Environmental Administrative Decisions: Decisions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Volume 13U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006 |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
Page 14
... regarding the cost effec- tiveness of the alternative technologies are considered under step 4. Id . at B.31 - .46 . The purpose of step 4 of the analysis is to validate the suitability of the top control option identified , or provide ...
... regarding the cost effec- tiveness of the alternative technologies are considered under step 4. Id . at B.31 - .46 . The purpose of step 4 of the analysis is to validate the suitability of the top control option identified , or provide ...
Page 18
... regarding application of that policy in this case . See Brief of the EPA Office of Air and Radiation and Region V at 2-15 ( Mar. 7 , 2006 ) [ hereinafter " OAR's Brief " ] . OAR explains that the policy " reflects the Agency's ...
... regarding application of that policy in this case . See Brief of the EPA Office of Air and Radiation and Region V at 2-15 ( Mar. 7 , 2006 ) [ hereinafter " OAR's Brief " ] . OAR explains that the policy " reflects the Agency's ...
Page 24
... regarding the central purpose of the proposed Facility - production of electricity from a dedicated 30 - year supply of coal - is supported in part by the fact that Prairie State submitted the permit appli- cation for the coal mine and ...
... regarding the central purpose of the proposed Facility - production of electricity from a dedicated 30 - year supply of coal - is supported in part by the fact that Prairie State submitted the permit appli- cation for the coal mine and ...
Page 37
... regarding the comparable control effectiveness of IGCC to the technology IEPA selected for control of SO2 and NOx , the NSR Manual's guidance authorized IEPA to reject IGCC without the full cost - effectiveness analysis that would ...
... regarding the comparable control effectiveness of IGCC to the technology IEPA selected for control of SO2 and NOx , the NSR Manual's guidance authorized IEPA to reject IGCC without the full cost - effectiveness analysis that would ...
Page 38
... regarding two technologies that they argue should not have been eliminated from the BACT analysis for control- ling emissions from different parts of Prairie State's facility , and Petitioners raise concerns regarding whether the ...
... regarding two technologies that they argue should not have been eliminated from the BACT analysis for control- ling emissions from different parts of Prairie State's facility , and Petitioners raise concerns regarding whether the ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
administrative Agency Agency's air quality ALJ's alleged appeal application argument asbestos BACT analysis BACT limits Board Brief capacitors Christian County citing clear error coal compliance schedule concluded ConocoPhillips considered count D.C. Cir determination draft permit effluent limits emissions limits enforcement Environmental EPA's EPS's Euclid explained failed federal FIFRA filed Final Permit hazardous waste Howmet IEPA IEPA's IEPA's response impacts Indeck Init Initial Decision issue LTCP major stationary source Martex ment monitoring NAAQS NPDES NPDES permit NSR Manual OCS source PCB waste Penalty Policy permit decision permit issuer pesticide Petition Petitioners argue pollutant Prairie State's proposed Facility protection PSD permit public comment period RCRA record Region regulatory remand requirements Response to Comments Sierra Club SMRO specifically spent material tion U.S. EPA violations WASA water quality standards