[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60401-60402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29076]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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: [email protected].

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