Notes of Decisions
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
· cites it 26× “See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 8× “" 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a). These operating permit provisions, commonly referred to as Title V of the CAA, also specify that "[e]ach permit issued under this title shall include enforceable emission limitations and standards, a schedule of compliance, .”
United States Sugar Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 830 F.3d 579 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
· cites it 4× “See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. The EPA, however, can exempt an area source subcategory if it finds “that compliance with such requirements is impracticable, infeasible, or unnecessarily burdensome on such categories.”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
· cites it 19× “Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
Cal. Cmty. Against Toxics v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 934 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
· cites it 4× “7 (e), and state permitting authorities must provide for public comment and a hearing on all permit applications that they receive, 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(6). But what if a state permitting authority issues or denies a permit application on a ground that a regulated source, or a 1…”
New York v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 263 F. Supp. 2d 650 (W.D.N.Y. 2003).
· cites it 4× “42 U.S.C. § 7661a (emphasis added). The goal of the operating permit program is to collect all of the “applicable requirements” under the Clean Air Act that govern the operation of a “major source” into a single operating permit, and to provide for monitoring and other methods…”
Gulf Restoration Network v. Gina McCarthy, 783 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 4× “” 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i). While the title of a statutory section is not part of the law itself, and so does not control, it may be used as a guide to determine the meaning of a provision.”
United States v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P, 727 F.3d 274 (3rd Cir. 2013).
· cites it 3× “See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. C. Penelec and NYSEG modify the Plant during the 1990s but do not apply for a PSD permit, though they later apply for a Title V permit.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a) — 43 cases
Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008).
“" 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a). These operating permit provisions, commonly referred to as Title V of the CAA, also specify that "[e]ach permit issued under this title shall include enforceable emission limitations and standards, a schedule of compliance, .”
United States Sugar Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 830 F.3d 579 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. The EPA, however, can exempt an area source subcategory if it finds “that compliance with such requirements is impracticable, infeasible, or unnecessarily burdensome on such categories.”
United States v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P, 727 F.3d 274 (3rd Cir. 2013).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. C. Penelec and NYSEG modify the Plant during the 1990s but do not apply for a PSD permit, though they later apply for a Title V permit.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b) — 16 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(10) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(3) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(3)(A)(i) — 1 case
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(4) — 1 case
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(5) — 3 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(5)(E) — 6 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(6) — 19 cases
Cal. Cmty. Against Toxics v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 934 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
“7 (e), and state permitting authorities must provide for public comment and a hearing on all permit applications that they receive, 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(6). But what if a state permitting authority issues or denies a permit application on a ground that a regulated source, or a 1…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(l) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d) — 11 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d)(1) — 11 cases
Cal. Cmty. Against Toxics v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 934 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
“7 (e), and state permitting authorities must provide for public comment and a hearing on all permit applications that they receive, 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(b)(6). But what if a state permitting authority issues or denies a permit application on a ground that a regulated source, or a 1…”
Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008).
“" 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a). These operating permit provisions, commonly referred to as Title V of the CAA, also specify that "[e]ach permit issued under this title shall include enforceable emission limitations and standards, a schedule of compliance, .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d)(2) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d)(2)(B) — 2 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d)(3) — 7 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(d)(l) — 13 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008).
“" 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(a). These operating permit provisions, commonly referred to as Title V of the CAA, also specify that "[e]ach permit issued under this title shall include enforceable emission limitations and standards, a schedule of compliance, .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(e) — 1 case
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(g) — 3 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i) — 5 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Gulf Restoration Network v. Gina McCarthy, 783 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2015).
“” 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i). While the title of a statutory section is not part of the law itself, and so does not control, it may be used as a guide to determine the meaning of a provision.”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i)(1) — 5 cases
Gulf Restoration Network v. Gina McCarthy, 783 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2015).
“” 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i). While the title of a statutory section is not part of the law itself, and so does not control, it may be used as a guide to determine the meaning of a provision.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i)(2) — 5 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Gulf Restoration Network v. Gina McCarthy, 783 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2015).
“” 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i). While the title of a statutory section is not part of the law itself, and so does not control, it may be used as a guide to determine the meaning of a provision.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i)(4) — 4 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
— 42 U.S.C. § 7661a(i)(l) — 5 cases
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003).
“See 42 U.S.C. § 7661a. Pursuant to the statutory schedule: by November 1993, States were to submit proposed permit programs; by November 1994, the EPA had to either grant full or interim approval, or deny approval; by November 1995, the EPA was to take over state permit programs…”
Michigan v. Env't Prot. Agency, 268 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
“Section 502(d)(3) specifies that “[i]f a program meeting the requirements of this subchapter has not *1083 been approved in whole for any State, the Administrator shall, 2 years after the date required for submission of such a program .”
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.