Rule2026-00246
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Huntington County 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Redesignation and Maintenance Plan
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 9, 2026
Effective
January 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that Huntington Township in Huntington County, Indiana (hereafter referred to as "Huntington area") is attaining the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA is approving Indiana's request to redesignate the Huntington area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS because the request meets the statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is also approving Indiana's maintenance plan for the area as part of Indiana's federally enforceable State Implementation plan (SIP).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 6 (Friday, January 9, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 911-915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-00246]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2024-0378; FRL-12933-02-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Huntington County 2010 Sulfur Dioxide
Redesignation and Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that
Huntington Township in Huntington County, Indiana (hereafter referred
to as ``Huntington area'') is attaining the 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). EPA is
approving Indiana's request to redesignate the Huntington area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS because
the request meets the statutory requirements for redesignation under
the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is also approving Indiana's maintenance
plan for the area as part of Indiana's federally enforceable State
Implementation plan (SIP).
DATES: This final rule is effective on January 9, 2026.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2024-0378. All documents in the docket are listed on
the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> or at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region
5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Cecilia Magos, at (312) 886-7336 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cecilia Magos, Air and Radiation
Division (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7336,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#016c60666e722f626462686d6860416471602f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="86ebe7e1e9f5a8e5e3e5efeaefe7c6e3f6e7a8e1e9f0">[email protected]</span></a>.
[[Page 912]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. Background
On January 9, 2018 (83 FR 1098), EPA designated Huntington
Township, a partial area of Huntington County, Indiana, as
nonattainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS. Section 191 of the
CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7514, directs States to submit a SIP for an area
designated as nonattainment demonstrating that the area will achieve
the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years
from the effective date of designation. EPA approved Indiana's plan for
attaining the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS for the Huntington area on
August 14, 2025 (90 FR 39130), and found that Indiana satisfied other
applicable requirements for nonattainment areas. EPA published its
proposed approval on September 25, 2025 (90 FR 46124), for the
Huntington area. The public comment period for this proposal closed on
October 27, 2025.
II. Response to Public Comments
EPA received two supportive comments and three adverse comments.
Summaries of the adverse comments and EPA's responses are provided
below. All comments submitted during the public comment period are
available in the docket of this action.
Comment: The commenter requests EPA withdraw the direct final rule
approving the Huntington County area redesignation and maintenance
plan. Additionally, they request EPA re-propose the action as a
``standard notice-and-comment process'' and provide a 60-day comment
period pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the CAA
with all the key technical materials in the docket the commenter
suggests are missing.
Response: EPA notes the commenter mischaracterizes the action
published. EPA did not publish a direct final rule approving the
redesignation to attainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS and
maintenance plan of the Huntington County area. EPA published a
proposed approval of the redesignation and maintenance plan on
September 25, 2025 (90 FR 46124), and opened a public comment period
for 30-days as required by the APA and CAA. Additionally, EPA has made
all appropriate documentation available in the docket of this action.
Therefore, EPA will not repropose the approval of the 2010
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS redesignation and maintenance plan for the
Huntington area.
Comment: Commenter states that under the APA, EPA did not include
the appropriate or sufficient technical materials necessary for
meaningful comment. To summarize, the commenter requests additional
modeling and technical support materials related to AERMOD, AERMET,
BPIPPRM, receptor network, background concentration, stack parameters,
source shutdown or curtailment documentation for the demonstration of
attainment and emissions growth projections for the maintenance period,
verification of the maintenance plan's monitoring/verification
commitments, and quality assurance and quality control documentation be
made available for meaningful evaluation of the attainment
demonstration and maintenance plan for Huntington County.
