Sentences with phrase «clean water act»

Because if that happens, their track record (no compensation provisions in either the Clean Water Act or the Endangered Species Act) pretty well forces them to come out and say — à la Paul Martin — that they are against the concept.

Changing the scope of federal law is solely the responsibility of Congress, and over the past several Congresses, the legislative branch has repeatedly determined not to expand federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reportedly requested that EPA clarify whether the «significance» of a connection between smaller waterbodies and larger downstream waters marks a technical or policy issue — echoing questions raised by a coalition of regulated stakeholders, including NAR, who are concerned that the agency may not be adequately weighing the issue as it works to clarify jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act (CWA).

This is a positive development for regulated stakeholders because establishing significance of the connection is a test articulated by Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to ascertain which wetlands merit Clean Water Act jurisdiction.

The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers have released a cost - benefit analysis in support of their proposed rule to regulate all waters of the U.S. under the Clean water Act.

In a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) raised concerns that the proposed rule «Definition of Waters of the United States under the Clean Water Act» would have «direct, significant effects» on small businesses.

The Court ruled that property owners facing an EPA compliance order under the Clean Water Act (CWA) can seek judicial review before being forced to comply.

[SWOOSH] Question: what properties require a permit under the Clean Water Act?

April 9, 2012: U.S. EPA overstepped its authority when it vetoed a Clean Water Act permit issued for a sprawling mountaintop - removal coal mining project in West Virginia, a federal judge ruled today.

This decision will change how EPA enforces the Clean Water Act and will have implications for how EPA uses compliance orders under other environmental statutes.

The EPA determined that the site contained jurisdictional wetlands under the Clean Water Act (CWA), and that the Sacketts had failed to obtain a permit in violation of the law.

The U.S. Small Business Administration, a federal agency responsible for protecting the interests of small businesses, has asked the Administration to withdraw a proposed rule that changes the scope of existing law without Congress» authority and expand federal regulatory power under the Clean Water Act.

During the last two years, Republicans, like their Democratic predecessors in prior Congresses, failed to pass major overhauls of the Superfund hazardous waste law, the Endangered Species Act, or wetlands permitting processes (Clean Water Act).

The Clean Water Act guidance, which would increase the number of waters, streams and wetlands under the jurisdiction of the 1972 law, has been stalled at the White House Office of Management and Budget for more than a year.

As part of the regulatory approval process for a new peat processing site, the Company applied for permit under the Clean Water Act («CWA») to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers («Corps»).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (The Corps) have issued a proposed rulemaking that redefines most water bodies as «waters of the U.S.,» which is a fundamental change to the Clean Water Act.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers («Corps») has proposed new and revised Nationwide Permits («NWPs») for activities that require authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.

In the biggest Clean Water Act (CWA) case in a decade, the US Supreme Court will soon decide whether government assertions of CWA jurisdiction may be challenged in court.

Coordinated regional efforts with adjoining governmental entities to include Native American tribes relative to regional public transit systems, water distribution / consumptive use matters pertaining to the Clean Water Act, waste water treatment infrastructure, economic development initiatives and legislative appropriation efforts

May 2, 2018 Courts Hold Clean Water Act Regulates Discharges through Groundwater, as Congress and Regulators Consider Responses

Ryen has extensive experience in defending litigation under the Clean Water Act (CWA), Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).

• Worker safety standards enforced under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Mine Safety and Health Act • Clean Water Act permitting of wastewater and stormwater discharges • Clean Air Act emissions regulation • Hazardous waste management and underground storage tank requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) • Spill and chemical reporting and release prevention under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Emergency Planning and Community Right - to - Know Act, Oil Pollution Act, and Clean Water Act • Regulation of chemical manufacturing and distribution under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) • Environmental disclosures under Regulation S - K of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and corporate reporting of environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters to the public and interested investors

Representing one of two defendants in the White River (Indiana) fish kill case involving federal, state and class action claims seeking civil damages and penalties exceeding $ 50 million and federal criminal prosecution under the Clean Water Act.

In 2 - 1 ruling, appeals court says a nationwide stay «honors the policy of cooperative federalism that informs the Clean Water Act» The Sixth Circuit has stayed implementation of the «Waters of the United States» (WOTUS) rule (or, as EPA would have it, the Clean Water Rule).

