I need help spotting the Issue-Rule-Application-Conclusion (IRAC) Analysis of the fact pattern below.I need to spot the:

Important Issue Identification

Important Law and Rule Identification

Application of Laws and Rules Discussion

Conclusion

Could someone help me recognize these please. Here is the fact pattern below:

The Fact Pattern

Assume that the State of Texas, in an attempt to clean up air pollution in Texas cities, passes a "Clean Air Act" that sets certain targets for air pollution in the cities, and generally puts enforcement for the requirements of the statute under the control of the Texas Air Quality Board, a five member commission whose members are appointed by the Governor.

The Clean Air Act not only establishes targets for the cities, it gives the Texas Air Quality Board the authority to establish certain penalties for cities that do not attain these air quality goals within certain time periods. Most importantly, the statute requires the Air Quality Board to create new permitting restrictions and requirements for cities that do not meet these goals that require new polluting facilities to meet higher air quality standards.

However, what actually constitutes "higher air quality standards" is not defined in the statute.

To implement these requirements, the Texas Air Quality Board passes new permitting regulations that essentially define "higher air quality standards" as a very minimal threshold - a less than 1% reduction over the current standard.

Environmental groups question these new regulations and whether the Texas Air Quality Board has gone far enough to meet the purpose, goals, and requirements of the Clean Air Act.

A court hearing has been scheduled solely to determine whether or not the court should grant deference to the Texas Air Quality Board's decisions and standards on this matter.The court is not hearing the merits of the claim (i.e., who should win). The court is only interested in how bound it is by the administrative body's rulings and regulations.

You have been asked to brief the judge (using standard IRAC analysis) as how it should proceed and how much weight it should give the administrative body's regulation.