(a) (Applicable to State programs, see 40 CFR 123.25 (NPDES), 145.11 (UIC), and 271.14 (RCRA).)At the time that any final permit decision is issued under § 124.15, the Director shall issue a response to comments. States are only required to issue a response to comments when a final permit is issued. This response shall:
(1) Specify which provisions, if any, of the draft permit have been changed in the final permit decision, and the reasons for the change; and
(2) Briefly describe and respond to all significant comments on the draft permit raised during the public comment period, or during any hearing.
(b) For EPA-issued permits, any documents cited in the response to comments shall be included in the administrative record for the final permit decision as defined in § 124.18. If new points are raised or new material supplied during the public comment period, EPA may document its response to those matters by adding new materials to the administrative record.
[48 FR 14264, Apr. 1, 1983, as amended at 89 FR 103501, Dec. 18, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Hughey v. Gwinnett Cnty., 609 S.E.2d 324 (Ga. 2004).
· cites it 2× “If EPD wishes to issue a final permit that differs from a draft permit, the proper requirements are set forth in 40 CFR § 124.17 (a)(1); in such a circumstance, EPD is required to specify in the final permit "which provisions, if any, of the draft permit have been changed in the…”
Adams v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency, 38 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 1994).
· cites it 2× “Following the public comment period, the Agency issued a “Response to Comments” as required by 40 C.F.R. § 124.17 . This regulation requires that the agency “[b]riefly describe and respond to all significant comments on the draft *53 permit .”
Sierra Club v. Moser, 310 P.3d 360 (Kan. 2013).
“40 C.F.R. § 124.17 (a) (2012); see In the Matter of Atochem N.”
Dept. of Env. v. Assateague Coastal Trust, 299 A.3d 619 (Md. 2023).
“The Director must respond to significant comments received during the comment period, as provided in 40 CFR 124.17, and, if necessary, require the CAFO owner or operator to revise the nutrient management plan in order to be granted permit coverage.”
Gwinnett Cnty. v. Lake Lanier Ass'n, 593 S.E.2d 678 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “06 (7) ( 40 CFR § 124.17 (a) (1)); Adams v. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 38 F3d 43, 51 (1st Cir.”
LeBlanc v. Env't Prot. Agency, 310 F. App'x 770 (6th Cir. 2009).
“40 C.F.R. § 124.17 . To obtain review by the Board, a petitioner is required to show the permit is based on “a finding of fact or conclusion of law which is clearly erroneous” or rests on “an exercise of discretion or an important policy consideration which the Environmental…”
Citizens for Clean Air v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 959 F.2d 839 (9th Cir. 1992).
· cites it 2× “We think this issue turns on whether the agency properly relied on the “significant comment” threshold test set forth at 40 C.F.R. § 124.17 (a)(2) in refusing to consider recycling as a possible best available control technology.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council v. The Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 140644 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
“" 40 C.F.R. § 124.17 (a)(2) (2014). ¶ 37 " '[C]omments must be significant enough to step over a threshold requirement of materiality before any lack of agency response or consideration becomes of concern.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council v. The Pollution Control Bd., 2015 IL App (4th) 140644 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
“” 40 C.F.R. § 124.17 (a)(2) (2014). ¶ 37 “ ‘[C]omments must be significant enough to step over a threshold requirement of materiality before any lack of agency response or consideration becomes of concern.”
Opinion No. (1983) (Mo. Att'y Gen. 1983).
· cites it 3× “15 , regarding notification of the issuance of permits, and 40 CFR 124.17 , regarding response to comments submitted on the tentative decision, not to require full public notice, and therefore not to be subject to 40 CFR 124.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 124.17(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.