"King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov> 

02/28/2008 09:34 AM

	

To

Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Nathalie
Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Tom
Walton/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Darryl Weatherhead/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Larry
Sorrels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

RE: SAB letter on extrapolated costs









Thanks Ron - I am happy reading :-)

h 

-----Original Message-----

From: Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 9:34 AM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Cakir.Janet@epamail.epa.gov; Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov;

simon.nathalie@epa.gov; Crabtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov;

walton.tom@epa.gov; Weatherhead.Darryl@epamail.epa.gov;

Sorrels.Larry@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: RE: SAB letter on extrapolated costs

Thanks for the quick response.   I reviewed the SAB paper a few minutes

ago, I found it easier to understand with a prior reading of the

materials put together by EPA for their review.   Here is the most

relevent piece.

http://www.epa.gov/oar/sect812/mar07/cost_estimation.pdf

Happy reading.

                                                                        

             "King, Heidi R."                                           

             <Heidi_R._King@o                                           

             mb.eop.gov>                                             To 

                                      Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA        

             02/27/2008 07:15                                        cc 

             PM                       Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,     

                                      Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA,    

                                      Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, 

                                      Nathalie Simon/DC/USEPA/US@EPA    

                                                                Subject 

                                      RE: SAB letter on extrapolated    

                                      costs                             

                                                                        

                                                                        

                                                                        

                                                                        

                                                                        

                                                                        

Thank you, Ron, for sending this tonight - I'm getting out of the office

early tonight so I can begin to read this on my way home and have a

headstart on tomorrow.

FYI

- I have briefed Art

- We need to get Rob to join us for two specific points of conversation:

1) marginal cost approach vs hybrid

2) social costs

On the hybrid approach, follow up to my request that we articulate the

theory and relationship with its calculation:

In general, OMB sense of comfort with the ability of the hybrid approach

to meet the requirements of A-4 will rely upon understanding M, as we

discussed earlier.  Food for thought: Wouldn't it just be simpler to use

an "M" tech change factor estimated in the (fairly rich) econ

literature, rather than backing it out?  I realize there is not a rich

lit on cost/ton, but general macro tech change studies would not be a

bad place to look for an M.  The enviro econ lit might offer something.

Keep in mind that until we better explain M the arguments for using the

hybrid approach may not be compelling:  1) CASAC's request for

transparency seems to be tough to argue while we need to explain M's

calculation as an expression of what it means in economic terms, and 2)

meeting A-4 guidance is tough to demonstrate.

I appreciate your work / your team's work on this.  It's a pleasure to

explore a novel approach --

heidi

-----Original Message-----

From: Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:11 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Cakir.Janet@epamail.epa.gov; Wegman.Lydia@epamail.epa.gov;

Crabtree.Tricia@epamail.epa.gov; simon.nathalie@epa.gov

Subject: SAB letter on extrapolated costs

Heidi, per our conversation, here is a copy of the SAB letter on

extrapolated costs from last Summer.   Let me know if you have questions

or want to discuss, I will be reading this concurrently with you to

refresh my memory.

Obviously we need to have additional discussions with you as well as Art

and Rob.   Is there likely to be available times remaining this week?

If you can give me some timeslots I will work with Margaret Morrison to

get together again this week.   Early Friday afternoon is likely to be

the best time on this side.

Thanks again for taking the time with us this afternoon, I think we made

progress.

Ron Evans

Leader, Air Benefit & Cost Group

HEID/OAQPS/OAR/EPA

Mail Drop C-439-02

919-541-5488

919-541-0839 fax

We do one thing: overwhelm people's impossible expectations.

(See attached file: EPA-COUNCIL-07-002_signed.pdf)

