Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles; Compliance
Programs for New Light-Duty Vehicles and Light-Duty Trucks
Related Material
[Federal Register: November 5, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 214)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 60401-60402]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05no99-25]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 86
[FRL-6470-7]
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles; Compliance
Programs for New Light-Duty Vehicles and Light-Duty Trucks
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice requesting comment on Ethyl Corporation petition for
reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA requests comment on a petition submitted to EPA by the
Ethyl Corporation (Ethyl). The petition requests reconsideration of the
CAP 2000 final rule at 64 FR 23906 (May 4, 1999).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 20, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties should submit written comments (in
duplicate, if possible) to: EPA Air and Radiation Docket, Attention
Docket No.A-96-50, room M-1500 (mail code 6102), 401 M St., SW,
Washington, D.C. 20460. The docket may be inspected at this location
from 8:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. weekdays. The docket may also be reached
by telephone at (202) 260-7548. As provided in 40 CFR part 2, a
reasonable fee may be charged by EPA for photocopying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Hormes, Office of Mobile
Sources, Vehicle Programs and Compliance Division, 2000 Traverwood, Ann
Arbor, MI 48105. Phone: (734) 214-4502. Email: lhormes@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 2, 1999, the Ethyl Corporation
submitted a petition to EPA requesting reconsideration of the CAP 2000
final rule. Ethyl based its request for reconsideration on the argument
that certain aspects of the CAP 2000 rule are inconsistent with the
Clean Air Act (Act). In brief, Ethyl focused on the durability
demonstration requirements of the regulation and stated that section
206(d) of the Act requires EPA to establish certification test
procedures by regulation and that EPA can not avoid its rulemaking
responsibilities under 307(d) by characterizing the certification
process as an adjudicatory type
[[Page 60402]]
proceeding. Ethyl's petition also states that maintaining the secrecy
of certification test procedures is not in the public interest. Ethyl
also submitted comments during the CAP 2000 rulemaking; the preamble to
the final rule discusses these, explains EPA's reasons for adopting the
durability demonstration procedures contained in the rule, and why EPA
believes these provisions are consistent with the Act.
Because of the potential impact the Agency's decision could have on
the automotive industry and on other concerned parties, EPA is
requesting comment on all the issues raised in Ethyl's petition for
reconsideration. EPA also requests that commenters address any specific
impacts the decision (whether approval or denial) would have on the
commenter. EPA will consider all comments and publish its final
decision in a separate Federal Register document.
The Ethyl petition and other related documents may be found in the
docket listed above in the ADDRESSES section. An electronically scanned
copy of Ethyl's petition can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oms/ld-
hwy.htm#regs.
Dated: November 1, 1999.
Margo T. Oge,
Director, Office of Mobile Sources.
[FR Doc. 99-29076 Filed 11-4-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U