Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2004-04-22 · Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) · Proposed Rules

Proposed Rules. Proposed rule

487 words·~2 min read·/register/2004/04/22/04-9037·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Action: Proposed rule
Citation: FR Doc. 04-9037 · CA 118-PLANb; FRL-7641-6 · 40 CFR 52, 81

Summary

EPA is proposing to find that East Kern County, California, has attained the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to approve the East Kern County 1-hour ozone maintenance plan and motor vehicle emissions budgets as revisions to the East Kern County portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Finally, EPA is proposing to redesignate the East Kern County area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

Dates

Any comments on this proposal must arrive by May 24, 2004.

Supplementary Information

In accordance with Clean Air Act (CAA) section 181(b)(2)(A), we are proposing to find that East Kern County, California, has attained the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). We are proposing to approve the East Kern County 1-hour ozone maintenance plan as revisions to the East Kern County portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), under CAA sections 175A and 110(k)(3), and we are proposing to approve the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the maintenance plan under CAA section 176(c)(2). Finally, we are proposing to redesignate the East Kern County area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). In the rules and regulations section of this Federal Register , we are making this finding, approving the maintenance plan and budgets, and redesignating the East Kern County area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in a direct final action without prior proposal because we believe that these actions are not controversial. If we receive adverse comments, however, we will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule and address the comments in subsequent action based on this proposed rule. We do not plan to open a second comment period, so anyone interested in commenting should do so at this time. If we do not receive adverse comments, no further activity is planned. For further information, please see the direct final action. Dated: March 19, 2004. Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. 04-9037 Filed 4-21-04; 8:45 am]

★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.