In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF47953502.2026C861-ON8525731D.006C001B-8525731D.006ED2FF@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/19/2007 04:10:30 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Lydia Wegman,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Lydia Wegman,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  edits to PRB
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Lydia Wegman,Bryan Hubbell,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  4DF43A17A4DAAE4A8525731400758386
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I was able to catch up with Bryan and Lydia.  There is a concern with your
edits which I will try to explain.  The first paragraph tried to focus on
international emissions and natural source emissions.  Thus, the sentence
you planned to move from the end of the first paragraph intended to tie
that whole discussion together.  You will see that we have accepted your
edit about different costs, while recognizing that changes in emissions
would also influence benefit estimates as well.

The second paragraph tried to specifically address the role of PRB and the
RIA.  Again, for balance we have accepted your edit that there is no role
for PRB in benefits, again while recognizing that there is no role for PRB
in our cost estimates either.

Let me know what you think about this approach.

This focus on the assessment of the incremental costs and benefits of
attaining any alternative standard is an important difference from the
focus of the risk assessment used in developing the standard.  For
purposes of the Staff Paper-risk assessment, risks are estimated
associated with just meeting recent air quality and upon just meeting the
current and alternative standards as well as incremental reductions in
risks in going from the current standard to more stringent alternative
standards.  When considering risk estimates remaining upon attaining a
given standard, EPA is only interested in the risks in excess of policy
relevant back
ground (PRB).   PRB is defined in the ozone Criteria Document and Staff
Paper as including (1) O3 in the U.S. from natural sources of emissions in
the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and (2) O3 in the U.S. from the transport of
O3 or the transport of emissions from both natural and man-made sources,
from outside of the U.S. and its neighboring countries (Staff Paper,
p.2-54).   Emissions of ozone precursors from natural sources (e.g.
isoprenes emitted from trees) and from sources outside of the U.S. are
uncertain, as are the specific impacts those emissions will have on ozone
concentrations in areas exceeding alternative standards.  Our models use
available information on these emissions in generating future projections
of baseline ozone concentrations, and our modeled reductions in U.S.
emissions of NOx and VOC are based on these baseline levels that include
the contribution of natural and non-U.S. emissions.  To the extent that
these emissions contribute a greater (lesser) proportion of ozone on high
ozone days, more (less) reductions in emissions from U.S. sources might be
required to reduce ozone levels below alternative standard, resulting
different costs and benefit estimates.

In contrast, the RIA only examines the incremental reduction, not the
remaining risk, which results from changes in U.S. anthropogenic
emissions.  The air quality modeling used to establish the baseline for
the RIA explicitly includes contributions from natural and anthropogenic
emissions in Canada, Mexico, and other countries abroad, as well as the
contributions to ozone levels from natural sources in the U.S. Since the
RIA does not attempt to estimate the risk remaining upon meeting a given
standard, and the alternative standards are clearly above any estimate of
PRB, there is no role for PRB in the RIA costs and benefits estimates.

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  07/19/2007 01:58:43 PM
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF342E32F1.9FA5944A-ON8525731D.0062C2E4-8525731D.0062CC59@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/19/2007 01:59:08 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Fw: language for Rob on PM controls
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  DEEF49ADAC2F69E08525731D0059857F
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  07/19/2007 01:59:09 PM

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/19/2007 01:58 PM -----

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
07/19/2007 12:32 PM

	To
	margie jones
	cc

	Subject
	language for Rob on PM controls

Footnote to Table 3.1 on page 3.6

NOx controls are included as part of the hypothetical control scenario
modeled in the 2006 PM NAAQS RIA.  These controls included low NOx burners
and SNCR for industrial boilers.  Further examples can be found in Table
3-5 (page 3-18) of the 2006 PM NAAQS RIA.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF23FBB2F8.A03E6B1E-ON8525731C.00722C17-8525731C.00722E46@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/18/2007 04:47:09 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: fax number
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  723221C8D8EF44A48525731C006E961F
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>07/18/2007 04:07 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	Subject
	fax number

Hi Ron/Margie,

Do you have a fax number that I could use?

Rob

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF1211349D.084E145A-ON85257314.00483D61-85257314.00486FB7@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/10/2007 09:11:12 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RE: how is the review going?
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  FFF4AB06FA98A23B8525731400452959
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Thanks for the quick reply.  I don't understand what happened to the 2, 7,
9 chapters but I concur the extra review time is reasonable.  Your note
sounds hopeful, I look forward to seeing your comments soon.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>07/10/2007 08:35 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RE: how is the review going?

Hi Ron,

Hope you had a nice weekend.

On the RIA, since we did not receive Ch 2, 7, and 9 until Monday
morning. I felt we needed to give the interagency folk an additional 24
hrs at least to review and to provide comments.

I have been compiling a list of remaining issues --- mostly minor (in my
opinion), several may require additional discussion.  Hopefully, I'll be
able to pass you these by today COB.

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 8:28 AM
To: Johansson, Robert
Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: how is the review going?

Just checking in and see how the chapter review is going.  I wanted to
get a sense if you thought we were going to need to meet in the next day
or so to discuss anything or you would just have some written comments
(hopefully minor!).  Any issues coming other than the UVB which we
discussed last week?

We are finishing off the 079 analysis and I hope to have the 079 numbers
cut into a draft by Friday.  Do you think you will need to review a
version with the 079 cut in?

Please give me a call or a quick e-mail, thanks.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF24A0F631.B285E07B-ON85257314.0043D8CE-85257314.0044833B@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/10/2007 08:28:21 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  how is the review going?
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  899FFF39685FDEB1852573100067DF56
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Just checking in and see how the chapter review is going.  I wanted to get
a sense if you thought we were going to need to meet in the next day or so
to discuss anything or you would just have some written comments
(hopefully minor!).  Any issues coming other than the UVB which we
discussed last week?

We are finishing off the 079 analysis and I hope to have the 079 numbers
cut into a draft by Friday.  Do you think you will need to review a
version with the 079 cut in?

Please give me a call or a quick e-mail, thanks.

$FILE:
$FILE:
$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF4737A4D2.B9663893-ON85257313.0048A315-85257313.0048C46A@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/09/2007 09:14:49 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Joseph-J Dougherty/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Mary Henigin
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  1,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  Dougherty.Joseph-J@epamail.epa.gov,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Joseph-J Dougherty/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Mary Henigin
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RE: ozone NAAQS RIA chapter  8 for forwarding to OMB, last piece
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Joseph-J Dougherty/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,Mary Henigin
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  899FFF39685FDEB1852573100067DF56
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Not sure what happen to these, here is a separate copy.
Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
07/02/2007 02:37 PM

	To
	Joseph-J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US
	cc
	Bruce Schillo/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lesley Schaaff/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia
Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Rebecca
Daniels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rosalina
Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Thomas
Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US
	Subject
	ozone NAAQS RIA chapters 2,7,9 for forwarding to OMB

Please forward these to Rob Johansson at OMB.

Rob, we will be sending additional chapters this afternoon, with the goal
of getting the rest to you tomorrow.  Note that these are clean copies
which should reflect all our discussions and some editorial changes for
clarity and addressing OPEI comments.   Essentially, for all chapters we
accepted your comments unless we have discussed them on the call.  There
were some deletions which, as you indicated, did not come across in your
PDFs, some we accepted and some we did not.  I suggest you read these
versus the review/comment versions you sent to us to compare the changes.
Please let me know if you have any questions.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>07/06/2007 02:54 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RE: ozone NAAQS RIA chapter  8 for forwarding to OMB, last piece

Hi Ron,

Just to confirm, we have yet to receive the new Chapters of 2, 7, and 9.

When do you expect those to arrive?

