Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION Reducing the Fuel Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Phase Two First Report Committee on Assessment of Technologies and Approaches for Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Phase Two Board on Energy and Environmental Systems Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences Transportation Research Board

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by cooperative agreement DTNH22-12-H-00389 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978- 0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Copies of this report are available in limited supply, free of charge from: Board on Energy and Environmental Systems National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck W934 Washington, DC 20001 Additional copies of this report are available for sale from: Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2014 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION iii

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON ASSESSMENT OF TECHNOLOGIES AND APPROACHES FOR REDUCING THE FUEL CONSUMPTION OF MEDIUM- AND HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES, PHASE TWO ANDREW BROWN, JR., NAE, 1 Delphi Corporation, Troy Michigan, Chair INES AZEVEDO, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania RODICA BARANESCU, NAE, University of Illinois-Chicago TOM CACKETTE, California Air Resources Board (ret.), Sacramento NIGEL CLARK, West Virginia University, Morgantown RONALD GRAVES, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Knoxville, Tennessee DANIEL HANCOCK, NAE, General Motors (ret.), Indianapolis, Indiana W. MICHAEL HANEMANN, NAS, 2 Arizona State University, Tempe WINSTON HARRINGTON, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. GARY MARCHANT, Arizona State University, Tempe PAUL MENIG, Tech-I-M, Sherwood, Oregon DAVID MERRION, Merrion Expert Consulting, Brighton, Michigan AMELIA REGAN, University of California, Irvine MIKE ROETH, North American Council for Freight Efficiency, Fort Wayne, Indiana GARY ROGERS, independent consultant, Birmingham, Michigan CHUCK SALTER, independent consultant, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania CHRISTINE VUJOVICH, Cummins, Inc. (ret.), Columbus, Indiana JOHN WOODROOFFE, University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor MARTIN ZIMMERMAN, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Staff MARTIN OFFUTT, Responsible Staff Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems JAMES ZUCCHETTO, Director, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems ALAN CRANE, Senior Scientist, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems JOSEPH MORRIS, Senior Program Officer, Transportation Research Board MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems E. JONATHAN YANGER, Research Associate, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems LANITA JONES, Administrative Coordinator DANA CAINES, Financial Manager, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems 1 NAE, National Academy of Engineering. 2 NAS, National Academy of Sciences. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION v

OCR for page R1
BOARD ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS ANDREW BROWN, JR., NAE, 1 Delphi Corporation, Troy, Michigan, Chair DAVID T. ALLEN, University of Texas, Austin WILLIAM F. BANHOLZER, NAE, The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, Michigan WILLIAM F. BRINKMAN, NAS, Princeton University WILLIAM CAVANAUGH III, Retired Chairman, Progress Energy, Raleigh, North Carolina PAUL A DECOTIS, Long Island Power Authority, Albany, New York CHRISTINE EHLIG-ECONOMIDES, NAE, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas SHERRI GOODMAN, CNA, Alexandria, Virginia NARAIN HINGORANI, NAE, Consultant, Los Altos Hills, California DEBBIE NIEMEIER, University of California, Davis MARGO OGE, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ret.), McLean, Virginia MICHAEL OPPENHEIMER, Princeton University, New Jersey JACKALYNE PFANNENSTIEL, Consultant, Piedmont, California DAN REICHER, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California BERNARD ROBERTSON, NAE, Daimler-Chrysler Corporation (retired), Bloomfield Hills, Michigan GARY ROGERS, independent consultant, Birmingham, Michigan ALISON SILVERSTEIN, Consultant, Pflugerville, Texas MARK H. THIEMENS, NAS, 2 University of California, San Diego RICHARD WHITE, Oppenheimer & Company, New York, New York ADRIAN ZACCARIA, Bechtel Group (ret.), Frederick, Maryland MARY LOU ZOBACK, NAS, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California Staff JAMES J. ZUCCHETTO, Director JOHN HOLMES, Associate Director and Senior Program Officer DANA CAINES, Financial Associate ALAN CRANE, Senior Scientist ELIZABETH EULLER, Project Assistant LANITA JONES, Administrative Coordinator MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer E. JONATHAN YANGER, Research Associate 1 NAE, National Academy of Engineering. 2 NAS, National Academy of Sciences. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION vi

