gov>, "rebecca.yoon@dot.gov" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>

Date: 06/17/2011 03:50 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Hi All,

Please find attached a summary of initial interagency working comments received on draft 

joint rule under EO 12866 review. They are for your consideration and subject to further 

policy review. We may follow-up with additional interagency comments soon. 

Please provide responses to these comments by Friday, June 24th. 

Thanks and have a great weekend!

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule 

under EO 12866 review subject to further policy review1.pdf**

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: 'Jim Tamm' <james.tamm@dot.gov>, Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/07/2011 10:00 AM

Subject: RE: Heavy Duty

Jim,

Do you think we can get the additional responses by 12 noon today?

Thanks.

Chandana

From: Achanta, Chandana L. 

Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 5:45 PM

To: Jim Tamm; Bunker.Byron@epamail.epa.gov
Subject: Heavy Duty

Jim, Byron,

Should we expect additional responses to interagency comments from you? Also, what are your 

availabilities this week for a policy level meeting?

Thanks.

Chandana 

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, "lily.smith@dot.gov" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Angela 

Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathryn Sargeant/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken 

Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather 

Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 07/08/2011 09:17 AM

Subject: RE: MD & HD FE and GHG interagency question 12 response

Thanks, Byron.

Can you please send us responses to the other interagency questions from Friday by 10 today? I need to 

circulate responses before the call today. 

Thanks.

Chandana 

From: Byron Bunker [mailto:Bunker.Byron@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 8:23 PM

To: Achanta, Chandana L.

Cc: james.tamm@dot.gov; lily.smith@dot.gov; Angela Cullen; Kathryn Sargeant; Ken Davidson; Ann 

Wolverton; Heather Klemick

Subject: MD & HD FE and GHG interagency question 12 response

Hi Chandana,

Following is our response to interagency question 12 on comparisons to the AEO2011 baseline. 

Thanks,

Byron

Agency Response 12:

The existing alternatives section already provides the reader with the ability to compare the reductions 

estimated in the AEO2011 case to the standards the agencies are finalizing. We do not intend to extend 

that presentation to include presentations of cost and benefits beyond the existing text. We have made 

this decision for several reasons. First, we are not able to make a directly comparable estimate of the 
compliance costs for the EIA 2011 estimate because the AEO2011 analysis assumes different 

technologies and has different cost estimates for the technologies we do have in common. For example, 

the EIA model does not include idle shutdown technologies or the use of diesel APUs in reaching its 

projections. Since diesel APUs represent well over half of the projected costs for combination tractors in 

our analysis, it is self evident that the two analyses cannot be directly compared for costs. 

We are similarly reluctant to make comparisons of the projected fuel economy improvements and hence 

CO2 reductions between the AEO2011 analysis and our own. The AEO2011 analysis includes two 

assumptions/projections that are substantially different and which are problematic in comparing the 

analysis. For Class 2b pickups, EIA assumes that commercial truck makers will automatically carry over 

the same level of improvement as is required in the 2012-2016 light-duty regulations. This is different 

from our joint analysis which assumes absent regulation truck OEMs would not realize improvements in 

fuel efficiency. Throughout the rulemaking process, truck OEMs in this market have been clear that these 

regulations will force the introduction of technology that would not otherwise be offered on these vehicles. 

Equally troublesome in comparing the two analyses, the AEO2011 analysis assumes that all other 

vocational trucks (many of which use the same engines and transmissions as the Class 2b pickups) will 

see an increase in fuel consumption over time. We do not see a clear basis for assuming a 15 percent 

improvement in fuel efficiency from 2b pickups (those between 8500-10,000 lbs) at the same time that 

virtually identical Class 3 pickups (those between 10,000 -14,000 lbs) are assumed to see a loss in fuel 

efficiency. This is driven in part by differences in how vehicles are grouped in our regulatory program and 

in the transportation demand model used by EIA. We understand that EIA intends to fundamentally 

revisit its HD analysis for AEO2012 to reflect more up-to-date data on heavy-duty truck technologies and 

to make the analysis approach consistent with our heavy-duty rulemaking requirements.