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From: Johansson, Robert
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 10:47 AM
To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: RE: ozone NAAQS RIA chapter 8 for forwarding to OMB, last piece

Hi Ron,

We have received 7-02-07 and 7-03-07 versions of these chapters thus
far:

Exec Sum
Ch 1
Ch 3
Ch 3 appendix
Ch 4
Ch 5
Ch 5 appendix
Ch 6
Ch 6 appendix a
Ch 6 appendix b
Ch 6 appendix c
Ch 8
Acronyms

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  07/05/2007 10:37:25 AM
$FILE:
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFA3593F27.21A34BF5-ON8525730F.005054A5-8525730F.005072A3@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/05/2007 10:38:43 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Fw:  ozone NAAQS RIA chapter  8 for forwarding to OMB, last piece
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  A641460DCEC7A8618525730D006A4805
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I have asked about the status of the deliveries, let me know if you are
missing other chapters.
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/05/2007 10:37 AM -----

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
07/03/2007 03:22 PM

	To
	Joseph-J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	Bruce Schillo/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lesley Schaaff/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia
Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Mary Henigin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Rebecca
Daniels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Rosalina Rodriguez/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Thomas Gillis/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Marjorie
Jones/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	Subject
	 ozone NAAQS RIA chapter  8 for forwarding to OMB, last piece

Please forward to Rob Johansson at OMB.  Thanks

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  07/05/2007 10:24:35 AM
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,Daniels.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,1,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFFE60F450.2C53998B-ON8525730F.004F2829-8525730F.004F8B15@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/05/2007 10:28:50 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Bryan Hubbell
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Bryan Hubbell
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Fw: missing chapter 8 language
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Bryan Hubbell
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  AFF8E4F0EE33DBA98525730F004C2542
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, here is the missing piece for relative contribution language.  It
goes in the following location of the chapter 8 I sent:

8.2 	Discussion of Results

Relative Contribution of PM benefits to total benefits

To be added, could not find e-mail with language from Bryan Hubbell.

Because of the relatively strong relationship between PM2.5 concentrations
and premature mortality, PM co-benefits resulting from reductions in NOx
emissions can make up a large fraction of total montetized benefits,
depending on the specific PM mortality impact function used, and on the
relative magnitude of ozone benefits, which is dependent on the specific
ozone mortality function assumed.  PM co-benefits based on daily average
concentrations are calculated over the entire year, while ozone related
benefits are calculated only during the summer ozone season.  Because the
control strategies evaluated in this RIA are assumed to operate year round
rather than only during the ozone season, this means that PM benefits will
accumulate during both the ozone season and the rest of the year.

PM co-benefits account for between 13 and 99 percent of co-benefits,
depending on the standard analyzed and on the choice of ozone and PM
mortality functions used.  The estimate with the lowest fraction from PM
co-benefits occurs when ozone mortality is based on the Levy et al (2005)
study and when PM2.5 mortality is based on the function provided by
“Expert K” from the expert elicitation.  The estimate with the highest
fraction from PM co-benefits occurs when no ozone mortality reductions are
included (following the assumption of no causal relationship between ozone
and mortality) and when PM2.5 mortality is based on the function provided
by “Expert E” from the expert elicitation.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFEF71D050.BA8E7A4F-ON8525730F.0048538A-8525730F.004BDE72@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/05/2007 09:48:42 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,1,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,Daniels.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:   a few notes about chapter 8
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  D122BF28DDE7C0C18525730D006B8AD1
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, I realized I forgot to give you a heads up on a few of your edits on
chapter 8 which were not taken.  Obviously we can discuss these after you
review the chapter.   I am working from your comments on WORD version of
chapter 8 which you sent.  Your comments are in red, ours in green.

From page 9, top paragraph

we generally understate the total benefits that would result from
implementing additional emissions controls to fully attain the ozone NAAQS
(which i.e., assuming that the application of control strategies would
result in ozone reductions both at nonattaining and attaining monitors).,
and that there are quantifiable benefits to reducing ambient ozone below
each of the alternative standards.)

You added in the red language as a suggestion.  We did not take this
comment since this seems to imply that there is a threshold for effects.

From page 9, top of second paragraph

However, we note that there is additional uncertainty in the benefits
extrapolations to the extent to which unknown controls actually achieve
the alternative standards in some future year.These extrapolated benefits
are uncertain, but the relative uncertainty compared to the modeled
benefits is similar, once the underestimation bias has been taken into
account.  The emissions and costbenefit extrapolations do not have a clear
directional bias, however, they are much more uncertain relative to the
modeled emissions and cost estimates, because of the lack of refined
information about the relationship between emissions reductions and ozone
changes in specific locations, and because of the difficulties in
extrapolating costs along a marginal cost curve well beyond the observed
data without accounting for shifts in the cost-curve due to improvements
in technology or use of technologies over time.

This paragraph was about the comparing the modeled versus the
extrapolated.  The first sentence is the only one which relates to
benefits, the remainder of the paragraph is about the cost side so the
deletion of the word cost and replacing it with benefits was problematic
in the second sentence.  The sentence you added at the beginning did not
seem to fit, as our sentence which follows indicates, we expect that the
relative uncertainties are similar.

From page 12, bottom of #6

We did not assume any shift in the cost curve to reflect technological
innovation.  As such, we are likely overestimating costs in the future,
instead we provide sensitivity by selecting a high and low fixed marginal
cost curve

Assuming no technological innovation over the next few decades is a very
conservative assumption which leads to an upward bias in the estimates.

From page 13 bottom of first incomplete paragraph.

We acknowledge, however, that the costs and benefits of this rule may fall
disproportionately across regions and may result in regionally significant
adverse economic impacts.

It may be you are referring to California here and we have less of an
issue with this if more focused.  As a generic statement, we would say
that those that need to get additional reductions will pay the cost but
also get the benefits.  However, we can not say that this change in the
standard may result in regionally significant adverse economic impacts as
a general statement.  Even in the case of California, it is not just this
change in standard which leads to reduce emissions, there are numerous
other factors (e.g. climate change, energy concerns etc) which play a
complementary and probably more significant role.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF455FA7C0.645636AB-ON8525730D.006A8F26-8525730D.006AA40E@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  07/03/2007 03:24:48 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  all RIA pieces sent thru OPEI
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  DE32AC4E90C1760485257308006920EF
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

You should have all today or first thing on Thursday.

Have a good 4th.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF0352BD99.FA84A67F-ON85257309.004E5655-85257309.004E8280@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/29/2007 10:17:32 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .,.
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .,.
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert" <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,"Schwab, Margo"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RE: passback on UVB language
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert" <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,"Schwab, Margo"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  DE32AC4E90C1760485257308006920EF
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Sorry, just got your e-mail, I was way behind yesterday.  If either of you
see this give me a call

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/28/2007 03:08 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RE: passback on UVB language

Hi Ron,

Can you give me or Margo a ring?

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

$FILE:
$AutoSpell:  0
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
$RFSaveInfo:  FED8DF374D962A9C85257306006A4703
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF67779D21.627F4259-ON85257308.0063347C-85257308.00642E13@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/28/2007 02:14:14 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,1
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
BlindCopyTo:
WebSubject:  Re: passback on UVB language
FaxToList:
Subject:  Re: passback on UVB language
ldf_locale:  en-US
$KeepPrivate:
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,margie jones,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$Revisions:  06/28/2007 02:11:34 PM,06/28/2007 02:11:34 PM,06/28/2007 02:14:14 PM
$RespondedTo:  2

Here are our responses, for the most part confirming what we said on the
call.

Comment A1:  insert VSL figure into text............................OK

Comment A2 & A3:  provide updated values for health and environment
effects of UVB............We have reviewed the literature and don't
believe that it is clear cut to do direct addition, there are methodology
changes which need evaluation and we don't have time to review those
studies in detail.............No change.

The remainder of this discussion is lifted directly from the preamble of
the proposed rule.  Since it previous had been jointly agreed to by EPA
and OMB, we do not see a need to change this language.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/26/2007 03:21 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	passback on UVB language

Hi Ron,

Here are suggested edits to the UV-B section.

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF00BDFD59.54EFBDCF-ON85257307.00646F34-85257307.0064A37D@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/27/2007 02:19:14 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,<Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,<Patrick_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez,Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Jim Ketcham-Colwill,Larry Sorrels,darryl weatherhead,david misenheimer,Bryan Hubbell
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.,.,.,1,.,.,.,1,1,.,.,.,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,Jones.Marjorie@epamail.epa.gov,.,.,.,Daniels.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov,.,.,.,Kopits.Elizabeth@epamail.epa.gov,Morgan.Cynthia@epamail.epa.gov,.,.,.,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  "Schwab, Margo" <Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,"Frey, Patrick J." <Patrick_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez,Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Jim Ketcham-Colwill,Larry Sorrels,darryl weatherhead,david misenheimer,Bryan Hubbell
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Ex summ bullets, updated list
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  "Schwab, Margo" <Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,"Frey, Patrick J." <Patrick_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,margie jones,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Lydia Wegman,rosalina rodriguez,Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,Jim Ketcham-Colwill,Larry Sorrels,darryl weatherhead,david misenheimer,Bryan Hubbell
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  DF18FE7A84B9E9FC85257306006D37A9
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Here is an updated list reflecting Margo's comments and some upgrades.

