You probably produce different numbers of units for each product. Some small products may require large quantities, while complex projects may take longer to produce and therefore result in fewer units during any given period. Add up the total number of units you produce in a month regardless of which product it is.
An initial agency interpretation is not instantly carved in stone. On the contrary, the agency, to engage in informed rulemaking, must consider varying interpretations and the wisdom of its policy on a continuing basis. Moreover, the fact that the agency has adopted different definitions in different contexts adds force to the argument that the definition itself is flexible, particularly since Congress has never indicated any disapproval of a flexible reading of the statute. As previously noted, prior to the 1977 Amendments, the EPA had adhered to a plantwide definition of the term “source” under a NSPS program. After adoption of the 1977 Amendments, proposals for a plantwide definition were considered in at least three formal proceedings. A single overhead rate for assigning all of the manufacturing production and service department costs to products.
- A plant-wide overhead rate is often a single rate per hour or a percentage of some cost that is used to allocate or assign a company’s manufacturing overhead costs to the goods produced.
- Add up all your quality control expenses into one grand total, even if most of the quality problems are with one or two products.
- Chapter 7 presented the hierarchical synthesis of process systems.
- The court observed that the relevant part of the amended Clean Air Act “does not explicitly define what Congress envisioned as a ‘stationary source, to which the permit program . . . should apply,” and further stated that the precise issue was not “squarely addressed in the legislative history.” Id., at 273, 685 F.2d, at 723.
Significantly, it was not the agency in 1980, but rather the Court of Appeals that read the statute inflexibly to command a plantwide definition for programs designed to maintain clean air and to forbid such a definition for programs designed to improve air quality. The distinction the court drew may well be a sensible one, but our labored review of the problem has surely disclosed that it is not a distinction that Congress ever articulated itself, or one that the EPA found in the statute before the courts began to review the legislative work product. We conclude that it was the Court of Appeals, rather than Congress or any of the decisionmakers who are authorized by Congress to administer this legislation, that was primarily responsible for the 1980 position taken by the agency. The definition in § 302(j) tells us what the word “major” means—a source must emit at least 100 tons of pollution to qualify but it sheds virtually no light on the meaning of the term “stationary source.” It does equate a source with a facility—a “major emitting facility” and a “major stationary source” are synonymous under § 302(j). The ordinary meaning of the term “facility” is some collection of integrated elements which has been designed and constructed to achieve some purpose. Moreover, it is certainly no affront to common English usage to take a reference to a major facility or a major source to connote an entire plant as opposed to its constituent parts.
Are we missing a good definition for plantwide? Don’t keep it to yourself…
Finally, the agency explained that additional requirements that remained in place would accomplish the fundamental purposes of achieving attainment with NAAQS’s as expeditiously as possible.30 These conclusions were expressed in a proposed rulemaking in August 1981 that was formally promulgated in October. The argument based on the text of § 173, which defines the permit requirements for nonattainment areas, is a classic example of circular reasoning. One of the permit requirements is that “the proposed source is required to comply with the lowest achievable emission rate” (LAER). Although a State may submit a revised SIP that provides for the waiver of another requirement the “offset condition”—the SIP may not provide for a waiver of the LAER condition for any proposed source. Respondents argue that the plantwide definition of the term “source” makes it unnecessary for newly constructed units within the plant to satisfy the LAER requirement if their emissions are offset by the reductions achieved by the retirement of older equipment. Thus, according to respondents, the plantwide definition allows what the statute explicitly prohibits—the waiver of the LAER requirement for the newly constructed units.
Dictionary Entries Near planetwide
In response to this situation, manufacturers will use departmental overhead rates and perhaps activity based costing. Chapter 7 presented the hierarchical synthesis of process systems. In this approach, which proved successful in a large number of applications, the designer addresses one fundamental problem at each level, by applying appropriate analysis and synthesis techniques. This chapter considers another important issue, namely the control of the chemical plant. This is a significant topic because the recycling of raw materials, energy integration and reduced size of buffer vessels are characteristics of modern plants.
February 27, 1987 Plantwide Definition
In these conditions, the interaction between units is so strong that controllability of parts (unit operations) does not guarantee the controllability of the whole (the entire plant). The book by Luyben et al. (1999) emphasizes that ‘How a process is designed fundamentally determines its inherent controllability. In an ideal project, dynamic and control strategies would be considered during the process synthesis and design activities’. “5. States will remain subject to the requirement that for all nonattainment areas they demonstrate attainment of NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable and show reasonable further progress toward such attainment. Thus, the proposed change in the mandatory scope of nonattainment new source review should not interfere with the fundamental purpose of Part D of the Act. We hold that the EPA’s definition of the term “source” is a permissible construction of the statute which seeks to accommodate progress in reducing air pollution with economic growth.
