42 U.S.C. § 7651a
Definitions
Part B of title III of the Act, referred to in par. (11), means title III of the Clean Air Act, act July 14, 1955, ch. 360, as added, which is classified to subchapter III of this chapter, but title III does not contain parts. For provisions of the Clean Air Act relating to permits, see subchapter V (§ 7661 et seq.) of this chapter.
Another section 402 of act
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1992–2008 · leading case: Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency
Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16). Once the allowances determined by the formula were aggregated for the 2,200 units in question, they could then be reduced across the board so that they would add up to only the permissible 8.”
Appalachian Power Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, Public Service Electric & Gas Company, Intervenors (1998)
“Because a Phase I “affected unit” (defined as “a unit that is subject to emission reduction requirements or limitations under this subchapter,” 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(2) (1994)) must come into compliance with sulfur dioxide emissions limits by January 1, 1995, and because a Phase II…”
Ormet Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (1996)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27); 40 C.F.R. § 72.2 (defining owner to include a party with a life-of-the-unit contractual arrangement).”
American Municipal Power-Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“” See Webster’s Third International Dictionary 2373 (1993). Under petitioner’s definition of the term, small utility units would fall within the thermal energy exception because their units, like all those subject to Title IV, literally produce “heat.”
General Motors Corp. v. Indianapolis Power & Light Co. (1995)
“42 U.S.C. §§ 7651a(@®), 7651b. If the source emits fewer tons, it has excess allowances that may be sold; if it emits more tons, it may achieve compliance in whole or in part by purchasing more allowances.”
Michigan v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(C). However, two months after the promulgation of the rule, EPA *692 redefined an EGU as a unit that serves a “large” generator (greater than 25MW) that sells electricity.”
North Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency (2008)
“Title IV exempts EGUs that are “simple combustion turbines, or units which serve a generator with a nameplate capacity of 25 Mwe [megawatt electrical] or less,” 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(8), those that are not fossil fuel-fired, id.”
Indianapolis Power & Light Company v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Defense Fund, Interve (1995)
“42 U.S.C. §§ 7651a(3), 7651b(b). Beginning in 1995, the emissions from each Phase I unit may not exceed the number of allowances that unit holds.”
Clean Air Markets Group v. Pataki (2003)
“§ 7651b, and each allowance authorizes the utility to emit one ton of S02, see 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3). Every successive year, the total cap on allowable S02 emissions is reduced, and fewer allowances are allocated.”
Ormet Primary Aluminum Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (2000)
“More particularly, the district court concluded that the 1966 Power Agreement did not make Ormet a part owner because Ormet did not purchase power under a “life-of-the-unit, firm power contractual arrangement” as defined by § 402(27) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27).…”
Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2007)
“IV, § 402(3) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3)). In 1999 Entergy filed with the Commission a proposed amendment to the System Agreement designed to “ensure[ ] that each Entergy Operating Company will be compensated for any sulfur dioxide emission allowances used to generate…”
Monongahela Power Co. v. Reilly (1992)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3). . Existing sources are allocated allowances based upon their historic fuel use and the emissions limitations set forth in Title IV.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(15) — 1 case
American Municipal Power-Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“” See Webster’s Third International Dictionary 2373 (1993). Under petitioner’s definition of the term, small utility units would fall within the thermal energy exception because their units, like all those subject to Title IV, literally produce “heat.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16) — 1 case
Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16). Once the allowances determined by the formula were aggregated for the 2,200 units in question, they could then be reduced across the board so that they would add up to only the permissible 8.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(C) — 2 cases
Michigan v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(C). However, two months after the promulgation of the rule, EPA *692 redefined an EGU as a unit that serves a “large” generator (greater than 25MW) that sells electricity.”
American Municipal Power-Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“” See Webster’s Third International Dictionary 2373 (1993). Under petitioner’s definition of the term, small utility units would fall within the thermal energy exception because their units, like all those subject to Title IV, literally produce “heat.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(18) — 1 case
Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16). Once the allowances determined by the formula were aggregated for the 2,200 units in question, they could then be reduced across the board so that they would add up to only the permissible 8.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(2) — 1 case
Appalachian Power Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, Public Service Electric & Gas Company, Intervenors (1998)
“Because a Phase I “affected unit” (defined as “a unit that is subject to emission reduction requirements or limitations under this subchapter,” 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(2) (1994)) must come into compliance with sulfur dioxide emissions limits by January 1, 1995, and because a Phase II…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27) — 2 cases
Ormet Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (1996)
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27); 40 C.F.R. § 72.2 (defining owner to include a party with a life-of-the-unit contractual arrangement).”
Ormet Primary Aluminum Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (2000)
“More particularly, the district court concluded that the 1966 Power Agreement did not make Ormet a part owner because Ormet did not purchase power under a “life-of-the-unit, firm power contractual arrangement” as defined by § 402(27) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27).…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27)(A) — 1 case
Ormet Primary Aluminum Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (2000)
“More particularly, the district court concluded that the 1966 Power Agreement did not make Ormet a part owner because Ormet did not purchase power under a “life-of-the-unit, firm power contractual arrangement” as defined by § 402(27) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27).…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27)(B) — 1 case
Ormet Primary Aluminum Corp. v. Ohio Power Co. (2000)
“More particularly, the district court concluded that the 1966 Power Agreement did not make Ormet a part owner because Ormet did not purchase power under a “life-of-the-unit, firm power contractual arrangement” as defined by § 402(27) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(27).…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3) — 4 cases
Clean Air Markets Group v. Pataki (2003)
“§ 7651b, and each allowance authorizes the utility to emit one ton of S02, see 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3). Every successive year, the total cap on allowable S02 emissions is reduced, and fewer allowances are allocated.”
Indianapolis Power & Light Company v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Defense Fund, Interve (1995)
“42 U.S.C. §§ 7651a(3), 7651b(b). Beginning in 1995, the emissions from each Phase I unit may not exceed the number of allowances that unit holds.”
Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2007)
“IV, § 402(3) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3)). In 1999 Entergy filed with the Commission a proposed amendment to the System Agreement designed to “ensure[ ] that each Entergy Operating Company will be compensated for any sulfur dioxide emission allowances used to generate…”
Monongahela Power Co. v. Reilly (1992)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(3). . Existing sources are allocated allowances based upon their historic fuel use and the emissions limitations set forth in Title IV.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(4)(A) — 2 cases
Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16). Once the allowances determined by the formula were aggregated for the 2,200 units in question, they could then be reduced across the board so that they would add up to only the permissible 8.”
Indianapolis Power & Light Company v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Defense Fund, Interve (1995)
“42 U.S.C. §§ 7651a(3), 7651b(b). Beginning in 1995, the emissions from each Phase I unit may not exceed the number of allowances that unit holds.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(4)(C) — 1 case
Texas Municipal Power Agency v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“42 U.S.C. § 7651a(16). Once the allowances determined by the formula were aggregated for the 2,200 units in question, they could then be reduced across the board so that they would add up to only the permissible 8.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(8) — 3 cases
North Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency (2008)
“Title IV exempts EGUs that are “simple combustion turbines, or units which serve a generator with a nameplate capacity of 25 Mwe [megawatt electrical] or less,” 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(8), those that are not fossil fuel-fired, id.”
American Municipal Power-Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency (1996)
“” See Webster’s Third International Dictionary 2373 (1993). Under petitioner’s definition of the term, small utility units would fall within the thermal energy exception because their units, like all those subject to Title IV, literally produce “heat.”
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.