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2014 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1 KIRK T. STEUDLE, Director, Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing, Chair DANIEL SPERLING, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, Vice Chair ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Transportation Research Board, Executive Director VICTORIA A. ARROYO, Executive Director, Georgetown Climate Center, and Visiting Professor, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C. SCOTT E. BENNETT, Director, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, Little Rock DEBORAH H. BUTLER, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, Virginia (Past Chair, 2013) JAMES M. CRITES, Executive Vice President of Operations, Dallas–Fort Worth International Airport, Texas MALCOLM DOUGHERTY, Director, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento A. STEWART FOTHERINGHAM, Professor and Director, Centre for Geoinformatics, School of Geography and Geosciences, University of St. Andrews, Fife, United Kingdom JOHN S. HALIKOWSKI, Director, Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix MICHAEL W. HANCOCK, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort SUSAN HANSON, Distinguished University Professor Emerita, School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts STEVE HEMINGER, Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Oakland, California CHRIS T. HENDRICKSON, Duquesne Light Professor of Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania JEFFREY D. HOLT, Managing Director, Bank of Montreal Capital Markets, and Chairman, Utah Transportation Commission, Huntsville, Utah GARY P. LaGRANGE, President and CEO, Port of New Orleans, Louisiana MICHAEL P. LEWIS, Director, Rhode Island Department of Transportation, Providence JOAN McDONALD, Commissioner, New York State Department of Transportation, Albany ABBAS MOHADDES, President and CEO, Iteris, Inc., Santa Ana, California DONALD A. OSTERBERG, Senior Vice President, Safety and Security, Schneider National, Inc., Green Bay, Wisconsin STEVEN W. PALMER, Vice President of Transportation, Lowe’s Companies, Inc., Mooresville, North Carolina SANDRA ROSENBLOOM, Professor, University of Texas, Austin (Past Chair, 2012) HENRY G. (GERRY) SCHWARTZ, JR., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri KUMARES C. SINHA, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana GARY C. THOMAS, President and Executive Director, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas, Texas PAUL TROMBINO III, Director, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames PHILLIP A. WASHINGTON, General Manager, Regional Transportation District, Denver, Colorado THOMAS P. BOSTICK (Lt. General, U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (ex officio) ANNE S. FERRO, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) DAVID J. FRIEDMAN, Acting Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) 1 Membership as of March 2014. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION vii

OCR for page R1
JOHN T. GRAY II, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C. (ex officio) MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) PAUL N. JAENICHEN, SR., Acting Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) THERESE W. McMILLAN, Acting Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) MICHAEL P. MELANIPHY, President and CEO, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, D.C. (ex officio) VICTOR M. MENDEZ, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, and Acting Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) ROBERT J. PAPP (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (ex officio) LUCY PHILLIPS PRIDDY, Research Civil Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Mississippi, and Chair, TRB Young Members Council (ex officio) CYNTHIA L. QUARTERMAN, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) PETER M. ROGOFF, Acting Under Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) CRAIG A. RUTLAND, U.S. Air Force Pavement Engineer, Air Force Civil Engineer Center, Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida (ex officio) JOSEPH C. SZABO, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California (ex officio) GREGORY D. WINFREE, Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio) FREDERICK G. (BUD) WRIGHT, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. (ex officio) PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION viii

