Environmental Administrative Decisions: Decisions of the United States Environmental Protection AgencyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
Page 39
... DECISION Decided November 18 , 1998 Syllabus This is an appeal by B & R Oil Company , Inc. ( “ B & R ” ) , a petroleum marketing firm based in Granger , Indiana , from an Initial Decision by Administrative Law Judge Carl C. Charneski ...
... DECISION Decided November 18 , 1998 Syllabus This is an appeal by B & R Oil Company , Inc. ( “ B & R ” ) , a petroleum marketing firm based in Granger , Indiana , from an Initial Decision by Administrative Law Judge Carl C. Charneski ...
Page 41
... Initial Decision by Administrative Law Judge Carl C. Charneski ( " Presiding Officer " ) arising out of an action by Complainant EPA Region V ( “ Region V " or " Region " ) alleging violations by B & R of regulations at 40 C.F.R. part ...
... Initial Decision by Administrative Law Judge Carl C. Charneski ( " Presiding Officer " ) arising out of an action by Complainant EPA Region V ( “ Region V " or " Region " ) alleging violations by B & R of regulations at 40 C.F.R. part ...
Page 48
... Initial Decision . As noted before , B & R contests the Initial Decision on the following grounds : ( 1 ) The Presiding Officer erred in finding B & R liable for violating the financial responsibility regulations at 40 C.F.R. part 280 ...
... Initial Decision . As noted before , B & R contests the Initial Decision on the following grounds : ( 1 ) The Presiding Officer erred in finding B & R liable for violating the financial responsibility regulations at 40 C.F.R. part 280 ...
Page 56
... Initial Decision at 11. As explained by the Presiding Officer , B & R's attempts at private coverage were limited to inquiries on insurance quotes , and B & R did not even seek to obtain partial coverage , a factor that , though not a ...
... Initial Decision at 11. As explained by the Presiding Officer , B & R's attempts at private coverage were limited to inquiries on insurance quotes , and B & R did not even seek to obtain partial coverage , a factor that , though not a ...
Page 62
... initial decision , the Presiding Officer lowered the Region's assessed penalty from $ 76,601 to $ 60,000 , providing the following suc- cinct explanation : The bulk of this [ $ 60,000 ] penalty assessment is due to respondent's ...
... initial decision , the Presiding Officer lowered the Region's assessed penalty from $ 76,601 to $ 60,000 , providing the following suc- cinct explanation : The bulk of this [ $ 60,000 ] penalty assessment is due to respondent's ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
AAQ Report action Agency air quality air quality analysis alleged amended Appeal Brief AQMD AQMD's ARCO argues argument asbestos BACT determination Board CERCLA chemical civil penalty Clarksburg clear error Cogeneration combined cycle complaint compliance Corp deny review DOH's response draft permit emission limit enforcement Environmental EPA's EPCRA facility FIFRA filed Final Permit hazardous HELCO impact Initial Decision injection issue Knauf major stationary sources mineral oil monitoring NAAQS naphtha Newell NSR Manual operation penalty assessment Penalty Policy permit application permit condition permit decision Petitioners petitions for review pollutants Presiding Officer Presiding Officer's proposed PSD increment PSD permit PSD program public comment period raised reduction regarding Region's Response regulatory remand requirements Response to Comments Rio Mameyes SchoolCraft Self-Disclosure Policy Steeltech tanks tion U.S. EPA USTS violations Waimana WDNR