(a) After the effective date of any standard, no owner or operator shall construct or modify any stationary source subject to that standard without first obtaining written approval from the Administrator in accordance with this subpart, except under an exemption granted by the President under section 112(c)(2) of the Act. Sources, the construction or modification of which commenced after the publication date of the standards proposed to be applicable to the sources, are subject to this prohibition.
(b) After the effective date of any standard, no owner or operator shall operate a new stationary source subject to that standard in violation of the standard, except under an exemption granted by the President under section 112(c)(2) of the Act.
(c) Ninety days after the effective date of any standard, no owner or operator shall operate any existing source subject to that standard in violation of the standard, except under a waiver granted by the Administrator under this part or under an exemption granted by the President under section 112(c)(2) of the Act.
(d) No owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall fail to report, revise reports, or report source test results as required under this part.
[38 FR 8826, Apr. 6, 1973, as amended at 50 FR 46291, Nov. 7, 1985]
Notes of Decisions
Barrett Refining Corp. v. Mississippi Comm'n on Env't Quality, 751 So. 2d 1104 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “1 and NESHAPS General Provisions, 40 C.F.R. 61.05 and 61.07 for operating the facility without applying for and obtaining a construction permit for changes in operation that resulted in increased emissions subjecting the facility to NESHAP Subpart J— Equipment Leaks for Benzene.”
United States v. Hoechst Celanese Corp., 128 F.3d 216 (4th Cir. 1997).
“See 40 C.F.R. § 61.05 (c) (1996). Since HCC lacked fair notice of EPA’s interpretation at the time of promúlgation of the benzene NESHAP, the ninety-day period does not commence until HCC received actual notice of that interpretation in August 1989.”
United States v. Hoechst Celanese, No. 96-2003 (4th Cir. Dec. 4, 1997).
“See 40 C.F.R. § 61.05 (c) (1996). Since HCC lacked fair notice of EPA's interpretation at the time of promulgation of the benzene NESHAP, the ninety-day period does not commence until HCC received actual notice of that interpretation in August 1989.”
40 C.F.R. § 61.05(b): 1 case
Barrett Refining Corp. v. Mississippi Comm'n on Env't Quality, 751 So. 2d 1104 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
“1 and NESHAPS General Provisions, 40 C.F.R. 61.05 and 61.07 for operating the facility without applying for and obtaining a construction permit for changes in operation that resulted in increased emissions subjecting the facility to NESHAP Subpart J— Equipment Leaks for Benzene.”
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.