Featured Comment Period on CAFE Rules to End

Source: Feds deny request to extend comment period on mpg rules

Federal regulators have denied a request from automakers to extend the period that comments can be submitted over a report showing U.S. automakers probably will miss the 54.5 miles-per-gallon fleetwide average for 2025.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the California Air Resources Board denied a request from 16 auto industry and business lobbying groups in Washington that was led by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and Association of Global Automakers Inc. to extend a 60-day comment period over the report on the proposed emission rules that cover the model years between 2022 and 2025. The comment period began ticking down July 18.
. . .
The projection from the EPA and NHTSA stated that automakers may only be able to achieve a fleet-wide average of between 50 and 52.6 mpg by the deadline that was set by the Obama administration in 2012.
. . .
The proposed gas mileage rules, known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, are beginning to take effect with the 2017 model year. They call for ramping up from the current fleet-wide average of about 34 miles per gallon for cars and trucks that were required in 2016 to the eventual goal of more than 50 mpg by 2025.
. . .​

Federal Registry: Federal Register | 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards

This is the technical document, the final rule. Yes there are advocates on both sides of the final rule but it also puts down a technical challenge that competent engineers can and more importantly, should meet. It is also a document you too can submit a comment.

Bob Wilson

 

Sorry, I missed the edit window.

The draft technical document can be found at: Midterm Evaluation for Light-Duty CAFE, MYs 2022-2025 | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

There was a distracting thread awhile back that tried to blame Toyota for something. In reality, the technical rule change is what is important. Near as I can tell, there may yet be time to submit a comment. But step 1, read the rule and then identify problems.

Bob Wilson

 

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction (23 pages)
Chapter 2: Overview of the Agencies' Approach to the Draft TAR Analysis (9 pages)
Chapter 3: Recent Trends in the Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet Since the 2012 Final Rule (22 pages)
Chapter 4: Baseline and Reference Vehicle Fleets (82 pages)
Chapter 5: Technology Costs, Effectiveness, and Lead-Time Assessment (543 pages)
Chapter 6: Assessment of Consumer Acceptance of Technologies that Reduce Fuel Consumption and GHG Emissions (22 pages)
Chapter 7: Employment Impacts (13 pages)
Chapter 8: Assessment of Vehicle Safety Effects (62 pages)
Chapter 9: Assessment of Alternative Fuel Infrastructure (41 pages)
Chapter 10: Economic and Other Key Inputs Used in the Agencies' Analysis (56 pages)
Chapter 11: Credits, Incentives and Flexibilities (9 pages)
Chapter 12: EPA's Analysis of the MY2022-2025 GHG Standards (82 pages)
Chapter 13: ANalysis of Augural CAFE Standards (102 pages)
Appendix A - CARB Analysis of Vehicle Load REduction Potential for Advanced Clean Cars
Appendix B - Mass Reduction Technologies (84 pages)
Appendix C - EPA's OMEGA Model (17 pages)​

Bob Wilson

​

 

Using Adobe reader and 'Find', I did a quick scan of the 'Draft-TAR-Final.pdf' and it is an impressive body of work.

I was initially concerned that the BMW i3-REx was missing but it is there along with a complete and detailed review of the technology. The breadth and scope of this document is well worth reading, especially chapter 5.

Bob Wilson