The basic legal error of the Court of Appeals was to adopt a static judicial definition of the term “stationary source” when it had decided that Congress itself had not commanded that definition. Respondents do not defend the legal reasoning of the Court of Appeals.7 Nevertheless, since this Court reviews judgments, not opinions,8 we must determine whether the Court of Appeals’ legal error resulted in an erroneous judgment on the validity of the regulations. “We regret, of course, that Congress did not advert specifically to the bubble concept’s application to various Clean Air Act programs, and note that a further clarifying statutory directive would facilitate the work of the agency and of the court in their endeavors to serve the legislators’ will.” 222 U.S.App.D.C., at 276, n. To provide an answer to this challenge, we take a systemic approach. We consider that a process plant consists of several sub-systems interconnected through material and energy streams (Figure 15.1). The sub-systems will be called basic flowsheet structures (BFSs), defined as parts of the plant for which (local) control objectives are assigned and can be achieved using only manipulated variables that are local to the BFSs.
A key topic is the control of species inventory, which can be achieved either by feedback or by relying on self-regulation. The applicability of these alternatives is discussed by means of case studies of increasing complexity, for which detailed design, control and dynamic simulation results are provided. The non-linear behaviour of Reactor–Separation–Recycle systems is also discussed. The subject gives the opportunity of reviewing basic concepts of process control. To find your overhead cost, add up all your subtotals of expenses, direct and indirect.
“The new provision allows States with nonattainment areas to pursue one of two options. First, the State may proceed under EPA’s present ‘tradeoff’ or ‘offset’ ruling. The Administrator is authorized, moreover, to modify or amend that ruling in accordance with the intent and purposes of this section. Some products are cheaper to ship than others, but total your shipping costs on a plant-wide basis. Do not include wages for shipping personnel because you already included these in your direct costs for the entire plant.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 impose certain requirements on States that have not achieved the national air quality standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to earlier legislation, including the requirement that such “nonattainment” States establish a permit program regulating “new or modified major stationary sources” of air pollution. Generally, a permit may not be issued for such sources unless stringent conditions are met. 685, Congress enacted certain requirements applicable to States that had not achieved the national air https://business-accounting.net/ quality standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to earlier legislation. The amended Clean Air Act required these “nonattainment” States to establish a permit program regulating “new or modified major stationary sources” of air pollution. The question presented by these cases is whether EPA’s decision to allow States to treat all of the pollution-emitting devices within the same industrial grouping as though they were encased within a single “bubble” is based on a reasonable construction of the statutory term “stationary source.”
Basically, however, the language of § 302(j) simply does not compel any given interpretation of the term “source.” The definition of the term “stationary source” in § 111(a)(3) refers to “any building, structure, facility, or installation” which emits air pollution. This definition is applicable only to the NSPS program by the express terms of the statute; the text of the statute does not make this definition applicable to the permit plantwide meaning program. Petitioners therefore maintain that there is no statutory language even relevant to ascertaining the meaning of stationary source in the permit program aside from § 302(j), which defines the term “major stationary source.” See supra, at 851. “(6) require permits for the construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources in accordance with section 173 (relating to permit requirements).” 91 Stat.
Origin & history
These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word ‘planetwide.’ Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Your indirect costs are those that continue no matter how much or how little you manufacture. These include things like rent or mortgage payments, insurance, equipment leases, and plant maintenance. Look at such bills for your manufacturing plant and total them up. This figure is your plant-wide indirect cost that you must pay just to be in business. All of your manufacturing activities depend on the services you are paying for throughout your plant.
The plantwide overhead rate is a single overhead rate that a company uses to allocate all of its manufacturing overhead costs to products or cost objects. This is a simplified approach to cost allocation that works well in smaller and simpler businesses. “(5) expressly identify and quantify the emissions, if any, of any such pollutant which will be allowed to result from the construction and operation of major new or modified stationary sources for each such area; . . . In addition, respondents argue that the legislative history and policies of the Act foreclose the plantwide definition, and that the EPA’s interpretation is not entitled to deference because it represents a sharp break with prior interpretations of the Act. “(j) Except as otherwise expressly provided, the terms ‘major stationary source’ and ‘major emitting facility’ mean any stationary facility or source of air pollutants which directly emits, or has the potential to emit, one hundred tons per year or more of any air pollutant (including any major emitting facility or source of fugitive emissions of any such pollutant, as determined by rule by the Administrator).” 91 Stat. However, if the company manufactures diverse products, some of which use expensive equipment while some use only inexpensive equipment, or the company wants precise costs for pricing decisions, a plant-wide rate is not appropriate.