Response: As noted in the proposed rulemaking, EPA's April 23,
2024, ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO<INF>2</INF> Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions'' (``April 2014 SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance'') \1\ states EPA
may make determinations of attainment based on the modeling, using
allowable emissions, from the attainment demonstrations for the
applicable SIP for the affected area. The April 2014 SO<INF>2</INF>
Guidance also notes that a separate actuals-based modeling to support a
redesignation request is not necessary if an attainment determination
was made based on allowables-based modeling and a demonstration of a
fully implemented control strategy has been provided.\2\ EPA's
redesignation proposal relies on enforceable limits, previously
approved as part of the area's attainment plan action and a report
included in the redesignation request containing results from stack
testing demonstrating compliance with enforceable SO<INF>2</INF>
emission limits. These stack test results were included in the docket
of this action. Modeling requirements and Indiana's modeling analysis,
as requested by the commenter, may be found in EPA's proposed
attainment plan approval (see 90 FR 25968, June 18, 2025) and
therefore, EPA does not find the comment to warrant any changes to this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA's Guidance for 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Nonattainment
Area State Implementation Plans (SIP) Submissions can be found at
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/guidance-1-hour-sulfur-dioxide-so2-nonattainment-area-state-implementation-plans-sip">https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/guidance-1-hour-sulfur-dioxide-so2-nonattainment-area-state-implementation-plans-sip</a>.
\2\ April 2014 Guidance, pg. 63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the comments related to the maintenance plan, such as
emission growth projections, verification of monitoring, and the
availability of quality assurance and quality control documentation of
the attainment demonstration and maintenance plan for Huntington County
area, EPA finds that Indiana has appropriately fulfilled its
maintenance plan obligations as required under CAA section 175A, 42
U.S.C. 7505A. To further clarify, the docket of this action contains
Indiana's redesignation request, which outlines Indiana's requirements
for verification of continued attainment and the requirements for
maintenance demonstration under section 175A. EPA determines that
Indiana adequately fulfilled these requirements through commitments to
annual emissions submittals that verify continued attainment of the
2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS and review of the projected emissions
inventory for the Huntington area.
As noted above, EPA adequately fulfilled its requirements under the
APA, included all appropriate documentation, and provided adequate time
for public comment.
Comment: Regarding the maintenance plan, two commenters note that
it does not: ``specify objective, near-term triggers tied to monitored
and/or modeled indicators''; identify or define concrete contingency
measures to take effect upon triggers; contain corrective actions and
deadlines including specific numeric concentrations or emissions
thresholds that would initiate enforcement; nor does it commit to
verification of continued ambient air quality monitoring to detect
local SO<INF>2</INF> hotspots, or contain a schedule for periodic
inventories or public reporting.
Response: EPA does not agree with the submitted comments. Unlike
CAA section 172(c)(9), 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(9), section 175A of the CAA
does not explicitly require that contingency measures must take effect
without further action by the air agency in order for the maintenance
plan to be approved. However, the maintenance plan's contingency plan
would become an enforceable part of the SIP and should ensure that
contingency measures are adopted and implemented as expeditiously as
practicable once they are triggered.\3\ In the ``General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990,'' published on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), EPA provides further
discussion of contingency measures for SO<INF>2</INF>. This guidance
states that in many cases, attainment revolves around compliance of a
single source or a small set of sources with emission limits shown to
provide for attainment. Although this guidance applies to contingency
measures under section
[[Page 913]]
172(c)(9), EPA applies a similar policy with respect to contingency
measures for SO<INF>2</INF> required in maintenance plans under section
175A(d). The requirement to submit contingency measures in accordance
with section 175A of the CAA can be adequately addressed for
SO<INF>2</INF> by the operation of a comprehensive enforcement
program,\4\ as stated in the proposed rule, which can quickly identify
and address sources that might be causing exceedances of the NAAQS.
Indiana satisfies contingency measure requirements under CAA section
175A that will promptly correct any violation of the 2010
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See April 2014 SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance, page 68.
\4\ See April 2014 SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance, page 41-42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA finds that the redesignation request appropriately identifies
objectives, triggers, and timelines for contingency measures to take
place. As stated in the redesignation request, contingency measures
include reporting of non-compliance, which if a violation is present,
triggers a 30-day evaluation period to determine the cause, followed by
a 30-day consultation period with the facility to develop operational
changes. According to Indiana's redesignation request, any changes
would be implemented within 18-24 months of the modeled violation. Any
necessary control measures will be subject to Indiana's administrative
and legal processes, including public hearing and other measures as
required by State law for rulemaking, permitting, and/or SIP revisions.
