Search results

(165,941 - 165,960 of 182,629)

Pages

CRS84521ENRpage32
Title
CRS84521ENRpage32
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84136
Text
. 2001. Senator Glenn's proposal is very effective in protecting high sulfur coal jobs and perhaps in encouraging new control technologies. However, to accomplish this, very large subsidies are provided which increases the cost-sharing burden to those in the 3l~States which are affected. H.R. 4404 has many of the characteristics of H.R. 3400 but requires additional cost-sharing to achieve the l2
CRS84521ENRpage41
Title
CRS84521ENRpage41
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84136
Text
to assist Ohio Edison or utilities without a Top-50 plant in meeting the reduction requirement. It is assumed that the PUC does not reallocate the costs, but does prevent CEI from selling its excess S02 reduction. This assumption probably means that the CEI estimates are a little high. The cost of H.R. 3400 to CEI would be the l-mill fee (1985-1996), 10 percent of the capital cost of installing FGD
CRS84521ENRpage13
Title
CRS84521ENRpage13
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84136
Text
CRS-12 COST-SHARING PROPOSALS Generation Taxes In response to the scrubbing-switching dilemma, proposals have been suggested to remove S02 with less economic disruption in the Midwest through a broad-based generation tax. The major proposal of this type is H.R. 3400, introduced by Representatives Sikorski and Waxman. The four-part program would reduce S02 emissions by 10 million tons and NOx
CRS84521ENRpage51
Title
CRS84521ENRpage51
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84136
Text
here. For Gulf Power, H.R. 3400 does an effective dTable 8: Cost to Florida Power and Gulf Power of Compliance with Bills (mills/kwh, 19833) Utility 6 6 Highest Year Costa 20-Year Levelized Cost Fuel Switch 2 Fuel Switch H... 3400 S. 2001 Scenario H.R. 3400 S. 2001 Scenario Gulf Power 2.7 2.9 2.7 1.6 L 2.1 1.8 Florida Power 1.6 2.0 2.1 1.1 1.6 1.6 _1__6_/ ibid.
CRS84521ENRpage49
Title
CRS84521ENRpage49
Page from
info:fedora/mu:84136
Text
_ _ __.._.._—....__..¢.‘_ ., ._,. CR8-47 In 1980, Gulf Power reports emitting about 105,866 tons of S02, about 15 percent of Florida's total utility S02 emissions. Most of this S02 was emitted from the Crist power station, Units 4,5,6, and 7 (988.8 MW, 76,679 tons of S02) and the Smith power station, Units 1 and 2 (335.5 MW, 20,764 tons of soz). _1_§_/ They are both coal-fired facilities
CRS85585Apage17
Title
CRS85585Apage17
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
, at 36 (D. Mass. Dec. 7, 1978) (slip opinion, consent decree). 30/ Brewster v. Dakakis, 520 F. Supp. 882 887 (D. Mass.), vacated and remanded, 687 rl'2d 49s (1sE Cir. 1982). .3;/ 689 F. 2d 231 (1st Cir. 1982).
CRS85585Apage07
Title
CRS85585Apage07
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
;substantial" and “compelling” state interest standardu adopted by the appellate court in favor of a more deferential approach. According to Justice Powell, due process requires a "balancing (of the) 10/ liberty interests against the relevant state interests.‘—- Acknowledging the need to minimize federal judicial interference with the internal _8_/ U080 at ,2] 457 U.S. at 319. 19/ 457 u.s. at 321.
CRS85585Apage21
Title
CRS85585Apage21
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
the benefits. For example, 37/ in United States v. Winn;-_ the appeals court held that the trial court's wa111'§";' 734 F. 2d 1434 (11th cu. 1984). Islands, 679 F. 2d 1066 (3d Cir. 1982). 35/ Hickey v. Morris, 722 F. 2d 543 (9th Cir. 1983); Williams v. Cf., Government of Virgin_ ‘§§/ 484 F. Supp. 278 (D. Md. 1979). isee, also, Fasulo v._é£g£gh, 378 A. 2d 553 (Conn. 1977) (Periodic review
CRS85585Apage11
Title
CRS85585Apage11
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