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  06/26/2007 02:43:28 PM
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF7E62D754.D966D22B-ON85257306.0066DB8D-85257306.00673680@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/26/2007 02:47:21 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  alternative to UV-b language
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  E88A4D2FE8005299852573060066338F
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  06/26/2007 02:47:21 PM

In the interest of reaching quicker agreement and minimizing further
edits, Bryan suggests going directly with the preamble language in yellow
below plus the short opening piece on valuation.  Lets try this as a
replacement for the earlier language which you had significant edits to.
Thanks.

Obviously, the opening paragraph is OK to edit, the remainder being
otherwise agreed to in the preamble.
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/26/2007 02:43 PM -----

Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US
06/26/2007 02:39 PM

	To
	Ron Evans@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	Passback on UV-b

Rather than continuing to edit specific passages, I am suggesting now that
we simply use the language that is in the rule itself on UV-B, with an
additional introductory paragraph that talks about valuation.  It would
read as follows:

<IP_ADDRESS>.3 Ultraviolet Radiation

Another category of potential effects that may change in response to ozone
reduction strategies results from the shielding provided by ozone against
the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation (UV-B) derived from the sun.
UV-B exposure has been linked to a number of health effects, including
fatal and nonfatal melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers and cataracts.
The values of $15,000 per case for non-fatal melanoma skin cancer, $5,000
per case for non-fatal non-melanoma skin cancer, and $15,000 per case of
cataracts have been used in analyses of stratospheric ozone depletion
(U.S. EPA, 1999) .  Fatal cancers are valued using standard VSL estimates.
UV-B has also been linked to ecological effects including damage to crops
and forests.  For a more complete listing, see Table G-4 in the Benefits
and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990-2010 (U.S. EPA, 1999) .  UV-B related
health effects are also discussed in the context of stratospheric ozone in
a 2006 report by ICF Consulting, prepared for the U.S. EPA .  The great
majority of UV-b shielding results from naturally occurring ozone in the
stratosphere, but the 10 percent of total “column” ozone present in the
troposphere also contributes (NAS, 1991). A variable portion of this
tropospheric fraction of UV-B shielding is derived from ground level or
“smog” ozone related to anthropogenic air pollution. Therefore, strategies
that reduce ground level ozone will, in some small measure, increase
exposure to UV-B from the sun.

There are many factors that influence UV-B radiation penetration to the
earth’s surface, including latitude, altitude, cloud cover, surface
albedo, PM concentration and composition, and gas phase pollution. Of
these, only latitude and altitude can be defined with small uncertainty in
any effort to assess the changes in UV-B flux that may be attributable to
any changes in tropospheric O3 as a result of any revision to the O3
NAAQS. Such an assessment of UV-B related health effects would also need
to take into account human habits, such as outdoor activities (including
age- and occupation-related exposure patterns), dress and skin care to
adequately estimate UV-B exposure levels.  However, little is known about
the impact of these factors on individual exposure to UVB.

Moreover, detailed information does not exist regarding other factors that
are relevant to assessing changes in disease incidence, including: type
(e.g., peak or cumulative) and time period (e.g., childhood, lifetime,
current) of exposures related to various adverse health outcomes (e.g.,
damage to the skin, including skin cancer; damage to the eye, such as
cataracts; and immune system suppression); wavelength dependency of
biological responses; and interindividual variability in UV-B resistance
to such health outcomes. Beyond these well recognized adverse health
effects associated with various wavelengths of UV radiation, the Criteria
Document (section <IP_ADDRESS>) also discusses protective effects of UV-B
radiation. Recent reports indicate the necessity of UV-B in producing
vitamin D, and that vitamin D deficiency can cause metabolic bone disease
among children and adults, and may also increase the risk of many common
chronic diseases (e.g., type I diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis) as well
as the risk of various types of cancers. Thus, the Criteria Document
concludes that any assessment that attempts to quantify the consequences
of increased UV-B exposure on humans due to reduced ground-level O3 must
include consideration of both negative and positive effects. However, as
with other impacts of UV-B on human health, this beneficial effect of UV-B
radiation has not been studied in sufficient detail to allow for a
credible health benefits or risk assessment. In conclusion, the effect of
changes in surface-level O3 concentrations on UV-induced health outcomes
cannot yet be critically assessed within reasonable uncertainty (Criteria
Document, p. 10-36).

Please send this over to Rob and Margo and get their reaction.  The
highlighted portion is directly from the Federal Register (p.78-79).

Dr. Bryan J. Hubbell
Senior Advisor for Science and Policy Analysis
Health and Environmental Impacts Division
U.S. EPA/OAQPS (C504-02)
RTP, NC 27711
(919) 541-0621

$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFB90CFC16.E9B69701-ON85257306.0065920A-85257306.0065DE8B@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/26/2007 02:32:41 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,Lydia Wegman,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,Lydia Wegman,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: unquantifiable effects piece
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,Lydia Wegman,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  1C0366F1485F937C8525730600631760
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  06/26/2007 02:32:41 PM

Rob, consistent with the last e-mail I sent a few hours ago, I need to see
a version of your comments which shows all changes, however ugly it
looks.  We tried to convert the version of chapter 6 you sent us in PDF
into Word and it came back a mess.  I need to have you send us Word
versions, this approach to sending PDFs is not working right now.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/26/2007 02:02 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	unquantifiable effects piece

Hi Ron,

Please find enclosed the unquantifiable effects suggested edits.

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF2EA7F093.01081883-ON85257306.0057E6EC-85257306.0059D112@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/26/2007 12:21:02 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,CN=Marjorie<EMAIL_ADDRESS>BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RE: chapter edits
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Bryan Hubbell,margie jones,Neal Fann
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  424B16CEB7C22D1485257306004AF4E2
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  06/26/2007 12:21:02 PM

Rob, thanks for the chapter.  Also, your note explains some confusion I
had when I reviewed the Executive Summary comments from you yesterday.
There was some significant text movement and I could not track it because
of your approach to the PDF as you describe below.  For both our purposes
of understanding your changes and the docket, I really need to get a Word
version of all your comments in redline which shows the movement of those
larger deletions.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/26/2007 09:38 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RE: chapter edits

Hi Ron,

Here's Chapter 6.  We are still working on the unquantified effects
section which includes UV-B edits.

Cheers,
Rob

PS Note that some of the larger deletions in these pdf chapters were
accepted --- so not all show up as redline strikeouts.

On Chapter 5 appendix --- I assume you'll be taking out EMPAX and
working on strengthening discussion of continuous monitoring.
________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
-----Original Message-----
From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:11 AM
To: Johansson, Robert
Cc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: Re: chapter edits

I think we have the following from you:

Ex Summ
Chapter 1
Chapter 4
Chapter 5 (w/o) appendices
Chapter 8

When do you think you will be forwarding the remaining ones?

             "Johansson,
             Robert"
             <Robert_C._Johan                                        To
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>       Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
             >                                                       cc

             06/25/2007 03:44                                   Subject
             PM                       chapter edits

Hi Ron,

Here are several chapters.

Cheers,
Rob
________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
 [attachment "ozoneRIAexecsum 062507.pdf" deleted by Ron
Evans/RTP/USEPA/US] [attachment "ozoneRIAchapter5-062507.pdf" deleted by
Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US] [attachment "ozoneRIAchapter8 062507.pdf"
deleted by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US]

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFF3504D1E.704557FF-ON85257306.0047D44B-85257306.00486D75@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/26/2007 09:11:06 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: chapter edits
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  78E8C4FC459E27F285257305006C765D
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I think we have the following from you:

Ex Summ
Chapter 1
Chapter 4
Chapter 5 (w/o) appendices
Chapter 8

When do you think you will be forwarding the remaining ones?