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'james.tamm@dot.gov'" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"'Neil.Eisner@dot.gov'" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'analiese.wilcox@dot.gov'" <analiese.wilcox@dot.gov>, 

Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" 

<Steve.Wood@dot.gov>, "'rebecca.yoon@dot.gov'" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>

Date: 07/08/2011 06:17 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Please find attached a summary of additional interagency working comments received on 

draft joint rule under EO 12866 review. They are for your consideration and subject to 

further policy review. We may follow-up with additional interagency comments soon. 
Please provide responses to these comments and other outstanding interagency comments 

by COB Monday, July 11th.

Thanks 

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review 2.pdf**

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"rebecca.yoon@dot.gov" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>, "lily.smith@dot.gov" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov" <Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov>, 

"Neil.Eisner@dot.gov" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>

Date: 07/19/2011 12:25 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Hi All,

Please find attached additional interagency working comments received on draft final rule under EO 

12866 and EO 13563 review. These are subject to further policy review. Please provide responses by 

COB Wednesday, July 20th.

Thanks.

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review 3.pdf**

----- Forwarded by Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US on 07/28/2011 03:05 PM -----

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "james.tamm@dot.gov" <james.tamm@dot.gov>

Cc: "Mancini, Dominic J." <Dominic_J._Mancini@omb.eop.gov>

Date: 07/19/2011 03:25 PM

Subject: FW: NHTSA/EPA Heavy-duty Rule

Byron, Jim-
FYI- We received the following note and attached document from David Bookbinder. We wanted to make 

sure both agencies received this information as well. 

Please let us know what your thoughts/reactions are to the attached.

Thanks.

Chandana 

From: David Bookbinder <david.bookbinder@verizon.net> 

To: Mancini, Dominic J. 

Cc: Keohane, Nathaniel 

Sent: Mon Jul 18 16:16:28 2011

Subject: NHTSA/EPA Heavy-duty Rule 

Dom:

Following up on our June 27 meeting, attached 

is a short memo that addresses implementation 

issues with the fuel economy credit sought by 

the natural gas vehicle interests (which we did 

not discuss at our meeting), and a proposal for a 

much smaller fuel-economy credit (13% v. 

85%) coupled with an equivalent 13% GHG 

credit.

Please feel free to contact me with any 

questions.

David Bookbinder 

**Attachment included: Follow-up to June Meeting memo.docx**
From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'james.tamm@dot.gov'" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"'rebecca.yoon@dot.gov'" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>, "'lily.smith@dot.gov'" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov'" <Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov>, 

"'Neil.Eisner@dot.gov'" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>

Date: 07/20/2011 12:45 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Please find attached additional interagency working comments received on draft final rule under EO 

12866 and EO 13563 review. These are subject to further policy review. 

Thanks.

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review4.pdf**

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'james.tamm@dot.gov'" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"'rebecca.yoon@dot.gov'" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>, "'lily.smith@dot.gov'" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov'" <Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov>, 

"'Neil.Eisner@dot.gov'" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>

Date: 07/23/2011 12:19 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Hi All,

Please find attached additional interagency working comments received on draft final rule 

under EO 12866 and EO 13563 review. These are subject to further policy review. 

Thanks.

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review5.pdf**
From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'james.tamm@dot.gov'" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"'rebecca.yoon@dot.gov'" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>, "'lily.smith@dot.gov'" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov'" <Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov>, 

"'Neil.Eisner@dot.gov'" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>

Date: 07/26/2011 03:14 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Please find attached additional interagency working comments received on draft final rule 

under EO 12866 and EO 13563 review. These are subject to further policy review. 

Thanks.

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review6.pdf**

From: "Achanta, Chandana L." <Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov>

To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'james.tamm@dot.gov'" <james.tamm@dot.gov>, 

"'rebecca.yoon@dot.gov'" <rebecca.yoon@dot.gov>, "'lily.smith@dot.gov'" <lily.smith@dot.gov>, Ann 

Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Heather Klemick/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul 

Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Todd 

Sherwood/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, "'Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov'" <Analiese.Marchesseault@dot.gov>, 

"'Neil.Eisner@dot.gov'" <Neil.Eisner@dot.gov>, "'Steve.Wood@dot.gov'" <Steve.Wood@dot.gov>

Date: 07/27/2011 04:16 PM

Subject: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft rule under EO 12866 review

Please find attached additional interagency working comments received on draft final rule 

under EO 12866 and EO 13563 review. These are subject to further policy review. 

