Search for: "Direct Energy Services, LLC v. Public Utilities Regulatory Authority"
Results 21 - 31
of 31
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Oct 2017, 1:01 am
Thus, the agency’s determination that there was continuing utility to the 2006 decision and related environmental analysis was proper. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 pm
Landfill gas collected by the separate Middlesex County Utilities Authority (MCUA) and Edgeboro Disposal Inc. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 11:15 am
Draper Energy, which owned the Snack Corner Mobil Station, and Energy North Inc., which operated the service station, failed to put in place a spill prevention plan and illegally discharged diesel fuel, according to a Complaint that had been filed by EPA’s New England office in September 2009. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:28 pm
The petitioners argued that there were unusual circumstances due to “the inherently noxious and controversial nature of a portion of Planned Parenthood’s services” which would cause significant environme [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 3:37 pm
Custom Air, LLC, of Louisville, Miss., was hired to spray Quilt fungicide over 120 acres of corn in a field owned by Jeff Sanderman, of Decorah, Iowa, on August 12, 2009, according to an administrative consent agreement and final order filed by EPA Region 7 in Kansas City, Kan. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 7:41 pm
As the City’s ordinance did not give the City authority to mitigate environmental impacts not otherwise associated with design features, the appellate court ruled that the exemption was appropriate, following the logic in Bowman v. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 9:08 am
The utility will also pay up to $100,000 for consultants – picked jointly by the utility and the activists — to critique the plan and advise the activists about any new problems. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 8:43 am
But his administration’s decision on this case, Connecticut v. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
County of Butte v. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
County of Butte v. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 2:46 pm
ClientEarth asserts that Shell’s board, made up of 13 executive and non-executive directors, has mismanaged the company’s climate risk through adopting an energy strategy that is inconsistent with its target to “become a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050” and the Paris Agreement. [read post]
