C.F.R. » Title 40 » CHAPTER I—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY › SUBCHAPTER C—AIR PROGRAMS › PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS › Subpart A—Air Emissions Reporting Requirements

40 C.F.R. § 51.10

[Reserved]

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1973–1974 · leading case: South Terminal Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Massachusetts Port Auth. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Gulf Oil Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Texaco, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Fitz-Inn Auto Parks, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Marvin A. Meyers, as He is President of Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Associated Dry Good Corp. Etc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 504 F.2d 646 (1st Cir. 1974).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
South Terminal Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Massachusetts Port Auth. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Gulf Oil Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Texaco, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Fitz-Inn Auto Parks, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Marvin A. Meyers, as He is President of Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Associated Dry Good Corp. Etc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 504 F.2d 646 (1st Cir. 1974). “' 40 C.F.R. 51.10(a). See also 51.2(b), (d) We disagree with the view of one commentator that the concern expressed in the guidelines is 'inappropriate' since EPA may not consider economic costs in setting the primary national ambient air quality standards.”
South Terminal Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 504 F.2d 646 (1st Cir. 1974). “” 40 C.F.R. § 51.10 (a). See also § 51.2(b), (d).”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 478 F.2d 875 (1st Cir. 1973). · cites it 2× “regulations 40 C.F.R. §§ 51.10 (e) and 51.11(a)(6). 17 Regulation 14 of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health Air Pollution rules states: Upon request by the Department through direct communication or public notice, any person who owns or operates a stationary emission…”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 489 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1974). “See also 40 C.F.R. § 51.10 (e), -.11(a)(6) (1972).”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 489 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1974). “21 See also 40 C.F.R. 51.10(e), -.11(a)(6) (1972) 22 Section 1857h-2(a) provides: (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), any person may commence a civil action on his own behalf-- (1) against any person (including (i) the United States, and (ii) any other governmental…”
— 40 C.F.R. § 51.10(a) — 1 case
South Terminal Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Massachusetts Port Auth. v. Env't Prot. Agency, & Russell E. Train, Adm'r, Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Gulf Oil Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Texaco, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Fitz-Inn Auto Parks, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Marvin A. Meyers, as He is President of Pilgrim Parking Inc., a Massachusetts Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, Associated Dry Good Corp. Etc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 504 F.2d 646 (1st Cir. 1974). “' 40 C.F.R. 51.10(a). See also 51.2(b), (d) We disagree with the view of one commentator that the concern expressed in the guidelines is 'inappropriate' since EPA may not consider economic costs in setting the primary national ambient air quality standards.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 51.10(e) — 1 case
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 489 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1974). “21 See also 40 C.F.R. 51.10(e), -.11(a)(6) (1972) 22 Section 1857h-2(a) provides: (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), any person may commence a civil action on his own behalf-- (1) against any person (including (i) the United States, and (ii) any other governmental…”
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.