It is declared to be the public policy in the state of Rhode Island to preserve, protect,
and improve the air resources of the state to promote the public health, welfare,
and safety, to prevent injury or detriment to human, plant, and animal life, physical
property and other resources, and to foster the comfort and convenience of the state’s
inhabitants. The director is authorized to exercise all powers, direct or incidental,
necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter to assure that the state of Rhode
Island complies with the federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq., and retains maximum control under this chapter, and receives all desired
federal grants, aid, and other benefits.
Notes of Decisions
Durfee v. Ocean State Steel, Inc., 636 A.2d 698 (R.I. 1994).
“General Laws 1956 (1989 Reenactment) § 23-23-2 provides that “[i]t is hereby declared to be the public policy in the state of Rhode Island to preserve, protect, and improve the air resources of the state so as to promote the public health, welfare, and safety, to prevent injury…”
Rhode Island Cogeneration Assocs. v. City of East Providence, 728 F. Supp. 828 (D.R.I. 1990).
· cites it 2× “R.I.Gen.Laws § 23-23-2. The mandate to the state agencies has been carried out through detailed laws and regulations that establish standards, require permits for polluting enterprises, monitor emissions, and set up enforcement and punitive mechanisms for those who are not in…”
Keeney v. Vinagro, 656 A.2d 973 (R.I. 1995).
“The trial justice specifically held that “[t]he director had the power and the duty to investigate the conditions reported to [his] department concerning the defendants’ activities on the premises in question,” pursuant to § 23-23-2(1) and (2). Thus, he ruled, the director did…”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 23-23-2(1) — 1 case
Keeney v. Vinagro, 656 A.2d 973 (R.I. 1995).
“The trial justice specifically held that “[t]he director had the power and the duty to investigate the conditions reported to [his] department concerning the defendants’ activities on the premises in question,” pursuant to § 23-23-2(1) and (2). Thus, he ruled, the director did…”
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.