OCR for page R1
Preface The fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (MHDVs) have become a focus of legislative and regulatory action in the past few years. Section 101 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Pub. L. No. 110-140 §101, mandated the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to promulgate fuel consumption standards for MHDVs for the first time. In addition, Section 108 of that same Act required the Secretary of Transportation to contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to undertake a study on the technologies and costs for improving fuel consumption in MHDVs, and include a follow-on report at 5-year intervals. In response to the Secretary’s request, the National Research Council (NRC) in 2010 completed Technologies and Approaches to Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, referred to henceforth as the ‘Phase One Report.’ The Phase One Report provided a series of findings and recommendations on the following: the development of a fuel consumption program for MHDVs; metrics for measuring MHDV fuel consumption; availability and costs of various technologies for reducing fuel consumption; potential indirect effects and externalities associated with fuel consumption standards for MHDVs; alternatives for the scope, stringency, certification methods, and compliance approach for the standards; and a suggested demonstration program to validate innovative certification procedures and regulatory elements. Thereafter, in 2011, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued the ‘Phase I Rule’ on fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of MHDVs. This report comprises the first periodic, 5-year follow-on to the NRC’s 2010 report. The NRC formed the Committee on Technologies and Approaches for Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Phase Two, for this purpose. In the present report, the committee seeks to advise NTHSA as it revises its regulatory regime for MHDVs that meet the two agencies’ objectives of: (1) reducing in-use emissions of carbon dioxide from MHDVs; (2) reducing in-use emissions of other greenhouse gases (GHGs) from MHDVs; and (3) improving in-use efficiency of fuel use in MHDVs—by driving innovation, advancement, adoption and in-use balance of technology through regulation. At the same time, we seek to advise on pathways to accomplish this subject to the following constraints: (a) holding life-cycle cost of technology change or technology addition to an acceptable level; (b) holding capital cost of acquiring required new technology to an acceptable level; (c) acknowledging the importance of employing a balance of energy resources that offers national security; (d) avoiding near-term, precipitous regulatory changes that are disruptive to commercial planning; (e) insuring that the vehicles offered for sale remain suited to their intended purposes and meet user requirements; (f) ensuring that the process used to demonstrate compliance is accurate, efficient and not excessively burdensome; and (g) not eroding control of criteria pollutants or unregulated species that may have health effects. Objectives 1, 2, and 3 are not fully congruent when fuels having different carbon content are considered, and when GHGs other than carbon dioxide are considered. In particular, GHG and efficiency are decoupled when the fuel and engine technology changes. Objectives 1, 2 and 3 also require that any regulation must reflect real-world activity and performance of vehicles. Constraints (a) and (b) suggest that the regulation and standards may stop short of driving best available technology or certain technology pathways. However, (a) and (b) do not go so far as to suggest that new technology must offer a positive return on investment for the consumer through reduced fuel usage: needs for efficiency and GHG reduction may reach beyond economic drivers for change. Constraints (c), (d) and (e) may dictate that a PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION ix

OCR for page R1
single standard may not be reasonable because a mix of fuels may be needed and because these different fuels may not be capable of meeting a common standard if the standard is set too ambitiously. Constraint (f) may be in conflict with the real-world benefit implications of the objectives. Constraints (c) and (d) imply that the regulations should not close current or anticipated technology pathways without adequate notice to manufacturers and suppliers. The committee is grateful to all of the Federal agencies, original equipment manufacturers and suppliers and their respective associations, and non-governmental organizations who contributed significantly of their time and efforts to this National Research Council (NRC) study, either by giving presentations at meetings or by responding to committee requests for information. We acknowledge the valuable contributions of individuals and organizations that provided information and made presentations at our meetings (see Appendix C). This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Steve Berry, NAS, University of Chicago, Daniel Blower, UMTRI, Rebecca Brewster, American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), Mike Camosy, Auto Research Center, David Foster, University of Wisconsin (ret.), Art Fraas, Resources for the Future, Steve Hanson, Pepsi-FritoLay, Stephen Kratzke, NHTSA (ret.), Margo Oge, ICCT, Joseph Prahl, Case Western Reserve University, Bernard Robertson, NAE, DaimlerChrysler, Aymeric Rousseau, Argonne National Laboratory, and James Spearot, Mountain Ridgeline Consulting, LLC. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Elisabeth M. Drake, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, NAE. Appointed by the NRC, she was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. Andrew Brown, Jr., chair Committee on Assessment of Technologies and Approaches for Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Phase Two PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION x

