40 C.F.R. § 82.174

Prohibitions

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

(a) No person may introduce a new substitute into interstate commerce before the expiration of 90 days after a notice is initially submitted to EPA under § 82.176(a).

(b) No person may use a substitute which a person knows or has reason to know was manufactured, processed or imported in violation of the regulations in this subpart, or knows or has reason to know was manufactured, processed or imported in violation of any use restriction in the acceptability determination, after the effective date of any rulemaking imposing such restrictions.

(c) No person may use a substitute without adhering to any use restrictions set by the acceptability decision, after the effective date of any rulemaking imposing such restrictions.

(d) No person may use a substitute after the effective date of any rulemaking adding such substitute to the list of unacceptable substitutes.

(e) Rules Stayed for Reconsideration. Notwithstanding any other provision of this subpart, the effectiveness of subpart G is stayed from December 8, 1994, to March 8, 1995, only as applied to use of substitutes for export.

[59 FR 13147, Mar. 18, 1994, as amended at 59 FR 63256, Dec. 8, 1994; 60 FR 3303, Jan. 13, 1995]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1997–2020 · leading case: Natural Resources Defense Council v. Andrew Wheeler

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Andrew Wheeler (2020) cadc “at 18 ,433 (quoting 40 C.F.R. § 82.174 (the 5 1994 Framework Rule)).”

Honeywell International Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency (2004) cadc “See 40 C.F.R. § 82.174 (a). This would likely lead to more widespread interim use of these environmentally harmful chemicals than the much more limited use EPA authorized in the rule on review.”

Oz Technology Incorporated v. Environmental Protection Agency (1997) cadc “See 40 C.F.R. § 82.174 (1996). Subsequently, EPA rejected a request by OZ, filed pursuant to regulations implementing section 612(d) of the Act, seeking to remove HC-12a from the list of unacceptable substitutes and add it to the list of acceptable substitutes.”

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.