Thanks.

Chandana 

**Attachment included: Summary of interagency working comments received on draft ruel under EO 

12866 review subjuect to further policy review7.pdf**
From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, Lauren Steele/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Solveig Irvine/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, james.tamm@dot.gov, Paul Balserak/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, 

Ann Wolverton/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/01/2011 15:43

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 Update 

Preamble 1 August 2011

Hi Chandana,

Attached please find the latest update of the preamble and regulations for the HD package. This draft 

should reflect up to date edits responsive to all of the interagency comments save mass reduction.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachment included: 

**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov, Amanda_I._Lee@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, rebecca.yoon@dot.gov, james.tamm@dot.gov, Angela 

Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Lauren Steele/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Chet 

France/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ken Davidson/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, William 

Charmley/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Ed Nam/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gloria 

Helfand/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Solveig Irvine/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/03/2011 14:25

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 - Mass 

Reduction

Hi Chandana,
Attached is the new mass reduction cost writeup responsive to our call with OIRA on Monday. We are 

going to put this in the RIA as is and will then have the same text sans the figure in the preamble. The 

preamble text will refer to the RIA version with the figure.

Regarding the question about tables VIII-3, we think it would be useful to look at OMB Circular A-4 

specifically the discussion of cost effectiveness calculations. 

OMB Circular A-4 pages 11-12:

With regard to measuring costs, you should be sure to include all the relevant costs to society - whether 

public or private. Rulemakings may also yield cost savings (e.g., energy savings associated with new 

technologies). The numerator in the cost-effectiveness ratio should reflect net costs, defined as the gross 

cost incurred to comply with the requirements (sometimes called "total costs") minus any "cost savings." 

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachment included: EO 12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines+Vehicles 2060-

AP61 Mass Reduction_20110803.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Amy Kopin/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Solveig 

Irvine/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/04/2011 10:38

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 - RIA 20110804

Hi Chandana,

Attached are the latest versions of RIA chapters 6 and 9.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachments Included: Ch6 EO12866_GHG+Feul Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines+Vehicles 2060-

Ap61 FRM RIA_20110801_Ch 06 Results of the Preferred and Alternative Standards_Revised.docx & 
Ch9 EO12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines+Vehicles 2060-AP61 FRM 

RIA_20110801_Ch9 Economic and Social Impacts_Revised.doc**

*****************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************

From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Solveig Irvine/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/04/2011 10:47

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 - Mass 

Reduction 8/4/2011

Hi Chandana,

Attached is an updated version of the mass reduction language we shared yesterday. This version has 

the same text, but the figure has been updated labeling each of the data points.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachment Included: EO12866_GHG+Fuel Eff Stds for Med-Heavy-Duty Engines+Vehicles 2060-AP61 

Mass Reduction_20110804.docx**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************
From: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US

To: Chandana_L._Achanta@omb.eop.gov

Cc: lily.smith@dot.gov, Solveig Irvine/AA/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 08/05/2011 10:04

Subject: EO12866 GHG + Fuel Efficiency Stds for MD and HD Engines + Vehicles 2060-AP61 NADA and 

RVDA comments

Hi Chandana,

Here are the comments we received from NADA and RVDA.

Thanks,

Byron

**Attachements included: NADA EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162-2705[1].pdf & RVDA NHTSA-2010-0079-

0117.1[1].pdf**

******************************************************************

Byron Bunker

Center Director - Heavy-Duty Onroad Center

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

US Environmental Protection Agency

2000 Traverwood Drive

Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(734) 214-4155

(734) 214-4050 (fax)

(734) 353-9623 (cell)

e-mail: bunker.byron@epa.gov

**********************************************************