Further, Indiana relies on the enforceable emission control measures
set forth in Commissioner's Order 2023-Air-02, to be incorporated into
Isolatek International's (Isolatek) Part 70 Operating Permit, including
reporting and recordkeeping requirements and methods to determine
compliance. Therefore, EPA disagrees with commenters statements that
the State failed to identify appropriate contingency measure triggers
or verification of continued ambient air quality monitoring in the
Huntington County area.
Comment: The commenter requests that EPA repropose this rule to
incorporate a clear Incorporation by Reference section that includes
the maintenance plan or related State materials.
Response: This action does not include any new material for
Incorporation by Reference. Rather, EPA relies on the previously
approved and incorporated by reference Commissioner's Order 2023-Air-
02, which contains enforcement emissions limits and associated
requirements for Isolatek (90 FR 39130, August 14, 2025). All relevant
information is included in the docket of this action and has been made
available for public review.
Comment: Commenter notes that a lack of a SLAMS-equivalent ambient
SO<INF>2</INF> monitor in the nonattainment area suggests there is no
check on modeling assumptions or early warning of emission spikes. The
commenter requests the implementation and operation of an
SO<INF>2</INF> monitor within one year of redesignation to verify
modeled demonstrations, verify compliance, and enhance transparency.
Response: Based on the April 2014 SO<INF>2</INF> Guidance, in areas
where there are no air quality monitors located in the affected area,
EPA may make determinations of attainment based on a submitted modeled
demonstration, using allowable emissions, to show that the mix of
sources and enforceable measures and emission rates in an identified
area will not lead to a violation of the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
More information on the modeled demonstration can be found in the
proposed attainment approval (90 FR 25968, June 18, 2025) and will not
be restated here.
EPA's review of Indiana's redesignation and maintenance plan
request indicates that Indiana conducted allowables-based modeling to
show attainment of the NAAQS, previously approved (90 FR 39130, August
14, 2025), and included additional stack testing results to demonstrate
compliance with Commissioner's Order 2023-Air-02 that established
emissions limits and compliance requirements for SO<INF>2</INF> for the
Isolatek facility. Additionally, Indiana commits to annual emissions
reporting of the Isolatek facility as part of Indiana's submittal of
ongoing data requirements rule reporting subject to public notice, to
provide ongoing verification of attainment. Further, Indiana has a
fully approved New Source Review (NSR) program (94 FR 24837, October 7,
1994), including requirements to assess the impacts of any plans to
construct or resume operations of an emission unit on maintaining NAAQS
attainment. EPA finds these measures sufficient to ensure ongoing
compliance.
Comment: Commenter states the maintenance plan does not present
dispersion modeling for a future maintenance year, citing the Calcagni
Memo maintenance planning guidance.
Response: EPA does not find the comment to be accurate. EPA's
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment'', also known as the Calcagni Memo, describes two ways for a
State to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS following the
redesignation of the area: (1) the State can show that future emissions
of a pollutant will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory,
or (2) the State can provide modeling to show that the future mix of
sources and emission rates will not cause a violation of the NAAQS. As
stated in the proposed rule (90 FR 46124 at 46127), Indiana's
redesignation request contains an emissions inventory for 2035, the
maintenance year, that does not show any increases in maximum allowable
emissions from the attainment year, meeting the requirements laid out
in the Calcagni Memo.
Comment: Commenter expresses concern over the lack of assurance
that other existing or future stationary sources will remain within
acceptable SO<INF>2</INF> levels, beyond the Isolatek facility. The
commenter requests for ``a mechanism to track, evaluate, and control
unanticipated emission increases'' to ensure continued attainment.
Response: The CAA requires States to have an active NSR and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting programs for
any new construction or any new modification to a stationary source. As
a maintenance area, the Huntington area will be subject to NSR and PSD
permitting programs to address any potential violations or exceedances
of the NAAQS. Indiana's SIP approved programs for NSR and PSD (94 FR
24837, October 7, 1994)--as stated in the proposed rulemaking--include
requirements to assess the impacts of any potential new source
construction or modifications, and requirements applicable to resume
operations of an emission unit on maintaining NAAQS attainment.