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/25/2007 03:44 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	chapter edits

Hi Ron,

Here are several chapters.

Cheers,
Rob
________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
 [attachment "ozoneRIAexecsum 062507.pdf" deleted by Ron
Evans/RTP/USEPA/US] [attachment "ozoneRIAchapter5-062507.pdf" deleted by
Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US] [attachment "ozoneRIAchapter8 062507.pdf" deleted
by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US]

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFC951FBF9.2A6EF154-ON85257305.0047A0A0-85257305.0047A578@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/25/2007 09:02:34 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: call at 9 am
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  F768A7D182241ADA8525730500477600
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

919-541-4376

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/25/2007 09:00 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	call at 9 am

Hi Ron and Margie,

What call in number should we use for today’s call?

Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

In_Reply_To:  <OF743E7B29.EFC9C190-ON85257301.00745E65-85257301.0075194C@LocalDomain>
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFED2F2C79.A2044DA8-ON85257302.006A7EFA-85257302.006AF8FD@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/22/2007 03:28:26 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Al McGartland,david misenheimer,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
$Links:
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,1,1,.,1
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.,Jones.Marjorie@epamail.epa.gov,Adler.Ken<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
InheritedAltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Al McGartland,david misenheimer,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: RFS resend, revised paragraph
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Al McGartland,david misenheimer,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,margie jones,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  743E7B29EFC9C1908525730100745E65
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, I just realized that the e-mail I forwarded earlier today did not
include the edits from OPEI which came the next day.  Please consider this
version instead.

At the time that EPA established the regulatory baseline -- to capture how
existing rules affect the emissions inventory over time even in the
absence of this new NAAQS standard -- EPA focused on information which was
readily available in the emission inventories and other data sources.
Typically, a RIA analysis baseline includes only reductions from final
rules and not reductions from regulatory proposals or other actions being
contemplated.  However, for this analysis, EPA did not include the
recently promulgated Renewable Fuel Standard, due to a lack of readily
available quantitative information.  In addition, EPA did include
reductions from some upcoming rules in an attempt to better characterize
reductions which we anticipate to occur in the future (e.g. Ocean Going
Vessel Rule).  For the analysis to support the Final Rule, EPA will be
using an updated emission inventory and improved models and sets of
control information.  The baseline for the analysis will include only and
all promulgated rules, including the Renewable Fuel Standard rule.  Any
potential reductions resulting from proposed or upcoming rules will be
discussed separately.

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
06/21/2007 05:19 PM

	To
	"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>	cc
	Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US, Ken Adler/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, david misenheimer,
Al McGartland
	Subject
	RFS resend

Here is the paragraph on RFS I referred to earlier today.  As it turns
out, the language I was referring to from the RFS fact sheet of April 17th
is here as well.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/21/2007 05:11 PM -----

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
06/14/2007 02:25 PM

	To
	"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>	cc
	Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US
	Subject
	Re: RFS

It is not very clear cut on the impacts.  Below is an abstracted piece
from the public fact sheet on the April 2007 RFS rule
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420f07019.htm).    It is not clear
where the increases would occur, we need to have a discussion with OTAQ to
figure out if they make a differnence (it sounds like not).  Anyway, I
have included the following paragraph into the RIA specifically to address
the RFS in the final rule:

"At the time that EPA established the baseline of rules to be included in
this analysis, the focus was on information which was readily available in
the emission inventories and other data sources.   Typically, a RIA
analysis baseline includes only reductions from final rules and not
reductions from regulatory proposals.  For this analysis, we also included
reductions from some proposals to best characterize reductions which we
anticipate to occur in the future (e.g. Ocean Going Vessel Rule).
However, EPA did not include a complete set of all proposals, including
the recently promulgated Renewable Fuel Standard, due to a lack of readily
available information.  For the final analysis, EPA will be using an
updated emission inventory and improved models and sets of control
information.  The base case for the analysis will include all promulgated
rules, and any potential reductions resulting from proposed rules will be
separately highlighted in the RIA analysis baseline."

I hope this will cover it for this proposal.  Let me know.

Language from fact sheet on RFS rule:

The RIA provides an analysis of the energy, emissions, air quality, and
economic impacts of expanding the use of renewable fuels in comparison to
a reference case of 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel use which
represents 2004 conditions projected out to 2012.  Depending on the volume
of renewable fuel anticipated to be used in 2012, EPA estimates that this
transition to renewable fuels will reduce petroleum consumption between
2.0 and 3.9 billion gallons or roughly 0.8 to 1.6 percent of the petroleum
that would otherwise be used by the transportation sector.
With regard to emissions impacts, carbon monoxide emissions from
gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment will be reduced between 0.9 and
2.5 percent. Emissions of benzene (a mobile source air toxic) will be
reduced between 1.8 and 4.0 percent. Further, the use of renewable fuel
will reduce carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions between 8.0
and 13.1 million metric tons, about 0.4 to 0.6 percent of the anticipated
greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector in the United
States in 2012.
At the same time, other vehicle emissions may increase as a result of
greater renewable fuel use. Nationwide, EPA estimates an increase in total
emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides (VOC + NOx)
between 41,000 and 83,000 tons. However, the effects will vary
significantly by region. Areas that already are using ethanol will
experience little or no change in emissions or air quality. However, those
areas that experience a substantial increase in ethanol may see an
increase in VOC emissions between 4 and 5 percent and an increase in NOx
emissions between 6 and 7 percent from gasoline powered vehicles and
equipment.
The societal cost to produce a gallon of gasoline is estimated to rise
between 0.5 cent and 1.1 cents, though the presence of the excise tax
credit for ethanol will result in a net savings for fuel customers at the
pump of 0.4 to 0.7 cents per gallon. Net U.S. farm income is estimated to
increase by between $2.6 and $5.4 billion.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/14/2007 01:39 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RFS

Hi Ron,

Have you crafted any language to discuss how VOC and NOX might be affected
by increased use of ethanol?

Also, are you talking about how this might make extrapolated controls more
necessary; i.e., if RFS increases use of ethanol wouldn’t that increase
VOC and NOX emissions everywhere that gasoline is being combusted?

Let me know on this asap, there have been several queries on this question.

Thanks,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
$FILE:
$FILE:
$FILE:
InetSendTo:  .,.
InetCopyTo:  .,Kopits.Elizabeth@epamail.epa.gov,Morgan.Cynthia@epamail.epa.gov,.,Daniels.Rebecca@epamail.epa.gov,.,.,.,.,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .,.
$StorageCc:  .,1,1,.,1,.,.,.,.,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF0C529A47.AD3385B4-ON85257302.005D58E5-85257302.00618225@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/22/2007 01:45:03 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,<Margo_Schwab@omb.eop.gov>,Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Bryan Hubbell,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman,fox.tyler<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert" <Robert_C._Johansson<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,Bryan Hubbell,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman,fox.tyler<EMAIL_ADDRESS>BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Addressing some comments on ozone RIA
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert" <Robert_C._Johansson<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Al McGartland,CN=Elizabeth Kopits/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Cynthia Morgan/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,margie jones,CN=Rebecca Daniels/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,Bryan Hubbell,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman,Tyler Fox,Neal Fann
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Thanks for the conversation time yesterday.  In an effort to get a jump on
finishing up with you by COB on the 28th, here are our responses to a few
of the questions which involve new language.

A)   In questions 2, 4 and 13, Margo has requested inclusion in the Ex
Summ of some bullets on uncertainties in the analysis as well as a
specific statement about the proportion of the benefits which result from
PM reductions.  Here is a quick shot at the format and some of the issues,
please let us know what other issues you would like included in a similar
abbreviated format.  This format should meet both of our goals for making
the Ex Summ a tight presentation and a more complete characterization.
Note that each bullet will also include a cross reference to the section
of the RIA where it is discussed.

B)   For questions 16 and 21, you expressed an interest in a fuller
discussion of UVB and nitrogen passive fertilization amongst other
issues.  Bryan has gone back and pulled our compromise language used in
teh Heavy Duty Diesel RIA on these topics.  We believe that this language
still reflects current science and we would put these discussions into the
benefits chapter of the RIA.  Since this is previously vetted language, it
should represent the joint OMB/EPA view and not require editing.