process, is subject to a "balancing" test, requiring the needs of the inmate to be weighed ‘1§/ Association for Retarded Citizens of North Dakota v. Olson, S61 F0 Suppo (DONODO I 11/ .I_<.1.- l§/ E.g., Davis v. Balson, 461 F. Supp. 842 (N.D. Ohio 1978); Evans v. Washington, 459 F. Supp. 483 (D.D.C. 1978); Eckerhart v. Hensley, 475 F. Supp. 908 (W.D. Mo. 1979). A _]_»_9_/ U.S. at A
CRS85585Apage03
Title
CRS85585Apage03
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
on the rights of mental patients in five major areas: 1) right to protection from harm, 2) right to, be free of unreasonable restraints, 3) access to lawyers and courts, 4) right to periodic revie of their cases, and 4) right to obtain access to their medical records. The focus of the report will be on federal judicial ldecisions, and cases concerning constitutional standards and procedures-“ governing
CRS85585Apage25
Title
CRS85585Apage25
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
and psychiatristl must have access to hospital records to determine comprehensively the , 43/ 1 position of their client." Charles Dale Legislative Attorney F0 Supp. at 33/ 462 F. Supp. 1131 (D.N.J. 1978). F0 Supp. at
CRS85585Apage22
Title
CRS85585Apage22
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
Text
..»)N
CRS85585Apage10
Title
CRS85585Apage10
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
CRS85585Apage12
Title
CRS85585Apage12
Page from
info:fedora/mu:55327
CRS861046SPRpage25
Title
CRS861046SPRpage25
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
CRS-21 1977 the Section awarded more than 50 research contracts to laboratories all over the world to promote food irradiation. There were two main program components, which have continued to be the focus of international efforts on food irradiation. 1. Technological and economic feasibility of irradiation: To collaborate in the implementation of projects for extending shelf-life of food items
CRS861046SPRpage17
Title
CRS861046SPRpage17
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
the 1970s the Army contracted with two private laboratories, Industrial Bio4Test Laboratories (IBT), and Research 900 (now Hazelton-Raltech) to conduct animal feeding studies using irradiated beef, ham,‘ pork, and chicken, at a cost of more than $10 million. 12/ The purpose of these studies wasto demonstrate that irradiated foods were safe (free from) toxic chemicals and carcinogens) and nutritious. ‘In
CRS861046SPRpage12
Title
CRS861046SPRpage12
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
. ll] Taub, I. A., et al. Chemiclearance: Principle and Application to Irradiated Meats. In Proceedings of 26th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers. 1:233. 1980. 33/ Ibid. lg] Federal Register, v. 49, Feb. 14, 1984. p. 5715.
CRS861046SPRpage26
Title
CRS861046SPRpage26
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
cas-22 all foods irradiated up to an average overall dose of 100 hrads was achieved by the Joint Expert Committee. As a result of the IFIP research, the 1976 meeting of the Joint Expert Committee decided to recomend for unconditional public health acceptance of irradiated wheat, potatoes, strawberries, papaya and chicken. gfij Fish, rice and onions were recommended for provisional acceptance
CRS861046SPRpage15
Title
CRS861046SPRpage15
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Testimony before House Comittee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on Energy Research and Production. Thei Status of the Technical Infrastructure to Support Domestic Food Irradiation. Hearing, 98th Cong., 2d Sess., July 26, 1984. p. 69. ‘ H.
CRS861046SPRpage32
Title
CRS861046SPRpage32
Page from
info:fedora/mu:30496
Text
petitioned for approval of irradiated ham. FDA rescinded the bacon approval in 1968, citing deficiencies ff] Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Sec 409. 33/ Ibid., Sec. 201(5). fig] Ibid., Sec. 402(a)(7). 47/ Takeguchi, Clyde A. Irradiated Foods--Criteria for Deregulation. Presented at First National Workshop on Radiation Processing of Food, Uni- versity of Maryland, College Park, Md., July 16, 1981. H.

Pages