NCPI Workmark
Articles in regional publications that pertain to a wide range of North Carolina-related topics.

Search Results


4 results for Water Resources Research Institute News Vol. Issue 296, Nov/Dec 1995
Currently viewing results 1 - 4
PAGE OF 1
Record #:
34242
Author(s):
Abstract:
In October, Secretary of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Jonathan Howes requested that the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission reexamine the plan approved in 1993 for managing nutrients in the Neuse River. Water quality in the Neuse has experienced poor conditions and an angry public hearing prompted the Commission to revisit its management strategies.
Record #:
34243
Author(s):
Abstract:
In October, the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission approved a temporary rule that requires owners or operators of leaking underground storage tanks to show through risk assessments that the leaks pose a threat to human health or the environment to be eligible to receive reimbursement for cleanup from the state’s Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund. This article discusses the rule and earlier efforts of the trust fund.
Record #:
34244
Author(s):
Abstract:
In a research project submitted to the National Fire Academy as part of the Executive Fire Officer Program, Raleigh Assistant Fire Chief Earl F. Fowler recommends that municipal fire officials prepare themselves and their cities to make decisions that can avert environmental disaster in the case of large scale fire suppression operations. Fowler says the City of Raleigh and fire departments across the state need to develop policy and procedures to protect local water ways from pollution by fire-fighting runoff water.
Record #:
34245
Author(s):
Abstract:
A federal appeals court decision in a groundwater contamination lawsuit expected to have broad implications for toxic tort actions in North Carolina has turned out to be something of a legal curiosity, according to attorney Craig Bromby of Hunton & Williams. The case of Carroll versus Litton Systems, Inc. pertained to whether any amount of chemical contaminant moving from one person’s property into another person’s groundwater constitutes a legal trespass and whether a company is liable for increased risk of disease. However, the ruling’s opinion is unpublished and citation is limited.