Note that Bryan has reviewed the 2006 Strat ozone study which you referred
to in question 16.  He did not see any references to trop ozone which
would change the way we address this issue.

For reference, here is what Bryan found

This report is focused on measuring the impacts of reductions in decreases
in ozone-depletion occurring from bans on ozone-depleting substances.  The
focus is completely on stratospheric ozone.  Tropospheric ozone is
mentioned only two times in the report:

"Step 3. Changes in ground-level UV radiation are estimated.

Based on projections of stratospheric ozone concentration, UV radiation
intensities at the Earth’s surface were estimated by latitude, month,
year, and time of day using the Tropospheric Ultraviolet-Visible radiation
model (TUV, v3.9a, as described in Madronich 1993a, Madronich 1993b). The
TUV model generates look-up tables6 (see Section 5.1 for more detail) of
weighted solar UV irradiance at sea level as a function of solar zenith
angle and projected total column ozone based on the following assumptions:
obstruction-free and cloud-free skies; standard profiles of air density,
temperature, and tropospheric ozone (USSA 1976); typical continental
aerosols (Elterman 1968); and 10 percent isotropic ground reflectivity."

"9.1.2 Translating EESC Concentrations into Stratospheric Column Ozone

From a statistical standpoint, the largest source of uncertainty in the
AHEF is introduced by the limited data points available for use in
predicting changes in column ozone resulting from changes in EESC. The
reason these factors are statistically uncertain is that they are
estimated from a very limited data set of satellite-measured stratospheric
ozone concentrations and estimated EESC for the years that stratospheric
ozone data are available from NASA's Nimbus-7 Total Ozone Mapping
Spectrometer (TOMS) (i.e., 1978 to 1993). Relatively few observations in a
data set can lead to large standard errors in any statistical analysis.

Furthermore, UV radiation changes resulting from ozone depletion and
ground level pollution (i.e., tropospheric ozone generation) are more
accurately measured by spectrally resolved ground-based monitors than by
satellite measurements on which the AHEF currently relies (this is
discussed further in Section 10.5). Satellite data are not as accurate for
measuring ozone concentrations at ground-level as they are at higher
altitudes because of the coupling between UV absorption by ozone and UV
scattering by aerosols and particulate matter. These considerations are
important when the ozone perturbations occur in the lower-to-middle
troposphere, where soot and other aerosols are prevalent. When ozone
perturbations occur in the stratosphere (i.e., well above the region where
scattering occurs), absorption predominates. Thus, the altitude at which
ozone perturbations occur can affect UV radiation at the ground level.
These effects are not well captured by satellite data and hence, ground
level UV monitoring data could help to improve modeling estimates,
particularly in urban areas."

c)  In questions 19 and 20, you raise the issue of the policy relevant
background (PRB) and international emissions.  The enclosed is a
description of how the risk assesment treats the PRB in contrast with the
RIA and why PRB is not an issue for the RIA.  The second paragraph
addresses the international emissions issue.  We had intended to include
this in the last round into chapter 2 but I mis-directed the e-mail and it
did not get incorporated.

Talk to you @ 9:00am on Monday.  Hope you got good rest over the weekend.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  06/21/2007 05:11:03 PM
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,Adler.Ken@epamail.epa.gov,.,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,1,.,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF743E7B29.EFC9C190-ON85257301.00745E65-85257301.0075194C@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/21/2007 05:19:02 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,david misenheimer,Al McGartland
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
$Links:
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,david misenheimer,Al McGartland
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RFS resend
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US,david misenheimer,Al McGartland
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  4F39115A3334DF31852572FA006413B4
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  1
$Revisions:  06/21/2007 05:19:02 PM

Here is the paragraph on RFS I referred to earlier today.  As it turns
out, the language I was referring to from the RFS fact sheet of April 17th
is here as well.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/21/2007 05:11 PM -----

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US
06/14/2007 02:25 PM

	To
	"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>	cc
	Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US
	Subject
	Re: RFS

It is not very clear cut on the impacts.  Below is an abstracted piece
from the public fact sheet on the April 2007 RFS rule
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420f07019.htm).    It is not clear
where the increases would occur, we need to have a discussion with OTAQ to
figure out if they make a differnence (it sounds like not).  Anyway, I
have included the following paragraph into the RIA specifically to address
the RFS in the final rule:

"At the time that EPA established the baseline of rules to be included in
this analysis, the focus was on information which was readily available in
the emission inventories and other data sources.   Typically, a RIA
analysis baseline includes only reductions from final rules and not
reductions from regulatory proposals.  For this analysis, we also included
reductions from some proposals to best characterize reductions which we
anticipate to occur in the future (e.g. Ocean Going Vessel Rule).
However, EPA did not include a complete set of all proposals, including
the recently promulgated Renewable Fuel Standard, due to a lack of readily
available information.  For the final analysis, EPA will be using an
updated emission inventory and improved models and sets of control
information.  The base case for the analysis will include all promulgated
rules, and any potential reductions resulting from proposed rules will be
separately highlighted in the RIA analysis baseline."

I hope this will cover it for this proposal.  Let me know.

Language from fact sheet on RFS rule:

The RIA provides an analysis of the energy, emissions, air quality, and
economic impacts of expanding the use of renewable fuels in comparison to
a reference case of 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel use which
represents 2004 conditions projected out to 2012.  Depending on the volume
of renewable fuel anticipated to be used in 2012, EPA estimates that this
transition to renewable fuels will reduce petroleum consumption between
2.0 and 3.9 billion gallons or roughly 0.8 to 1.6 percent of the petroleum
that would otherwise be used by the transportation sector.
With regard to emissions impacts, carbon monoxide emissions from
gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment will be reduced between 0.9 and
2.5 percent. Emissions of benzene (a mobile source air toxic) will be
reduced between 1.8 and 4.0 percent. Further, the use of renewable fuel
will reduce carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions between 8.0
and 13.1 million metric tons, about 0.4 to 0.6 percent of the anticipated
greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector in the United
States in 2012.
At the same time, other vehicle emissions may increase as a result of
greater renewable fuel use. Nationwide, EPA estimates an increase in total
emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides (VOC + NOx)
between 41,000 and 83,000 tons. However, the effects will vary
significantly by region. Areas that already are using ethanol will
experience little or no change in emissions or air quality. However, those
areas that experience a substantial increase in ethanol may see an
increase in VOC emissions between 4 and 5 percent and an increase in NOx
emissions between 6 and 7 percent from gasoline powered vehicles and
equipment.
The societal cost to produce a gallon of gasoline is estimated to rise
between 0.5 cent and 1.1 cents, though the presence of the excise tax
credit for ethanol will result in a net savings for fuel customers at the
pump of 0.4 to 0.7 cents per gallon. Net U.S. farm income is estimated to
increase by between $2.6 and $5.4 billion.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/14/2007 01:39 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RFS

Hi Ron,

Have you crafted any language to discuss how VOC and NOX might be affected
by increased use of ethanol?

Also, are you talking about how this might make extrapolated controls more
necessary; i.e., if RFS increases use of ethanol wouldn’t that increase
VOC and NOX emissions everywhere that gasoline is being combusted?

Let me know on this asap, there have been several queries on this question.

