N&O Index Card
Subject/Name: Hazardous Waste Sites
Article(s) Referenced In:
- Chatham reports challenge effort to pick waste site - Ja 30 92, 3B
- Judge finds some waste site records to be public - Fe 27 92, 4B
- Auditor urges ethics, fairness in site search - Ap 8 92, 2B
- Wake site called better for dump; Experts say Chatham land unsuitable - Ap 8 92, 1B
- Scientists go with the flow in identifying site for waste - Ap 9 92, 1B
- Panel studies shipping rules for N.C. dump - Ap 10 92, 5B
- South awaits waste decision; S.C. holds key to regional pact - My 24 92, 1C
- S.C. to keep landfill; Low-level waste site to remain for 4 years - My 30 92, 1B
- State waste control limited by court - Jn 2 92, 1
- S.C. law may affect N.C. waste site - Jn 6 92, 4B
- Waste panel's funding cut; Move would make it harder to place hazardous landfill in state - Jn 6 92, 4B
- Waste pact in danger; Supreme Court lifts burden from states - Jn 20 92, 1
- Court ruling spurs lawmakers to revisit waste-compact issue - Jn 24 92, 4B
- Tar Heel editors speak: Squelching scientist wannabes - Au 9 92, 25A
- Effort to find disposal spot for radioactive waste falters - Au 23 92, 1C
- Waste site study faulted; State scientists want more data - Oc 16 92, 1B
- New meetings set on waste facility - Oc 17 92, 5B
- State mulls pared dump; Nuclear waste estimates lower - No 8 92, 1C
- Some see racism in waste decisions; UNC-CH meeting to address issue - No 12 92, 1
- Heroes in fight against incinerator: Award honors friends' alliance - No 22 92, 1C
- Activists, officials lead battle against dump - De 3 2, 5B
- Proposed rule changes - (Chart) - De 4 92, 6A
- Lobby pays for dump support; Waste site backers getting industry aid - De 9 92, 1
- N.C. facing waste dilemma; State may end up a national site - De 19 92, 1
- Low-level dumps a waste, UNC-CH trio says - De 30 92, 1B
See a typo in our data? Let us know and we'll fix it.
Places you might find this article:
Search For This Topic
Help us correct this text for future researchers.
Type your transcription below – don't worry about formatting. Please include the line number you are correcting.
Thank you!