Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Environmental Protection Agency (4)
- Clean Air Act (3)
- EPA (3)
- Mining (3)
- Clean Water Act (2)
-
- Ninth Circuit (2)
- Species (2)
- Tribal (2)
- Water (2)
- APA (1)
- Adjudication (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Agency (1)
- Agency's (1)
- Air impact analysis (1)
- Air pollution (1)
- Appalachian Streams (1)
- Army corps (1)
- Army corps of engineers (1)
- BACT (1)
- BLM (1)
- Baseflow (1)
- Baselines (1)
- Bears (1)
- Beneficial interest (1)
- Best Available Control Technology (1)
- Bioenergy BACT (1)
- Bioenergy Best Available Control Technology (1)
- Biological (1)
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Law
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Herr v. U. S. Forest Service, the Sixth Circuit ruled on whether the Forest Service could infringe on pre-existing private property rights held adjacent to a designated Wilderness Area. The Herrs purchased lakefront property adjacent to the Sylvania Wilderness in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan with the intention of using their littoral rights for recreational boating. The Sylvania Wilderness was created under the Michigan Wilderness Act in 1987, but the Act observed valid existing rights. The court found that the Herrs’ littoral rights were recognizable “valid existing rights.” Therefore, the Forest Service’s restriction of those rights was illegal.
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approved leases to persons and entities who wish to conduct mineral development on its lands. After an energy-development company, Osage Wind, leased privately-owned surface lands within Tribal reservation boundaries and began to excavate minerals for purposes of constructing a wind farm, the United States brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf. In the ensuing litigation, the Osage Nation insisted that Osage Wind should have obtained a mineral lease from the Tribe before beginning its work. In its decision, the Tenth Circuit applied one of the Indian law …
Clean Air Council V. Pruitt, Oliver Wood
Clean Air Council V. Pruitt, Oliver Wood
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted a motion for summary vacatur against the Environmental Protection Agency after environmental groups challenged the agency’s reconsideration of the Obama-era methane rule under the Clean Air Act. The court held that the EPA unlawfully issued a stay after it reconsidered the rule without proper authorization. The court vacated the EPA’s stay, one example of the Trump Administration unsuccessfully repealing Obama-era rulemaking.
City Of Helena V. Community Of Rimini, Molly M. Kelly
City Of Helena V. Community Of Rimini, Molly M. Kelly
Public Land & Resources Law Review
After twenty years of adjudication, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the City of Helena’s right to 13.75 cfs from Ten Mile Creek, the city’s primary water source. The Court found a statute allowing cities and municipalities to exercise water rights that have gone through extended periods of nonuse did not need a retroactive clause.
Murray Energy Corporation V. Administrator Of Environmental Protection Agency, Peter B. Taylor
Murray Energy Corporation V. Administrator Of Environmental Protection Agency, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Congress amended the Clean Air Act in 1977 because of public concern that enforcement of the Clean Air Act would have adverse effects on employment. Section 321(a) tasks the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency with a continuous duty to evaluate the potential employment impact of the administration and enforcement of the Clean Air Act. In Murray Energy Corporation v. Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled on whether the federal court’s authority to review and enforce non-discretionary Clean Air Act duties extended to the EPA’s Section 321(a) duty to continuously …
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The ESA protects threatened or endangered species, and species likely to become threatened or endangered within the foreseeable future, throughout all or a significant portion of their range. In Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona overturned a Fish and Wildlife Service policy defining the significant portion of range language in the ESA. The policy interpretation limited ESA protections to apply only when a species faced risk of extinction throughout its entire range. The court deemed this policy impermissible because it effectively rendered the significant portion of range language meaningless. …
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Whatcom County V. Hirst, Et Al, Stephanie A. George
Whatcom County V. Hirst, Et Al, Stephanie A. George
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Upending decades of common practice in water management and building in the state of Washington, the Washington Supreme Court found Whatcom County violated the state’s Growth Management Act. Whatcom County used the Department of Ecology’s Nooksack Rule in evaluating permits for buildings and subdivisions that rely on permit-exempt wells. This decision affects families across the state of Washington.
Catskill Mountains Chapter Of Trout Unlimited, Inc. V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Benjamin W. Almy
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
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.
Great Basin Resource Watch V. Bureau Of Land Management, Jody D. Lowenstein
Great Basin Resource Watch V. Bureau Of Land Management, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Great Basin Resource Watch v. Bureau of Land Management, the Ninth Circuit invalidated the BLM’s environmental review, finding that the agency based its approval of a mining project on unsupported reasoning, inaccurate information, and deficient analysis. In negating the action, the court held that the BLM failed to take the hard look required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Standing Rock Sioux’s effort to enjoin the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting of an oil pipeline was stifled by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia. In denying the preliminary injunction, the court held that the Tribe failed to show that the Corps violated the National Historic Preservation Act, and that the Tribe’s belated effort to litigate was futile after failing to participate in the consultation process.
Wyoming V. United States Department Of The Interior, Arie R. Mielkus
Wyoming V. United States Department Of The Interior, Arie R. Mielkus
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Responding to an overpopulation of wild horses on the BLM lands in the state, Wyoming sued the Secretary of the Interior and the BLM for failure to manage the excess numbers. Wyoming’s claim, based on the Wild Horses and Burros Act and Administrative Procedure Act, jumped the gun by bringing it before the BLM made its determination that removal was necessary to manage the overpopulation.
Helping Hand Tools V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Emily A. Slike
Helping Hand Tools V. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Emily A. Slike
Public Land & Resources Law Review
When the EPA decided to treat biomass fuel sources differently within the BACT analysis, the Ninth Circuit continued Chevron’s legacy and granted the agency deference. The Bioenergy BACT may develop as science continues to evolve, but because the EPA took a “hard look” during a thorough permit review, the court held that agency issuance of new BACT guidelines was reasonable.