Search for: "South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Mar 2015, 7:55 pm
In 2011, the South Coast Air Quality Management District adopted Rule 317, which imposes fees on certain programs aimed... [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 9:00 am
In the case environmental groups challenge a rule of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. [read post]
5 Aug 2011, 8:30 am
Southern California Air Quality Management District, 2011 W.L. 2557246 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), the National Resources Defense Council (“NRDC”) sought to call the Southern California Air Quality Management District (“SCAQMD”) to account for purportedly using invalid “offsets” for emissions increases resulting from new stationary sources. [read post]
21 Apr 2020, 1:11 pm
South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310 (“ConocoPhillips”); Neighbors for Smart Rail v. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 3:40 pm
Under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the District is responsible for developing a plan that ensures new emission increases are offset by reductions. [read post]
21 May 2015, 9:00 am
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its failure to act on the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) plan to reduce particulate matter, or soot. [read post]
5 Nov 2011, 3:00 pm
Bandza, In Brief, South Coast Air Quality Management District v. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 10:03 am
Supreme Court in Decker v. [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 8:06 am
Arguing on behalf of the South Coast Air Quality. . . [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 10:47 pm
. - Chris Anderson, South Coast Today, March 4, 2010 City officials are pushing for the remaining funds in the New Bedford Harbor trust to be allocated to city projects, arguing that the money should be spent as close as possible to where the damage from the long-running contamination of the harbor occurred. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 9:11 pm
Click Here Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 11:15 am
Department of Justice and the South Coast Air Quality Management District announced that Lifoam Industries, Inc. will pay $450,000 in fines, claiming the company violated the federal Clean Air Act and state air quality laws at its polystyrene manufacturing facility at 2340 E. 52 Street in Vernon, Calif. [read post]
3 May 2010, 9:30 pm
– EPA News Release, April 30, 2010 EPA Region 7 and GSA Heartland today signed an Environmental Working Agreement that outlines a plan to further investigate and manage environmental conditions at GSA-managed facilities within the Bannister Federal Complex in Kansas City, Mo. [read post]
31 Jan 2010, 7:16 pm
(Hydro) to resolve violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Clean Air Act CAA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and their implementing regulations at 16 facilities listed below: 249 South 51st Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85043; 100 Gus Hipp Blvd., Rockledge, FL 32955–4701; 200 Riviera Blvd., St. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 9:24 am
Click Here DECISIONS Arkema, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 3:37 pm
District Court in Hammond that Jupiter had violated the Clean Air Act. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 7:42 am
DECISIONS Sackett v. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 pm
– Department of Justice News Release, August 9, 2010 The second of two agreements to resolve longstanding problems with landfill gas emissions and their negative impacts on air quality at the Middlesex County and Edgeboro landfills in New Jersey has been reached to bring them into compliance with the Clean Air Act, the Justice Department and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 9:08 am
The company must also conduct additional monitoring and reporting of stormwater discharges, hire personnel certified in stormwater management to oversee compliance with stormwater permits, and provide training in stormwater management for all operational employees. [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 4:06 pm
“The EPA works closely with local air quality agencies to enforce existing regulations, and remind companies such as Lennar that not complying with the law will not be tolerated. [read post]