Thanks,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  06/18/2007 11:31:11 AM
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.,.,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,.,.,.,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF2D78115A.E5A3B525-ON852572FE.005540B0-852572FE.00556C9F@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/18/2007 11:33:03 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Dave Sosnowski/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Gary Dolce/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Rudolph Kapichak/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=David Misenheimer/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
$Links:
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,CN=Dave Sosnowski/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Gary Dolce/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Rudolph Kapichak/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=David Misenheimer/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Fw: Copy of the RIA for the IM240
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,CN=Dave Sosnowski/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Gary Dolce/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Rudolph Kapichak/OU=AA/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=David Misenheimer/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  57142F6FD847D1AB852572FE00512414
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, here is the detailed response on the IM240 numbers.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax
----- Forwarded by Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US on 06/18/2007 11:31 AM -----

Gene Tierney/DC/USEPA/US
06/18/2007 11:07 AM

	To
	Ken Adler/DC/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	Dave Sosnowski/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Gary Dolce/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Rudolph
Kapichak/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, David Misenheimer/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron
Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	Subject
	Re: Copy of the RIA for the IM240

There are many reasons why the test and convenience costs are different
today then projected in the IM240 TSD back in 1992.  They include:

The analysis done for the IM240 TSD assumed that, as required by the Clean
Air Act, all enhanced I/M programs would be centralized, test only and
realize the wide array of benefits of such (lower test costs, lower
convenience costs, greater emission reduction benefits).   In fact, only
two areas switched to centralized and the rest remained decentralized,
test-and-repair.  One centralized area switched to decentralized.  The
costs of decentralized I/M are much higher (e.g., $50-$70 per test in PA
and CA rather than $20 per test assumed back in 1992).  The assumptions
EPA made about the cost of centralized, enhanced testing were reasonably
borne out in those areas that chose that approach.
The analysis in 1992 looked at many factors - test costs, fuel economy
benefits, convenience costs, repair costs.  The analysis today is only
considering test and convenience costs.
The anaylsis done in the IM240 TSD was for the year 2000.  The analysis
today is for 2006.  There are more cars in the U.S. today and even though
some I/M areas have stopped testing, others have started or expanded.  For
example, North Carolina - on its own - expanded its program far beyond the
areas required to do enhanced I/M.
The 1992 analysis assumed that, on average, motorists would spend about 45
minutes in the inspection cycle process.   This analysis assumed two hours
mainly because it takes longer to get a test in a decentralized
environment.  In the well run centralized programs, and there are notable
exceptions, the 45 minute estimate is a good one.   Some might argue that
2 hours is a bit high so we are revising the analysis to include a range
of 1-2 hours.
Some states chose not to switch to biennial testing, which again was
another assumption made in 1992.   The reasons for this vary from state to
state.  The costs of annual testing is substantially higher than biennial
testing.
Finally, the test costs used in the Ozone RIA are based on actual test
volumes and costs in 2006.  Note that these numbers are undergoing review
by the states and could change somewhat but are in the ball park.

Eugene J. Tierney
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
Transportation and Regional Programs Division
1310 L Street, NW, Room 316
Washington, DC 20005
202-343-9267 (office)
734-277-7486 (cell)
734-343-2803 (fax)

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF84655046.91E8F616-ON852572FE.004FECC7-852572FE.0050241E@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/18/2007 10:35:21 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,david misenheimer,CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:  1
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  david misenheimer
BlindCopyTo:  CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA
Subject:  Re: IM240
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  david misenheimer
EnterBlindCopyTo:  CN=Ken Adler/OU=DC/O=USEPA/C=US
$RFSaveInfo:  D2B12C4BFCB65389852572FB006DD296
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

OTAQ is looking for the IM240 RIA now.  It is quite dated, roughly 10 to
15 years old so the comparisons may be out of date.  I am ready to set up
a discussion with you and OTAQ staff if you need further clarification
beyond the e-mail I sent the other day.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/15/2007 03:59 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	IM240

Hi Ron,

You didn't seem sure in your response and I know how busy you are, so I
figured I could look up the numbers myself.  There are some pretty big
estimates in that section so I wanted to confirm them.  I had asked Art
Rios about checking into this and was told that they had forwarded the
request on and would get back to me.  As I was still waiting to see how
these projected savings were used in Ch5, I thought I could dig through
it myself rather than ask you to walk me through the calcs.

Thanks for the letter and for the requests.
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 3:16 PM
To: Johansson, Robert
Subject: RE: Appendix 5

I just requested the IM240 RIA from OTAQ, it was my fault it was not
sent to you.  I assumed that our confirmation was sufficient.

Here is the SAB letter

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF4EF40967.7FE9A9E3-ON852572FE.004A716E-852572FE.004AA14C@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/18/2007 09:35:09 AM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: RIA problems
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  137ED6E4CB1E6405852572FE004A12F7
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Please call me soon as you can, I did not think the document was that far
away.  I know there are some XXX in spots in Chapter 8 which are being
fixed now and some final QA going on (including some formatting) but there
should not be anything major.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/18/2007 09:29 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RIA problems

Hi Ron,

The RIA seems to be in pretty rough shape still.

I don’t think it will be ready for Wed.

Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF68006E9B.837AFF34-ON852572FB.00815A95-852572FB.00816BC2@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/15/2007 07:33:36 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  1
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: IM240
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  D2B12C4BFCB65389852572FB006DD296
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Understood.  If you have remaining questions please feel free to send an
e-mail or call on Monday.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/15/2007 03:59 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	IM240

Hi Ron,

You didn't seem sure in your response and I know how busy you are, so I
figured I could look up the numbers myself.  There are some pretty big
estimates in that section so I wanted to confirm them.  I had asked Art
Rios about checking into this and was told that they had forwarded the
request on and would get back to me.  As I was still waiting to see how
these projected savings were used in Ch5, I thought I could dig through
it myself rather than ask you to walk me through the calcs.

Thanks for the letter and for the requests.
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 3:16 PM
To: Johansson, Robert
Subject: RE: Appendix 5

I just requested the IM240 RIA from OTAQ, it was my fault it was not
sent to you.  I assumed that our confirmation was sufficient.

Here is the SAB letter

$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF7E47258C.559CCFA6-ON852572FB.006951B0-852572FB.0069E0F1@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/15/2007 03:16:29 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  RE: Appendix 5
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  F505855BCE7069F2852572FB00684B86
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I just requested the IM240 RIA from OTAQ, it was my fault it was not sent
to you.  I assumed that our confirmation was sufficient.

Here is the SAB letter

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/15/2007 02:59 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RE: Appendix 5

Ron,

Just to be sure, could you send me the RIA from the IM240.  I believe
that we asked for that over a week ago.

Also, can you send me the SAB advisory letter from June 8th that you are
referring to in Chapter 5?  Is it on your website?

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF1A977848.0103133B-ON852572FB.00672084-852572FB.00675442@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/15/2007 02:48:38 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,david misenheimer
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,david misenheimer
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: Appendix 5
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,david misenheimer
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  8F8666D797F065EA852572F20061A4CF
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I think the numbers are consistent with the IM rules.  However, we did not
catch that $X/ton, I have asked my mobile expert to fix that on Monday, he
is not in today.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/06/2007 01:46 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	"Theroux, Richard P."<EMAIL_ADDRESS>	Subject
	Appendix 5

Hi Ron,

I have a question about the estimated costs and benefits of continuous IM
from the appendix 5 ozone RIA.

We have a recollection here that the RIA for the IM240 rule estimated
costs at a level much lower than the approx. $680 million annual costs
used in the ozone RIA.

Can you make sure that you are basing your estimate off the IM240 rule RIA.

Thanks,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF48D6A4F9.EB60848E-ON852572FB.005ED198-852572FB.00604C41@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/15/2007 01:31:50 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  language on 079 for RIA
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,rosalina rodriguez,Lydia Wegman
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I just finished talking to Lydia about the 079 analysis.  We think a
footnote to the following paragraph from page 8 of chapter 1 meets her
agreement with Art Fraas.  Just for clarity sake, we believe that the
agreement covers an analysis of 079 similar to that done for 075 and 065,
using an extrapolated approach from existing data and analyses.

"This RIA presents benefit and cost estimates for both ends of the
proposal range of 0.070 to 0.075 ppm.  It also assesses the costs and
benefits of attaining one more stringent standard option (0.065 ppm).*
Since EPA is not considering loosening the standard, the least stringent
option to the proposed range is the current standard itself.  Since this
RIA presents an analysis of the costs and benefits incremental to the
current standard, retaining the current standard would have no additional
incremental costs or benefits. "

*  EPA is working on a complementary analysis of one additional less
stringent standard option (0.079 ppm) which was not completed in time to
be included in this document.  This analysis will be placed in the ozone
NAAQS RIA docket by mid July 2007.

