C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER N—EFFLUENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS › PART 434—COAL MINING POINT SOURCE CATEGORY BPT, BAT, BCT LIMITATIONS AND NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS › Subpart F—Miscellaneous Provisions

40 C.F.R. § 434.61

Commingling of waste streams

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Where waste streams from any facility covered by this part are combined for treatment or discharge with waste streams from another facility covered by this part, the concentration of each pollutant in the combined discharge may not exceed the most stringent limitations for that pollutant applicable to any component waste stream of the discharge.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2004–2006 · leading case: Citizens Coal Council & Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 447 F.3d 879 (6th Cir. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Citizens Coal Council & Kentucky Resources Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 447 F.3d 879 (6th Cir. 2006). · cites it 3× “epted and Commingled Discharges Petitioners also complain that the Final Rule ignores the language and intent of the Rahall Amendment by requiring a pre-existing discharge that is “intercepted by active mining or that is commingled with waste streams from active mining areas for…”
Citizens Coal Council v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 385 F.3d 969 (6th Cir. 2004). “40 C.F.R. § 434.61 states: Where waste streams from any facility covered by this part are combined for treatment or discharge with waste streams from another facility covered by this part, the concentration of each pollutant in the combined discharge may not exceed the most…”
Citizens Coal v. EPA (6th Cir. 2006). · cites it 3× “ed and Commingled Discharges Petitioners also complain that the Final Rule ignores the language and intent of the Rahall Amendment by requiring a pre-existing discharge that is “intercepted by active mining or that is commingled with waste streams from active mining areas for…”
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.