40 C.F.R. § 52.241

Inspection and maintenance program

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) [Reserved]

(b) Approval. On June 5, 2009, the California Air Resources Board submitted a revision to the California Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program (2009 I/M Revision) to satisfy the requirements for basic and enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) in applicable ozone nonattainment areas. On October 28, 2009, the California Air Resources Board amended the 2009 I/M Revision to include revised enhanced performance program evaluations for six nonattainment areas. Approved elements of the 2009 I/M Revision, as amended on October 28, 2009, include a discussion of each of the required design elements of the I/M program; description of the current geographic coverage of the program; I/M-related statutes and regulations; enhanced I/M performance standard evaluations for the urbanized areas within six California ozone nonattainment areas (South Coast Air Basin, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Metro, Coachella Valley, Ventura County, and Western Mojave Desert); basic I/M performance standard evaluation for the urbanized area within the San Francisco Bay Area ozone nonattainment area; and emission analyzer specifications and test procedures, including BAR-97 specifications. The 2009 I/M Revision, as amended on October 28, 2009, meets the requirements of sections 182(a)(2)(B) and 182(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S and is approved as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan.

[75 FR 38026, July 1, 2010]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1976–1976 · leading case: City of Santa Rosa v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 534 F.2d 150 (9th Cir. 1976).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Santa Rosa v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 534 F.2d 150 (9th Cir. 1976). · cites it 7× “The State of California, the cities of Burbank, Los Angeles, and San Jose, and Pacific Legal Foundation indicated that the only remaining issue was the validity of the gasoline limitation regulation, 40 C.F.R. § 52.241 . All other petitions for review were dismissed.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.