Please let me know if you have any comments.  We can incorporate this
language in the final RIA chapter next week.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$LangPrincipal:
$AltPrincipal:
ForwardedFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
ForwardedDate:  06/14/2007 03:18:58 PM
$FILE:
InetSendTo:  .
InetCopyTo:  .,.
InetBlindCopyTo:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageCc:  .,.
$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF884C2B3B.24408C57-ON852572FA.006A1BAE-852572FA.006A3C63@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/14/2007 03:20:23 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,Arturo Rios,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  Arturo Rios,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Fw: Response to Commerce comments
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  Art Rios,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  F42430A9D04C34B8852572FA0058F90E
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Here are our responses to the DOC comments on chapter 5.  Please let me
know if you have any questions.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF1B129938.1FF41610-ON852572FA.00681AC3-852572FA.0069FF36@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/14/2007 03:17:46 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,fann.neal@epa.gov,Bryan Hubbell,Larry Sorrels
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .,.,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,fann.neal@epa.gov,Bryan Hubbell,Larry Sorrels
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: ria
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones,Neal Fann,Bryan Hubbell,Larry Sorrels
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  3D7155EB4AD852CD852572FA0056B519
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

See below

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/14/2007 11:47 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	ria

Hi Ron,

Where are you all with the RIA rewrite?  I plan to send out several if not
all chapters this evening, with any remainder tomorrow.  Per Margie's
voicemail, I would prefer to send clean copies instead of redline since
the number of changes has been substantial, a redline is nearly
unintelligible.

Looking forward to next week’s deadline, I’d like to see what you’ve done
as soon as possible in response to comments and requests for further
discussion.  The majority of the comments I have been getting on the
chapters are being addressed in the new draft.  Where we have issues or
concerns, I have been sending you separate responses.  I have a writeup
addressing the DOC comments from the other day which I will send in a few
minutes.

Have you made sure that the benefit and cost tables are presented with
discounts of 3 and 7%?  Here is the short answer:

o ozone benefits occur in the year in which the air quality change occurs,
thus no lag or discounting

o PM2.5 benefits are derived from benefit per ton estimates discounted at
3%.  We note in the RIA that the benefits discounted at 7% are likely to
be about 15% lower.  Given all the uncertainties in this analysis, we did
not put together the separate 7% table, we are running over 50 tables in
the benefits chapter already.

o the discount rates for the control sectors vary.  For the majority of
the larger nonstationary sources, we use 3 and 7% where there exists the
needed capital cost data and equipment life (consistent with what we did
in the PM RIA).  For area sources, the cost info is only available in
annualized cost/ton terms.  For these we use a rate of 7%, consistent with
our practice in NSPS and MACT rules.  Mobile source controls are presented
at 7%.  EGU costs have a different rate, which they have justified in the
CAIR rule.

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF4F39115A.3334DF31-ON852572FA.006413B4-852572FA.00653733@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/14/2007 02:25:33 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: RFS
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  0D6A673E6B82CBDF852572FA0060F874
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  06/14/2007 02:25:33 PM

It is not very clear cut on the impacts.  Below is an abstracted piece
from the public fact sheet on the April 2007 RFS rule
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420f07019.htm).    It is not clear
where the increases would occur, we need to have a discussion with OTAQ to
figure out if they make a differnence (it sounds like not).  Anyway, I
have included the following paragraph into the RIA specifically to address
the RFS in the final rule:

"At the time that EPA established the baseline of rules to be included in
this analysis, the focus was on information which was readily available in
the emission inventories and other data sources.   Typically, a RIA
analysis baseline includes only reductions from final rules and not
reductions from regulatory proposals.  For this analysis, we also included
reductions from some proposals to best characterize reductions which we
anticipate to occur in the future (e.g. Ocean Going Vessel Rule).
However, EPA did not include a complete set of all proposals, including
the recently promulgated Renewable Fuel Standard, due to a lack of readily
available information.  For the final analysis, EPA will be using an
updated emission inventory and improved models and sets of control
information.  The base case for the analysis will include all promulgated
rules, and any potential reductions resulting from proposed rules will be
separately highlighted in the RIA analysis baseline."

I hope this will cover it for this proposal.  Let me know.

Language from fact sheet on RFS rule:

The RIA provides an analysis of the energy, emissions, air quality, and
economic impacts of expanding the use of renewable fuels in comparison to
a reference case of 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel use which
represents 2004 conditions projected out to 2012.  Depending on the volume
of renewable fuel anticipated to be used in 2012, EPA estimates that this
transition to renewable fuels will reduce petroleum consumption between
2.0 and 3.9 billion gallons or roughly 0.8 to 1.6 percent of the petroleum
that would otherwise be used by the transportation sector.
With regard to emissions impacts, carbon monoxide emissions from
gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment will be reduced between 0.9 and
2.5 percent. Emissions of benzene (a mobile source air toxic) will be
reduced between 1.8 and 4.0 percent. Further, the use of renewable fuel
will reduce carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions between 8.0
and 13.1 million metric tons, about 0.4 to 0.6 percent of the anticipated
greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector in the United
States in 2012.
At the same time, other vehicle emissions may increase as a result of
greater renewable fuel use. Nationwide, EPA estimates an increase in total
emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides (VOC + NOx)
between 41,000 and 83,000 tons. However, the effects will vary
significantly by region. Areas that already are using ethanol will
experience little or no change in emissions or air quality. However, those
areas that experience a substantial increase in ethanol may see an
increase in VOC emissions between 4 and 5 percent and an increase in NOx
emissions between 6 and 7 percent from gasoline powered vehicles and
equipment.
The societal cost to produce a gallon of gasoline is estimated to rise
between 0.5 cent and 1.1 cents, though the presence of the excise tax
credit for ethanol will result in a net savings for fuel customers at the
pump of 0.4 to 0.7 cents per gallon. Net U.S. farm income is estimated to
increase by between $2.6 and $5.4 billion.

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/14/2007 01:39 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	RFS

Hi Ron,

Have you crafted any language to discuss how VOC and NOX might be affected
by increased use of ethanol?

Also, are you talking about how this might make extrapolated controls more
necessary; i.e., if RFS increases use of ethanol wouldn’t that increase
VOC and NOX emissions everywhere that gasoline is being combusted?

Let me know on this asap, there have been several queries on this question.

Thanks,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF2FD8BDC9.C979AFA6-ON852572F9.00689416-852572F9.0068FE60@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/13/2007 03:06:49 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  1,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  Rios.Arturo@epamail.epa.gov,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: FW: DOE comments; RIA chap. 3 and 5
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  AA1CCDA2F19E36F8852572F900647B74
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Some questions are easier to answer than others............

See answer below

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/13/2007 02:17 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	FW: DOE comments; RIA chap. 3 and 5

Hi Ron,

A couple more comments below on the RIA

Cheers,
Rob

1.  Nox emissions in 2002 (EPA Trends Report) indicate 21 million tons NOX
emissions in 2002.  Based on RIA analysis, CAAA will reduce Nox emissions
to less than 10 million tons in 2020 and will just be able to meet 0.084
standard (except some California counties and a few other areas).  The RIA
suggests that an additional 1 million tons of Nox reductions, coming
mainly from the nonEGU sector, will be the available known controls
available in 2020.  The analysis suggests that there is a large amount of
extrapolated Nox emissions needed to achieve 0.070 ppm full attainment.
Please indicate the amount of extrapolated Nox emission reductions and how
this can achieve a 14 ppm Ozone emission reduction with 1 million tons +
extrapolated tons reduction.  see chapter 4...in particular the Table in
section 4.4
2.  Is this rulemaking realistically portraying ability to achieve targets
based on such a small incremental reduction in Nox used to achieve the
0.070 ppm target when such a large amount is needed to achieve 0.084 ppm
reduction targets.  Based on 1997 NAAQS and Nox emissions achieved since
then, how well does the ppm ozone reduction correlate with these Nox
reductions?  I think that the discussion in chapter 4 on the development
of the impact ratios and the extrapolated tons addresses this.  I think
our modeling underlying the analysis strongly supports the relationship.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFCB4F1186.4DC8B48A-ON852572F9.00541E2F-852572F9.005456C9@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/13/2007 11:21:12 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  rios.arturo@epa.gov,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: Ch 5 and 9
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Arturo Rios/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  1205A5B963EAD0AD852572F800583B24
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, we got some background on the EGU impacts, as you can see, they are
very small.  I think this would imply that we are still consistent with
our EO statement as written.  Please let me know if you have more
questions.

As for the measures of impact, some good indicators are:  Extent of coal
retirements, change in generation mix, and electricity retail prices. They
are all small.