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1 Background, 1-1 Comparison of EPA and NHTSA MHDV Fuel Consumption Regulations to NRC Phase One Report, 1-2 Metrics Used in the Regulation, 1-3 Classes of Vehicles to Regulate, 1-4 Certification Procedures, 1-4 Pilot Program and Evolution of the Regulatory Regime, 1-5 Trailer Regulations, 1-8 Testing, 1-9 Other Recommendations in the NRC Phase One Report That Were Not Addressed by the Agencies, 1-10 Market and Regulatory Background Factors, 1-12 Natural Gas, 1-13 Biofuels, 1-15 Electrification, 1-17 Life-Cycle Analysis of Fuels, 1-19 Automated/Connected Vehicles, 1-19 “Green Logistics”, 1-20 Background Regulatory Changes, 1-20 References, 1-22 2 POTENTIAL FOR TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE IN COMMERCIAL VEHICLES TO 2-1 IMPACT FUTURE NHTSA REGULATIONS Overview of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles (Classes 2b through 8), 2-1 Power Train Technologies, 2-3 Vehicle Technology, 2-6 References, 2-7 3 CERTIFICATION AND COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES USING GEM 3-1 Development of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model, 3-2 Description of GEM, 3-6 Use of GEM for Over-the-Road Tractors, 3-9 Analysis of GEM, 3-10 User Interface, Order Entry and GEM Utility, 3-10 User-Specified Data Input and Hard-Coded Features of GEM, 3-11 Fixed Values in the GEM Code, 3-13 Vehicle and Component Integration, 3-13 References, 3-15 PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION xi

OCR for page R1
4 BASELINE INFORMATION ON MHDV FLEET AND METHODOLOGY FOR 4-1 COLLECTION Introduction, 4-1 Why Do We Need a Baseline? NHTSA Should Have a Baseline in Order to Inform Its Rule-Making, 4-2 What Is a Baseline?, 4-2 Why a Baseline?, 4-2 What Year Should the Baseline Capture?, 4-2 Which Data Should the Baseline Contain?, 4-3 Criteria for a Good Baseline Data Collection Process, 4-3 Comments on NHTSA, SwRI and Frost & Sullivan Survey, 4-3 Comments on the CALHEAT Report for the California Energy Commission, 4-5 Findings and Recommendations, 4-5 References, 4-6 Annex 4A: Other Sources of Baseline Data in the Industry, 4-7 Annex 4B: Additional Ways to Obtain Information in the Future, 4-20 5 NATURAL GAS VEHICLES: IMPACTS AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 5-1 Summary of Natural Gas Fuel Supply and Demand Trends, 5-1 Natural Gas Engines and Vehicles, 5-4 Technology, 5-4 Infrastructure, 5-11 Expected Growth in Natural Gas Vehicle Population, 5-15 Regulatory Framework for Natural Gas Engines and Trucks, 5-17 Greenhouse Gas Emission and Fuel Economy Standards for Engines, 5-17 NG Engines, 5-18 Emission and Fuel Economy Standards for Complete Trucks, 5-19 Findings and Recommendations, 5-20 References 5-21 6 REVIEW OF OPTIONS TO REDUCE ENERGY USE OF TRAILERS 6-1 Background2 Current Tractor-Trailer Energy Balance, 6-2 Aerodynamics and Tire Rolling Resistance of the Tractor-Trailer, 6-3 Aerodynamics of the Combined Tractor-Trailer, 6-4 Tractor Aerodynamics, 6-4 Van Trailer Aerodynamics, 6-6 Tractor-Trailer Gap, 6-6 Tire Rolling Resistance, 6-7 Government Programs That Influence Tractor-Trailer Fuel Consumption, 6-8 SmartWay, 6-8 California Air Resources Board Regulation, 6-11 NHTSA and EPA Regulations, 6-12 Methods for Aerodynamic Performance Evaluation, 6-13 Current Use of Aerodynamic Devices and Low Rolling Resistance Tires, 6-14 Tractors, 6-14 Aerodynamic Devices on Van Trailers, 6-15 The Market for Trailer Aerodynamic Devices, 6-16 Barriers to Increased Use of Trailer Aerodynamic Devices, 6-20 Tires, 6-21 Tire Pressure Systems, 6-23 PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION xii

OCR for page R1
Findings and Recommendations, 6-25 Trailers, 6-25 Tractors, 6-26 Tractors and Trailers, 6-26 Tires, 6-27 References, 6-27 Annex 6A: Questions Given to Van Trailer Manufacturers in Table 6-4, 6-30 Annex 6B, 6-31 GLOSSARY APPENDIXES A Committee Biographical Information B Statement of Task C Committee Activities D Acronyms and Abbreviations PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION xiii

OCR for page R1