Compliance Pollution Control Enforcement Penalties Fines Firecracker Regulations Court Decisions Mining Regulations Permits Sanctions Emissions Standards Legal Actions Supreme Court Decisions Investigations Tree Protection Public Safety Protected Areas Court Orders Air Quality Regulations Wildlife Protection Environmental Permitting Fines and Penalties Gardening Regulations EPA Regulations Supreme Court Corporate Compliance Waste Disposal Regulations Municipal Regulations Waste Management Laws Court Directives Waste Management Pollution Regulations Construction Regulations Air Quality Management Urban Regulations Clean Water Act Fishing Regulations Air Quality Standards Vehicle Emissions Filming Permits Violations National Green Tribunal Air Quality Land Use Regulations Mining Laws Administrative Procedures Illegal Activities Settlements Enforcement Actions Chemical Regulations Clean Air Act Tourism Regulations Prosecution Legal Proceedings Environmental Standards Abatement Notices Toxic Substances Environment Protection Act Camping Regulations Supreme Court Norms Naturschutzgesetz Water Quality Planning Law Vehicle Deregistration National Park Regulations Littering Cultural Practices Plastic Waste Management Idol Immersion Impact Assessment Regulations Corporate Responsibility Construction Environmental Impact Assessment Health Regulations Trespassing Laws Trespassing Pesticide Regulations Penalties for Violations Pesticides Impact Assessment Court Cases Sustainable Practices Local Government Regulations Tree Protection Laws Forestry Regulations National Environmental Policy Act Judicial Actions Conservation Acts Environmental Clearances Natura 2000 Cremation Regulations Climate Accountability Building Codes Fly-Tipping Legislation Wildlife Conservation NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010 Emissions Violations Water Quality Standards Forest Protection Resource Protection
Plaintiffs say the utility overlooked known risks, seeking court-ordered repairs, monitoring, compensation.