Additionally, Indiana has shown that it maintains an active enforcement
program to ensure ongoing compliance with these requirements. To
provide ongoing verification of attainment, Indiana commits to annual
emissions reporting of the Isolatek facility as part of Indiana's
submittal of ongoing data requirements rule reporting subject to public
notice as previously noted. EPA finds that Indiana provided appropriate
assurances to maintain attainment of the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
Comment: Commenter requests EPA to not approve the redesignation
and maintenance plan due to a ``probably inaccurate model using
dispersion to dilute SO<INF>2</INF>'' that is likely to lead to more
air pollution, the burden to the American taxpayer due to the costs
associated with deregulation, and the notion that this rule ``appears
to be a political and corrupt move because of
[[Page 914]]
the failed trade war, and [the] tariff tax [that] has destroyed
possibly forever America's agribusiness and free trade capital.''
Response: Modeling used to support the redesignation to attainment
for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS follows the appropriate modeling
requirements as described in appendix W to 40 CFR part 51. A more in-
depth analysis may be found in EPA's proposed attainment plan approval
(90 FR 25968, June 18, 2025) and in Indiana's modeling report included
as Attachment D of the submitted redesignation request. EPA finds that
the modeling demonstrates attainment of the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
and does not anticipate an increase in air pollution.
EPA does not find the ``costs associated with deregulation''
explanation to be relevant to this action. This action is approving a
redesignation to attainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS,
indicating cleaner air for the population of the Huntington area and a
plan to ensure future maintenance of the standard. Further, this action
is in accordance with CAA actions codified in 40 CFR part 52 and not
relevant to trade wars or tariff taxes as the commenter suggests.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving redesignation of the Huntington area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS in
accordance with Indiana's July 30, 2024, request. EPA determined the
area is attaining the 2010 SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS and that the
improvement is due to permanent and enforceable SO<INF>2</INF> emission
reductions in the area. Finally, EPA is approving Indiana's maintenance
plan as part of Indiana's federally enforceable SIP to ensure the
Huntington area will continue to maintain attainment of the 2010
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d) of the APA, this action shall
become effective immediately upon publication. The immediate effective
date for this action is authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
Section 553(d)(1) of the APA provides that final rules shall not
become effective until 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register ``except . . . a substantive rule which grants or recognizes
an exemption or relieves a restriction.'' The purpose of this provision
is to ``give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior before the final rule takes effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed.
Commc'n Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United
States v. Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting
legislative history). However, when the agency grants or recognizes an
exemption or relieves a restriction, affected parties do not need a
reasonable time to adjust because the effect is not adverse. EPA has
determined that this rule relieves a restriction because this rule
relieves sources in the area of Nonattainment NSR permitting
requirements; instead, upon the effective date of this action, sources
will be subject to less restrictive PSD permitting requirements. For
this reason, EPA finds that under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) it is appropriate
for this action to become effective on the date of publication of this
action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065,
February 6, 2025) because SIP actions are exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866;
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
<bullet> Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a State program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian Tribe has
demonstrated that a Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have Tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 10, 2026. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2). 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: December 29, 2025.
Anne Vogel,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40 CFR part 52 and 81
is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.770, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry for ``Huntington County 2010 Sulfur
[[Page 915]]
Dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) Maintenance Plan'' at the end to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved--Indiana Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title Indiana date EPA approval Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Huntington County 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 07/30/2024 01/9/2026, 90 FR [Insert Federal
Maintenance Plan. Register page where the
document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
4. Section 81.315 is amended in the table entitled ``Indiana--2010
Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS [Primary]'' by revising the entry for
``Huntington, IN'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.315 Indiana.
* * * * *
Indiana--2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS
[Primary]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation
Designated Area \1\ -------------------------------------------
Date \2\ Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huntington, IN 01/9/2026, 90 FR Attainment.
Huntington County (part)... [Insert Federal
Huntington Township........ Register page where
the document
begins].
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise
specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian
country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in
the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in
the designation area is not a determination that the state has
regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
\2\ This date is April 9, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-00246 Filed 1-8-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on January 9, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.