Environmental Administrative Decisions: Decisions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Volume 4 |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
Page 37
Petitioner's second argument is based more on practicality than on law or policy . Petitioner argues that section 401 of the Act enables States to fend for themselves against EPA - issued permits that might contain unwanted schedules of ...
Petitioner's second argument is based more on practicality than on law or policy . Petitioner argues that section 401 of the Act enables States to fend for themselves against EPA - issued permits that might contain unwanted schedules of ...
Page 43
MAC argues that an effluent limitation that directly limits turbidity is unnecessary because the limitation on settleable solids will control turbidity sufficiently to meet the water quality standard . This argument was raised and ...
MAC argues that an effluent limitation that directly limits turbidity is unnecessary because the limitation on settleable solids will control turbidity sufficiently to meet the water quality standard . This argument was raised and ...
Page 117
This argument does not establish grounds for reviewing the permit . ... Finally , the City argues that emissions limits necessary to protect human health and the environment should have been established prior to approval of the ...
This argument does not establish grounds for reviewing the permit . ... Finally , the City argues that emissions limits necessary to protect human health and the environment should have been established prior to approval of the ...
Page 122
D. * * * " Finally , the State argues that because of the permit's reliance on waste feed indicators rather than ... This argument seeks , in effect , to challenge the foundation of the Agency's regulations prescribing operating ...
D. * * * " Finally , the State argues that because of the permit's reliance on waste feed indicators rather than ... This argument seeks , in effect , to challenge the foundation of the Agency's regulations prescribing operating ...
Page 124
rected at the regulatory program itself , rather than the permit modification under consideration , the arguments are outside ... Mr. Kusic's argument that notice of the February 3 , 1992 modification was defective is without merit .
rected at the regulatory program itself , rather than the permit modification under consideration , the arguments are outside ... Mr. Kusic's argument that notice of the February 3 , 1992 modification was defective is without merit .
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accordance additional Administrator Agency alleged allow amended analysis Appeal application appropriate argues argument asserts authority basis Board Brief challenge Class Clean complaint compliance concerns conclude consider contain decision demonstration denied determination discharge discussed disposal draft permit effect effluent emissions Environmental established evidentiary hearing facility fact failed federal filed final granted hazardous waste impact implementing Initial interim issue letter limitations material matter ment Michigan modification motion necessary notice NPDES objections operation penalty period permit permit conditions permittee petition for review Petitioner Plant pollutants present Presiding Officer procedures proceeding proposed provides raised RCRA RCRA Appeal reasons record Region regulations relating remand Report requirements Response result revised rule specific standards submitted tion toxicity transformer treatment United violation waste
Popular passages
Page 354 - ... (A) cause, or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness; or (B) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, or disposed of. or otherwise managed.
Page 633 - First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.
Page 525 - If evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues made by the pleadings, the court may allow the pleadings to be amended and shall do so freely when the presentation of the merits of the action.
Page 331 - ... records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information...
Page 288 - best available control technology" means an emission limitation based on the maximum degree of reduction of each pollutant subject to regulation under this Act emitted from or which results from any major emitting facility, which the permitting authority, on a case-by-case basis, taking into account energy, environmental, and economic impacts and other costs, determines is achievable for such...
Page 531 - Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or in validity of the claim or its amount.
Page 607 - A thing is deemed to be affixed to land when it is attached to it by roots, as in the case of trees, vines, or shrubs; or imbedded in it, as in case of walls; or permanently resting upon it, as in the case of buildings; or permanently attached to what is thus permanent, as by means of cement, plaster, nails, bolts, or screws.
Page 56 - An employee shall avoid any action, whether or not specifically prohibited by this subpart, which might result in, or create the appearance of: (1) Using public office for private gain; (2) Giving preferential treatment to any person; (3) Impeding Government efficiency or economy; (4) Losing complete independence or impartiality; (5) Making a Government decision outside official channels; or (6) Affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of the Government.
Page 265 - ... In any case where the owner or operator of such facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Federal Land Manager, and the Federal Land Manager so certifies, that the emissions from such facility will have no adverse impact on the air quality-related values of such lands (including visibility) notwithstanding the fact that the change in air quality resulting from emissions from such facility will cause or contribute to concentrations which exceed the maximum allowable increases for class...
Page 327 - No agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains, unless disclosure of the record would be...
Bibliographic information
| Title | Environmental Administrative Decisions: Decisions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Volume 4 |
| Author | United States. Environmental Protection Agency |
| Contributors | United States. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of the Administrator, United States. Environmental Appeals Board |
| Publisher | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992 |
| Original from | the University of Michigan |
| Digitized | 9 Nov 2007 |
| ISBN | 0160482313, 9780160482311 |
| Export Citation | BiBTeX EndNote RefMan |