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

Water Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Water Law

Opening The Gates Of Cow Palace: Regulating Runoff Manure As A Hazardous Waste Under Rcra, Reed J. Mccalib Dec 2017

Opening The Gates Of Cow Palace: Regulating Runoff Manure As A Hazardous Waste Under Rcra, Reed J. Mccalib

Michigan Law Review

In 2015, a federal court held for the first time that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) may regulate runoff manure as a “solid waste” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”). The holding of Community Ass’n for Restoration of the Environment, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC opened the gates to regulation of farms under the nation’s primary toxic waste statute. This Comment argues that, once classified as a “solid waste,” runoff manure fits RCRA’s definition of “hazardous waste” as well. This reclassification would expand EPA’s authority to monitor and respond to the nation’s tragically common groundwater-contamination emergencies.


Limitations Of Sovereign Immunity Under The Clean Water Act: Empowering States To Confront Federal Polluters, Corinne Beckwith Yates Oct 1991

Limitations Of Sovereign Immunity Under The Clean Water Act: Empowering States To Confront Federal Polluters, Corinne Beckwith Yates

Michigan Law Review

This Note considers whether civil penalties that states impose on federal agencies for violations of NPDES permits arise under federal law and thus are covered by the Clean Water Act's waiver of sovereign immunity - an issue the Supreme Court is scheduled to address during the 1991 term. Part I outlines the history of the Clean Water Act, discussing Supreme Court decisions and statutory amendments that affect the sovereign immunity provision. Part II explains the mechanics of the NPDES state permit process and examines, through analysis of statutory provisions, the degree of control retained by the EPA over individual states …


The Evolution Of The Enforcement Provisions Of The Federal Water Pollution Control Act: A Study Of The Difficulty In Developing Effective Legislation, Frank J. Barry May 1970

The Evolution Of The Enforcement Provisions Of The Federal Water Pollution Control Act: A Study Of The Difficulty In Developing Effective Legislation, Frank J. Barry

Michigan Law Review

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act,1 which was originally enacted in 1948 and which has been amended five times from 1956 to 1970, has been the primary federal response to the problem of water pollution. The development of that Act in the past twenty-two years has been a story of delayed and inadequate response to the increasing problems of water pollution. The development of the Act's enforcement provisions is particularly representative of those problems. It is the purpose of this Article to examine that development, to point out the shortcomings in the Act, and to analyze the effort that has …


Legal Aspects Of A Federal Water Quality Surveillance System, Jon T. Brown, Wallace L. Duncan May 1970

Legal Aspects Of A Federal Water Quality Surveillance System, Jon T. Brown, Wallace L. Duncan

Michigan Law Review

Collection of water quality data is also important for the purpose of determining the present and future needs for water resources and for the purpose of determining the proper allocation of limited financial resources among those needs. In addition, such data are necessary in order to conduct research studies and in order to determine water quality trends for the purposes of long-range planning.

Perhaps the best way to collect such data would be to establish a national surveillance system designed to monitor the quality of the nation's water resources. Such a national system is currently under consideration by the Federal …


Real Property - Water Rights - Liability For Discharge Of Surface Water, Robert E. Hammell Feb 1956

Real Property - Water Rights - Liability For Discharge Of Surface Water, Robert E. Hammell

Michigan Law Review

In 1950 the corporate defendants purchased a forty acre tract of farm land lying north of plaintiffs' golf course and restaurant. Drainage from this tract had always flowed in a natural course southerly through plaintiffs' land. The defendant corporations constructed a subdivision of 169 homes on the tract. This change aggravated the discharge of surface water onto the land of the plaintiffs, increasing the run-off some 350 percent and, in times of heavy rains, producing flood conditions. Plaintiffs were awarded damages and an injunction by the trial court. On appeal, held, reversed. In respect to 30 acres of defendants' …