Tier 4 Criteria Pollutant Standards, Part 1: Phase-In Schedule for Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles

The commenter, identifying as MMC=IPCC, argues that the Tier 4 standards are overstringent, economically burdensome, and provide negligible public health benefits for most of the U.S. They advocate for a slower transition to electric vehicles, continued use of coal, and a focus on different environmental issues like ocean pollution and deforestation.

The commenter, a diesel truck technician, opposes the proposed standards because they believe current emission systems cause frequent mechanical failures and high repair costs. They argue that reverting to Tier 2 standards would improve truck reliability and lower costs for the supply chain and consumers.

The commenter, identifying as an industry worker, supports the EPA's plan to delay and roll back emission requirements. They argue that current standards have reached a point of diminishing returns, leading to increased vehicle costs, weight, and complexity without significant public health benefits.

Stefani Thomas, an Operations Manager at Power Performance Enterprises Inc., supports the EPA's proposal to postpone the Tier 4 implementation. She argues that the incremental emission benefits of Tier 3 and 4 are negligible compared to the high compliance costs and requests that the EPA revert to Tier 2 standards and establish a technology-neutral safe harbor for in-use vehicles.

Paul Henslee, a lead technician at PPEI, supports the EPA's proposal to postpone the Tier 4 implementation. He argues that the EPA should go further by reverting standards to Tier 2 levels and establishing a technology-neutral safe harbor for in-use vehicles, citing disproportionately high compliance costs and diminishing environmental benefits.

Chad Cole, representing PPEI Tuning, supports the EPA's proposal to postpone the Tier 4 standards. He argues that the costs of Tiers 3 and 4 outweigh their marginal benefits and urges the EPA to revert to Tier 2 standards and establish a technology-neutral safe harbor for vehicles meeting Tier 2 emissions.

Carmen Savant, CFO of Power Performance Enterprises Inc., supports the EPA's proposed postponement of Tier 4 standards. The commenter argues that the EPA should go further by reverting standards to Tier 2 levels and establishing a technology-neutral safe harbor for in-use vehicles, citing disproportionately high compliance costs and diminishing environmental returns.

Tim Allen, owner of a small construction equipment rental business, supports the EPA's proposal to roll back the proposed standards. He argues that the current rules are overly strict, costly to the economy and vehicle owners, and can lead to safety issues like "limp mode" in vehicles.

Alex Baciu supports the EPA's proposal to roll back emissions standards, arguing that current regulations make diesel vehicles less reliable and more expensive to maintain. The commenter suggests that the EPA should consider returning to Tier 2 standards to balance environmental protection with lower costs for consumers and businesses.

NMI Diesel supports the EPA's proposal to roll back emissions standards, arguing that current regulations make diesel vehicles unreliable and costly to repair. The commenter suggests that the EPA should put the final decision on hold to consider returning to Tier 2 standards, which they claim would achieve environmental goals at a significantly lower cost to consumers.