T es timon y Pr es ent e d to th e National Hi g hw ay Traffic S af ety A dmini s tr a t io n a nd U
. S
. E n v ironm e nt a l Prot e cti o n Age n cy By V i c e A dmir a l (Retired ) A nn R o nd ea u In s upp o rt o f G r ee nh o u se Gas E mi ss i o n s a nd F u e l E ffi c ie nc y S tand a rd s for M ed ium - a nd HeavyDuty En g in es a nd Ve hicl es- Ph ase II A u g u s t 6 , 2015 C hi cago, Illin o i s D oc k e t: EPA

- H Q- O A R

- 2 014-0827
Thank you for th e opportunity to present test imony in support of th e proposed Ph ase II Greenhouse Gas E mission s and Fu e l Effic iency S tandards for Medium- and Hea vy-Duty Engin es and Vehicles. I am Vice Admi ra l An n Rond eau. and I r e tired from the U.S. Navy in 20 12 after 3 8 years o f se rv ice. On one of my la s t commands, I had th e ho no r to se rve a s D e put y Commander f o r U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSC OM ) a unifi ed, functional co mbatant command which pr ovides su pp o rt to the e ig ht o th e r U.S. comba t an t commands , th e military serv ices, defense age nc ies and other gove rnment organizations. In oth e r words , a truck o r co nvoy didn ' t mov e without my unit knowi ng about it.
It is thr ough the lens of my expe ri ences at US T RANSC O M and serving nea rl y fo ur decades as a naval office r in th e ar m ed se r v ic es th at I v iew the c riti ca l iss ue of f u

e l economy. I experienced fir s thand the imp o rtance of ge ttin g ve hicles and e qu ipment to travel f a rther

- by th e road, air or sea - o n less fuel. This battlefield perspective drives my suppo rt for Ph ase II of the Nat iona l Highway Tra ffi c Sa f ety A dmini s tr at io n 's hea vyduty truck rule. Why? When it comes t o fuel usage, th e military didn ' t a l ways get it ri ght, and we have learned th e hard way that boo s ting gas mi leage improves nati o na l security. Si nce th e adven t of th e U.S. military 's evolution int o a mot o ri zed. machine

- driven force in th e wake of Wor ld Wa r I , the abi lir y t o adep tl y move troops, supp li es, am munition , and other daily needs ha s beco me core to the e ff ec ti ve exec uti o n of our mi ss i o n s. O ve r the la s t century, the ne e d for agility and mobility has only increa se d with eac h wartime engagement. A nd it 's been t ec hn o lo g ic a l in ge nuit y that he lp ed u s evo l ve into th e military we are to d ay. We 've co me a lo ng way si nce stra ndin g ou r tanks in th e
1desert in World War lJ after running out o f fue l, but yet 70 years later , our nation

- and armed forces

- is s till ham s trun g by our ove rre liance on fo ss il fuels. In fact , ou r overdependence o n o il mak es it more likel y that our men and wome n in unif o rm w ill be se nt int o harm 's way. Re ducing fuel u se by improvin g e fficiency e nh an ces the militar y's ope rational effectiveness
. decrea ses the size of convoys and saves li ves. T he men and women of o ur armed forces, who tire less ly protect our na tion at ho me a nd overseas, are pla ce d at an incr ease d risk du e to o ur oi l addiction. Th e s ad truth i s th at fu el convoy s have become a primary t a rge t in th e batt lefiel d. In 2007 , o n e in every 24 co n voys in Af g hanistan resulte d in th e d ea th or serious wo unding of one o f o ur fightin g forces, accordin g t o an Army s tud y. T hese brave me n and wo men deserve bene r od d s w h e n the y tak e th e w heel. Every ga ll o n of gas we can save by incr eas in g th e effic ie ncy o f trucks help s reduc e the threat t o tho se se rvin g in unif o rm . R e ducing our fu e l use also decreases the cost of d e fense operations. The fi tll y b urd ened cost of f u e l i s a calculation th e Departm e nt o r Defense ( DOD ) mak es that is equal to the commodity cost plu s th e t o tallifec y cle cost of all people a nd assets required to move and pro t ect fuel from th e point of sa l e t o the e nd u se r . I can s p ea k from expe ri e n ce; the fully burdened cost of fu e l makes oil a budget buster. By makin g th e truck s runnin g on US highwa ys more e fficient. we ca n tr ansfer th a t tec hn o l ogy to ensure th e heavy mac hinery used by th e military is mo re e fficient

