Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2017

Administrative Law

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Clean Water Act

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Catskill Mountains Chapter Of Trout Unlimited, Inc. V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Benjamin W. Almy Apr 2017

Catskill Mountains Chapter Of Trout Unlimited, Inc. V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Benjamin W. Almy

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Trout Unlimited’s effort to overturn the EPA’s Water Transfers Rule was stifled by the Second Circuit. The court’s comprehensive Chevron analysis determined that while the NPDES Water Transfers Rule may be at odds with the Clean Water Act’s mission, it was based on a reasonable interpretation of the statute’s ambiguous language, and therefore it did not violate the Administrative Procedures Act.


Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition V. Fola Coal Company, Llc, Emily A. Slike Apr 2017

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition V. Fola Coal Company, Llc, Emily A. Slike

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Disregarding CWA regulations, WVDEP allowed for a state coal mining company, Fola, to discharge pollutants into the Stillhouse Branch without regard for water quality violations. Fola claimed that because it held a WV/NPDES permit, it was shielded from any liability so long as the company followed the permit’s provisions, even if its discharge violated CWA water quality standards.


Hawkes Co. V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Sarah M. Danno Apr 2017

Hawkes Co. V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Sarah M. Danno

Public Land & Resources Law Review

A peat mining company will not be required to obtain a permit under the Clean Water Act to discharge dredged and fill material into wetlands. The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota held that the United States Army Corps of Engineers fell short in its attempts to establish jurisdiction over the wetlands by twice failing to show a significant nexus existed between the wetlands and navigable waters. Further, the district court enjoined the Corps from asserting jurisdiction a third time because it would force the mining company through a “never ending loop” of administrative law.