Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
NHTSARulemakingNHTSA-2017-0069

Environmental Impact Statement for the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Year 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks

RIN
Last modified
Dec 9, 2020
Comment window
closed 2832d ago
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filings
6

Activity

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed 6 comments on this docket between Sep 27, 2017 and Feb 4, 2020. 26 other organizations filed here. The comment window closed 2832d ago.

What Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed (6)

Feb 4, 2020· Comment from Center for Biological Diversity, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Communities for a Better Environment, Environment America, Environmental Law and Policy Center, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Inc., Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists· NHTSA-2017-0069-0731

Filed on regulations.gov — full text not in the inline record.

Feb 4, 2020· Comment from Environment America, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Public Citizen, Inc., and Union of Concerned Scientists· NHTSA-2017-0069-0732

Filed on regulations.gov — full text not in the inline record.

Jun 17, 2019· Comment from Natural Resources Defense Council· NHTSA-2017-0069-0719

Filed on regulations.gov — full text not in the inline record.

May 28, 2019· Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Inc., and Union of Concerned Scientists - Comments· NHTSA-2017-0069-0707

For submission to Docket ID No. NHTSA-2017-0069, attached is a Supplemental Comment addressing developments in vehicle technologies since the close of the comment period, as well as concerns about the manner in which this Administration is conducting the rulemaking process for the proposed SAFE Rule. This comment is submitted by Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Inc., and Union of Concerned Scientists.

Sep 27, 2017· Comment from Natural Resources Defense Council (On Behalf of Multiple Agencies)· NHTSA-2017-0069-0152

Please see attached comments on behalf of Acadia Center, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies, Clean Power Campaign, Coalition for Clean Air, Connecticut Fund for the Environment, Conservation Law Foundation, Environment America, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Law & Policy Center, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Plug In America, Public Citizen, Safe Climate Campaign, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and Center for Auto Safety.

Sep 27, 2017· Comment from Environmental Defense Fund, Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists· NHTSA-2017-0069-0160

Please consider the attached comments on the need to monetize greenhouse gas effects, submitted jointly by Environmental Defense Fund, the Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU School of Law, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and Union of Concerned Scientists. Our organizations may separately submit other comments regarding other aspects of the scoping process for the anticipated EIS. Sincerely, Jason Schwartz, Legal Director Institute for Policy Integrity

Abstract

This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) analyzes the environmental impacts of fuel economy standards and reasonable alternative standards for model years 2021 to 2026 for passenger cars and light trucks. NHTSA has proposed these new or amended Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Environmental impacts analyzed in this EIS include those related to fuel and energy use, air quality, and climate change. In developing the proposed standards, NHTSA considered “technological feasibility, economic practicability, the effect of other vehicle standards of the Government on fuel economy, and the need of the United States to conserve energy,” as required by 49 U.S.C. § 32902(f)

View on regulations.gov →