- from trucks , to ships , to genera tors
- red ucing the stress of fulfilling everyday tasks that are core to military lo g is ti cs. When we are able to mob ili ze ou r ve hicl es on less fuel , DOD saves mone y . but mo re import antl y, we re duce log i s tic s , re duce expos ure, reduce co n voys a nd save American li ves. /\way from th e front line s, the nation 's overreliance o n oil also impact s o ur nati o na l. eco nomic and e nerg y securit y. Thi s addicti o n leaves u s vu lner ab le t o a vo latil e int erna ti o na l mark e t and th e unfri e ndl y natio n s w ho con tro l th e spigots. L as t year, due to increa se d effic ienc y and production , th e U nit ed States s ign ifi ca ntl y cut o il imp orts. I applaud this effort , but th e hard work r e main s. As a nation , we s till imp o rt nearly 30 percent of th e o il we co n s ume , and wh il e th e majori ty of that oi l is now from Canada and Mex ico an d o th er friendly na ti o n s , the pri ce o f oil is no t in ou r total co ntro l. r egardl ess o f

2how mu c h we con se rv e or eve n produc e . Ju s t look at Lib ya as an examp le . In 20 11 , we imp or ted no oil from Libya. But when Lib ya brok e int o c iv il war, the pri ce of o il wor ldwide increased to ove r $ 1 00/barrel , and rose to ove r $3.00 gallon at the pump in the U.S. The prices in the U.S. rose because oi l is a global commo di ty. While we had a brief re pri eve ove r th e winter back in Wa s hin g ton , DC , we are back to mor e than $3 .00 at th e pump. But make no mi s take these pric es are not floatin g o n pure supp l y a nd demand ; they are being controlled to a great ex t en t by ho w mu c h the Saudi s choose to prod uce. Oil prices can be f o rc e d up as quickly as the y can be brought down , wreaking ha voc o n th e American eco nomy and und e rmining ou r na ti o n 's stre ng th domestically and internationally. Our eco no mic en gi ne is heavily reli an t on transportation , and 94 percent of our nation's tran spor tati on relies o n oil. It ' s easy to see how oil pri ce s hocks can be u sed as weapons to a tt ack o ur s tabilit y as a nation. We ca n ' t drill ourselves t o e n e rg y ind e pe nd e nce when we are reliant o n a finite , g loba l commodity. The o nl y op ti o n is to use less. CNA Milit a r y Advisory B oard (MA B ), a pan e l of t op- rank in g ret ir ed military leade rs on which I ha ve th e p leasure to se rv e, has re port e d ex t e nsively o n how o ur ove rrelia nce o n oil is a nati o nal v uln e rab ilit y. In short, th e M A B 's findings a re s impl e: efficiency makes u s mo re resi li e nt , and increased fue l economy s tandard s und erpi n a suite of conserva ti on and energy diversification s tep s thi s nation can take

- should take

- to ge t on the road towa rd energy in dependence.
It ' s mission critica l : the U.S. must use it s in ge nuit y to lead g lobal effo rt s to dep loy adva nced t ec hn o logies that lowe r the demand for o i l. Bas ed o n my own experience, fuel eco nom y s tandard s for ca rs and truck s have proved to be powerful t oo ls that spee d innovation , decrease our de pe nd e nce o n oil and improve our na ti o n 's overall eco nomy and sec urit y. In c los in g, 1 re it era t e my s upp o rt for th e proposed Phase IJ Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fu e l Efficiency Standards for Medium- and l leavy -Dut y Eng in es and Ve hi c les , a nd I hope to see NH TSA and EPA finali ze this rule without d e lay.



### 3