1. How much more retirements in the control case compared to the base
case: Very small/negligible.

2. How much electricity retail prices change: Not more than 1%.

Change in Wholesale Electricity Prices (mills/kWh)
Prices are in mills/kWh (numbers in parenthesis are the average)
OTC
LADCO                                        Rest of CAIR
-0.15 to 0.26 (0.06)	-0.13 to 0.40 (0.15)	-0.24 to 0.01 (-0.09)

3. How much generation mix change: 11 GW increase in coal (equivalent to
0.5% of coal, 0.25% of total generation) and corresponding decrease in
oil/gas generation.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/12/2007 12:04 PM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	Arturo Rios/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	Subject
	Ch 5 and 9

Hi Ron and Art
Not sure if I got Art’s email right.
Anyways.  Please comment in Chapter 5 about how increase in coal energy
output for the East is consistent with known control on EGU trading.
Also, please comment on how table 5.5 is consistent with your statements
about Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use.  It would seem that table 5.5 would suggest
this rule is “…significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or use…”
when coupled with the known controls for EGU.

Cheers,
Rob
________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF1B1089FE.C86EDC90-ON852572F8.006A9A82-852572F8.006D29E0@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/12/2007 03:52:21 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  EMPAX discussion results
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  1205A5B963EAD0AD852572F800583B24
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
$RespondedTo:  2
$Revisions:  06/12/2007 03:52:22 PM

I wanted to quickly review our agreement on the use of the EMPAX results
in the ozone NAAQS RIA.

We have agreed to pull that portion of the cost chapter covering the EMPAX
results for the modeled controls and place it into an appendix.  We will
remove that portion of the total costs attributed to the economic impacts
of the modeled controls as well (thus, the partial attainment costs drop
from $7.1 to $3.9 billion).  We will indicate in the body of the RIA that
we did not include the economic impacts portion of the modeled control
costs because we were not able to do a similar calculation for the
extrapolated cost portion, thus allowing for more of an apples to apples
comparison (recognizing that there are obviously differences as noted
elsewhere between the modeled and extrapolated costs).

Additionally, as I indicated, I will cite in the RIA the June 8th letter
of our Science Advisory Board (SAB) Section 812 Council which raises
questions on the appropriateness of estimating the cost of extrapolated
tons (see the response to charge question 2a).  I will state that we will
evaluate this advice as we design the final ozone NAAQS RIA analysis.
Enclosed is a copy of the letter to Administrator Johnson, including a
list of the members of the Council.

Please let me know if this is inconsistent with your memory of our
conversation.  Thanks.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFCA88AD1A.81F9CEE8-ON852572F8.00675A33-852572F8.0067613F@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/12/2007 02:49:11 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  my 3:00 cancelled, call me whenever
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  1205A5B963EAD0AD852572F800583B24
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF68FCC313.63F2FA45-ON852572F8.00577E90-852572F8.00590F37@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/12/2007 12:12:46 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: chapter 4 comments
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  DF1B36B3FC39D96F852572F80056FD9C
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Thanks.   I got your phone message, I am not available from 3 to 4,
otherwise free.

Also, as we are coming to the end game, please include Margie on all these
e-mails so I don't miss anything.  Thanks.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>06/12/2007 11:50 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc

	Subject
	chapter 4 comments

Hi Ron,

Chapter 4:

Table 4.1:  include results for all regions.

Section 4.1.2:
Please provide discussion of why you selected a 200 km radius.  Please
discuss how the extrapolated tons would change if you assumed a smaller
radius; i.e., if the number of areas increased.  Please discuss how the
200 km radius is affected by state borders.  Please discuss how the 200 km
radius is affected by natural boundaries (Great Lakes, Rocky Mountains,
Oceans, etc).  Please add note that states a sensitivity analysis of
alternative assumptions regarding the 200 km radius will be conducted in
the final RIA.

Section 4.2:
Please provide discussion of how higher/lower impact ratios will affect
the resulting extrapolated tons estimate.
Please provide discussion that regional specific impact ratios would
likely be more appropriate to use.

Please provide a statement that notes that regionally disaggregated impact
ratios will be conducted for the final RIA.

Cheers,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

$FILE:
$FILE:
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF8CAF301A.27E7EC4E-ON852572F7.007138EE-852572F7.007AFCA1@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/11/2007 06:23:20 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,simon.nathalie<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .,.,.
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  Jones.Marjorie@epamail.epa.gov,.,.
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,simon.nathalie<EMAIL_ADDRESS>BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  Re: FW: Some Comments on RIA for OMB to Transmit to EPA
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US@EPA,nathalie simon,Tyler Fox
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  4256FC6F20BCC6F5852572EB0055C4C7
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, I just realized I did not sent you responses to these questions.
Enclosed is a quick response to each question.  Please let me know if
there are any questions about our response.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

"Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>05/30/2007 11:36 AM

	To
	Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	cc
	Marjorie Jones/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA
	Subject
	FW: Some Comments on RIA for OMB to Transmit to EPA

Hi Ron,

Here are some additional questions on the RIA that you might want to
discuss during the call today.

Thanks,
Rob

________________________________________________
Robert Johansson, Ph.D.
OMB/OIRA/NREA
725 17th St. NW, Room 10202
Washington, DC 20503
(P)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(F)<PHONE_NUMBER>
(E<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Dennis<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 11:29 AM
To: Johansson, Robert
Cc: Daniels, Jarad; Grahame, Thomas
Subject: FW: Some Comments on RIA for OMB to Transmit to EPA

Rob,

Attached are some questions and comments related to the RIA ozone NAAQS
review.  Please transmit to EPA.

Best

Denny Smith
U.S. Department of Energy
FE-26
202-586-1822 (w)
410-326-0887 (h)

$FILE:
Importance:  1
In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFE9476DCD.F70480A6-ON852572F4.00460D00-852572F4.004AF5BF@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/08/2007 09:38:46 AM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  matrerials for today's briefing
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  8F8666D797F065EA852572F20061A4CF
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

Rob, enclosed are the few pages I plan to use in our discussion today.
Please understand that these tables are simplified formats to premit ease
of discussion today, the full agreed to format showing the range of ozone
mortality assumptions will appear in the RIA.

Ron Evans
Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group
HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA
Mail Drop C-439-02
919-541-5488
919-541-0839 fax

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OF18D17204.F7B7CCF5-ON852572F3.007A524E-852572F3.007A73DF@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/07/2007 06:17:30 PM
Recipients:  <Robert_C._Johansson@omb.eop.gov>,CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:  .
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:  .
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
useApplet:  True
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String:
Principal:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
SentToDocu:  False
SendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>CopyTo:  CN=Marjorie Jones/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
BlindCopyTo:
Subject:  materials coming in am for 10:00
ldf_locale:  en-US
Encrypt:  0
Sign:  0
ReturnReceipt:  0
delTmpEncrypt:
delTmpImportance:
delTmpReturnReceipt:
delTmpSign:
EnterSendTo:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EnterCopyTo:  margie jones
EnterBlindCopyTo:
$RFSaveInfo:  8F8666D797F065EA852572F20061A4CF
$UpdatedBy:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US

I have people doing QA/QC this evening, it may be tight but I will have
materials to you (including CA numbers) before the 10:00 meeting.

In_Reply_To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>$Mailer:  Lotus Notes Release 6.5.2 June 01, 2004
$MessageID:  <OFBC1A2B07.6D8D63D5-ON852572F1.00734E09-852572F1.00735708@LocalDomain>
INetFrom<EMAIL_ADDRESS>PostedDate:  06/05/2007 04:59:49 PM
Recipients<EMAIL_ADDRESS>MailOptions:  0
SaveOptions:  1
ldf_createddate:  null
ldf_from:  null
ldf_archive:  null
ldf_temp:  null
$AltNameLanguageTags:
$StorageCc:
$StorageTo:  .
$StorageBcc:
InetCopyTo:
InetSendTo:  .
AltCopyTo:
InetBlindCopyTo:
InheritedReplyTo:
InheritedFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedAltFrom:  "Johansson, Robert"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>InheritedFromDomain:
From:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
AltFrom:  CN=Ron Evans/OU=RTP/O=USEPA/C=US
Logo:  stdNotesLtr0
tmpImp2:
DefaultMailSaveOptions:  2
Query_String: