N&O Index Card Listings

Displaying 1-9 of 9 results.
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Panel makes no progress on Jordan water rules - Ja 9 87 6B
  • Less strict groundwater pollution rules urged (by Martin) - Fe 13 87 8C
  • Panel (Environmental Management Commission) told it's too lenient on offenders - Fe 13 87 25A
  • Strict sewage limits recommended to help clean up Falls, Jordan lakes - Fe 27 87 1
  • Action begins on Jordan Lake plan - Mr 13 87 22D
  • Phosphorus ruling will cost millions - Mr 14 87 13A
  • Water quality reclassified in New Hanover sound - Ap 10 87 8B
  • Storm runoff hearings to discuss regulations - Jn 25 87 24A
  • EMC criticized for cutting fines against polluters - Jy 10 87 1D
  • EMC members - Jy 19 87 10A
  • Developers, environmentalists disagree on water runoff plan - Au 21 87 WA-1
  • Selections for pollution panel spur concern - Au 24 87 1C
  • EMC appointment (Brady) pleases environmentalists - Se 2 87 1C
  • EMC seeks more consistent actions on fines (against polluters) - Se 4 76 5B
  • Latest EMC session hard on polluters - Se 11 87 1D
  • Conflict laws to be discussed with state environmental panel - Oc 8 87 16C
  • Editorial: Polluted by conflicts of interest - Oc 8 87 26A
  • EMC revises coastal pollution rules, denies conflicts - Oc 7 87 1C
  • Editorial: Trust forfeited on the coast - Oc 11 87 6D
  • 10 from EMC met in secret - Oc 14 87 1
  • Editorial: EMC stumbles in the dark - Oc 15 87 20A
  • Environmentalists probably won't sue EMC for secret meeting by 10 members - Oc 15 87 3C
  • Secret EMC session called illegal - Oc 17 87 1
  • Martin says meeting held by appointees in secret broke policy - Oc 21 87 1C
  • 2 EMC members (Turner; Griffith) have coastal properties - Oc 23 87 4C
  • Environmentalists denied chance to speak (against EMC proposed regulations) - No 5 87 2C
  • Editorial: Meeting of closed minds - No 9 87 14A
  • EMC will hear runoff opposition - No 10 87 18C
  • EMC to vote today on coastal runoff - No 12 87 1C
  • Coastal runoff rules reaffirmed; Environmentalists, fishermen assail vote - No 13 87 1C
  • EMC studies conflict-of-interest guidelines - No 14 87 WA-1
  • Under the Dome: EMC members call Martin bloc divisive - No 14 87 1
  • Editorial: Coast's tough job gets tougher - No 15 87 6D
  • Editorial: Course clear on conflicts - No 19 87 22A
  • EMC member's firm (T.D. Eure Construction) is fined for asbestos violation - No 25 87 1C
  • Agencies differ on which waters to protect - De 4 87 21A
  • Large plants targeted in phosphate reduction - De 8 87 2C
  • Water allocation rules OK'd for Jordan Lake - De 11 87 2C
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Commission wants review of progress by Chatham in developing Jordan plan - Ja 11 85 8B
  • Environmental panel moves to regain authority - Ja 11 85 8B
  • Official says coastal growth guards ignored - Ja 31 85 16C
  • Instructions seen as hurting island condo project - Fe 15 85 6B
  • Uncertainties remain about Jordan Lake's toxicity, report says - Fe 15 85 2D
  • Questions about use of Jordan Lake remain, report says - Fe 17 85 31A
  • Environmental Management panel asks staff for coastal growth advice - Mr 15 85 15A
  • Phosphate removal will be required at Butner, EMC says - Jn 14 85 17A
  • Storm-water runoff ruling delayed - Jn 14 85 19A
  • Four environmental commission members replaced - Jn 27 85 2C
  • Storm-water management bill advances - Jy 4 85 15B
  • Environmental commission to review authority it has relinquished to others - Jy 12 85 1D
  • Protection affirmed for 2 area lakes (Falls; Jordan) - Jy 12 85 1D
  • Battle lines drawn over coastal runoff standards - Au 18 85 34A
  • Stricter standards approved to protect some waters behind Wrightsville Beach - Oc 11 85 4C
  • Water management rules need work, panel says - No 14 85 5C
  • Plan would allow state to protect watersheds - No 27 85 1C
  • EMC requests delay in storm water rules adoption - De 13 85 5D
  • Plan to protect watersheds endorsed by commissioners - De 17 85 1C
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Court rules law violates doctrine (SEPARATION OF POWERS) - Ja 13 82 1
  • EMC's past acts OK, observers say - Ja 14 82 6
  • Lawyer says EMC ruling may apply retroactively - Ja 15 82 31
  • Commission extends variance in coal plant pollution limits - My 14 82 6B
  • Officials at meeting support bond issue for water projects - My 26 82 12C
  • Panel delays Knightdale's request to discharge more sewage in Neuse - Jn 13 82 36A
  • Jordan Lake's quality to be studied - Jy 9 82 1D
  • Divided authority blamed for death of 100,000 fish - Jy 10 82 1
  • Commission proposes modified emissions (coal-fired power plants) - Se 10 82 5B
  • Shape up or close, sewage firm told (Ocean Acres Utility) - De 10 82 2D
  • Variances are extended on coal plant emissions - De 11 82 6C
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • New rules for coal-fired plants to increase emissions, critics say - Ja 14 83 1D
  • N. C. environment panel given praise for air regulations - Ja 15 83 14C
  • N. C. officials support dumping sewage in sea - Fe 7 83 4C
  • Ocean dumping gets final OK with start-up expected in April - Fe 11 83 1
  • Developers ask relaxed rules for peat plant - Mr 11 83 11A
  • Upgraded lake classification urged - My 25 83 1C
  • Strictest standards for lakes studied - Jn 9 83 1
  • Watershed controls may hike bills - Jn 10 83 1D
  • Hearing planned on Lakes' standards - Jy 12 83 12C
  • Uniform standards urged for lake water - Au 10 83 1
  • Hearing participants back strict water ratings at lakes - Au 11 83 2C
  • Environmental panel embraces controls for Neuse basin - Au 12 83 6B
  • Sewage controls costly, official says - Au 13 83 1C
  • Report on chemicals in streams (BIOCIDES) alarms EMC member - Se 9 83 1D
  • Underground water classifications approved - Se 9 83 2D
  • Board recertified to condemn land - Oc 14 83 2D
  • Fishermen win bid for EPA hearing - Oc 14 83 2D
  • Editorial: Toward quality lakes - Oc 19 83 4A
  • Speakers oppose treatment plant - Oc 22 83 2C
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Phosphate dust control chastised - Fe 10 84 8C
  • Panel wants type of microbe killer banned in waterways - Mr 15 84 21A
  • Panel supports ban on phosphates to improve water quality in lakes - Ap 13 84 1D
  • Staff wants Neuse basin studied as nutrient-sensitive - Oc 12 84 2D
  • Commission to get report next week on local efforts in Falls, Jordan
  • basins - No 1 84 1C
  • Panel accepts Falls-Jordan report without comment - No 9 84 20A
  • Panel to pursue efforts against pollution at lakes - No 11 84 29A
  • Tenn. sues to block N. C. order on (Pigeon) river - No 27 84 4C
  • Question posed on two projects near Falls Lake - De 14 84 5B
  • N. C. wants dismissal of Tenn. Pigeon River suit - De 28 84 8B
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Proposal would weaken rules for water supplies - Ja 23 92, 1
  • Editorial: Watershed giveaway - Ja 26 92, 6J
  • Watershed shield faces well-heeled challenge - Ja 26 92, 1
  • Tar Heel editors speak: Looking for balance - Fe 2 92, 7J
  • Editorial: Your water at stake - Fe 9 92, 6G
  • Water quality rules at fork; State panel set for critical vote - Fe 12 92, 1B
  • What is the EMC? - (Chart) - Fe 12 92, 2B
  • Editorial: Fateful day for drinking water - Fe 13 92, 12A
  • Water vote likely close; Telephone blitz swamps panel - Fe 13 92, 1B
  • Watershed rules diluted; Developers get nod from EMC - Fe 14 92, 1
  • Editorial: A sieve for water - Fe 16 92, 6G
  • Debate on water to continue; Battle on watersheds moving to local level - Fe 22 92, 1B
  • 'Minimum standards'? Hardly - Fe 23 92, 7C
  • Vote on small marinas called bad precedent - Mr 17 92, 5B
  • Editorial: Clean-water comeback - Ap 21 92, 8A
  • EMC set to assign watershed categories - My 14 92, 1
  • State adopts restrictions on watersheds - My 15 92, 1B
  • Dioxin rules may change; State panel to consider whether to loosen standards - Jy 8 92, 1
  • Public hearings requested on watershed rules - Se 24 92, 6B
  • Environmental groups seek more hearings (on watershed protections) - Oc 10 92, 5B
  • Panel gives New River highest protection level - De 11 92, 5B
  • Release of new groundwater rules delayed - De 11 92, 2B
  • Editorial: Guarding the groundwater - De 20 92, 30A
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Groups want to protect development-threatened water - Ja 5 88 3C
  • EMC panel opposes tougher conflict (of interest) rules - Ja 15 88 1C
  • Neuse protections likely to be adopted - Ja 15 88 1
  • Editorial: Conflicts simmer at EMC - Ja 17 88 6D
  • Air pollution called top environmental priority - Ja 28 88 WA-1
  • 13 waters up for 'OUTSTANDING RESOURCE' (WATERS) label - Ja 29 88 WA-1
  • Neuse to get tight limits on discharge; Cities must enhance wastewater handling - Ja 29 88 1C
  • Proposed increase in fees debated; Environmental permits could cost up to $1,500 - Fe 4 88 10B
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Panel tightens rule on air pollutants - Ap 13 91 6B
  • Strict conditions proposed for state sewer variances - Jy 11 91 4B
  • Incinerator emissions limits set; Environmentalists' reactions mixed - Jy 12 91 1B
  • Environmentalists fear watershed rules imperiled - Au 13 91 1
  • 173
Environmental Management Commission, North Carolina
  • Speakers debate water-quality rules - Au 16 91 1B
  • Environmental board gets 5 new members - Se 23 91 4B
  • Panel member opposes lake project (Randleman Lake) - No 30 91 4B
  • Triad reservoir plan gets panel's support - De 13 91 1