Our team is experienced in underground storage tank regulation and litigation of actions brought pursuant to California Proposition 65, the Federal Clean Water Act and various state environmental laws and tort doctrines, including actions alleging contamination, product defect and failure to warn regarding methyl tertiary butyl ether («MTBE»).

In this case, the Ninth Circuit held that every culvert and ditched that channeled rainwater runoff from forest roads was a discharge from a point source, requiring a Clean Water Act permit.

Taft is skilled at prosecuting and defending complex cases involving environmental litigation involving the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), similar state statutes, class actions and common law claims.

Environmental: Ms. Brice has experience in all major aspects of environmental law, including handling significant Clean Water Act, CERCLA, RCRA, Clean Air Act, chemical exposure and project development disputes.

We also defend clients in enforcement actions, both administrative and judicial, under a variety of federal and state environmental statutes including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, TSCA and RCRA.

Crowley Fleck's lawyers have wide - ranging experience in all types of environmental matters, including the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, NEPA, state «mini-NEPAs», the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, RCRA / CERCLA, climate change litigation, and the defense of environmental crimes.

The successful defense of an oil company in a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice under the Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to recover clean up costs associated with an oil spill upon the navigable waters of the United States.

The CWA was originally enacted as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) Amendments of 1972 but was renamed «The Clean Water Act» following amendments in 1977.

Our lawyers are cognizant of the difficult challenges businesses face in connection with the Clean Water Act and other federal and state regulatory schemes and we work to manage and mitigate the potential risks and costs associated with these programs.

Corrie is an experienced environmental lawyer whose practice focuses on environmental litigation and compliance counseling, including CERCLA, RCRA, Clean Water Act, OSHA and California's Proposition 65.

Her practice focuses on Clean Water Act, California Water Code, CERCLA allocation and cost - recovery, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act, and CEQA.

In private practice, Tom represented clients in a wide range of federal civil and criminal litigation brought under federal environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, while also representing clients in the environmental review and permitting for major energy and railroad infrastructure projects.

Defended a food industry client in a citizen suit in California alleging Clean Water Act violations of pre-treatment standards; and

We counsel and defend clients charged with all types of criminal violations of environmental regulations including alleged violations of CERCLA, NEPA, CEQA, the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act.

We have particular experience with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and have helped clients navigate development projects through all applicable regulatory programs and court challenges.

Among other areas, our litigation experience in the environmental area includes governmental and private - party actions under CERCLA (including serving as lead counsel for PRP groups at major Superfund sites throughout the United States), citizen suits under RCRA, the Clean Water Act and other environmental laws, claims for property damage and personal injury arising from industrial emissions or environmental contamination, and defending clients against state and federal governmental enforcement actions.

He also worked directly for a model environmental advocacy organization that utilized citizen action to help government agencies remedy legal violations of the Clean Water Act.

A Richmond U.S. District Court says Dominion Virginia Power has violated the Clean Water Act by storing ash from burnt coal in piles and lagoons on its Chesapeake Energy Center site, allowing arsenic to leach into groundwater and surrounding surface...

Erika E. Malmen (Boise) is a member of the Environment, Energy & Resources practice, representing clients in permitting, compliance, and litigation under various statutes including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Clean Air Act (CAA), Federal Land Policy & Management Act (FLPMA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Representing a cruise line's chief engineer in a federal grand jury investigation for alleged Clean Water Act violations regarding oil pollution on the high seas.

In addition, our litigators defend clients in a wide range of civil and criminal enforcement actions arising out of the major federal environmental statutes — including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, CERCLA (Superfund), FIFRA, RCRA, TSCA, and EPCRA (Right - to - Know)-- as well as climate change regulation, renewable energy regulation, and project development.

Lightfoot's attorneys have also assisted clients in a variety of compliance matters and enforcement actions involving state and federal agencies, including matters under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act («RCRA»), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act («CERCLA»), Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act («FIFRA»), Toxic Substances Control Act («TSCA»), Clean Water Act («CWA») and Clean Air Act («CAA»).

Reviewing the DNR's decision de novo, but with a great weight of deference to the agency, the court concluded that any other ruling «would undermine the careful federal and state balance created by the Clean Water Act and would thwart the finality of permits properly issued under the WPDES permit program.

Within the Policy Brief, Lehr writes that the ten years following the establishment of the EPA in 1971 he «helped write a significant number of legislative bills that were to make up a true safety net for our environment,» including, «Water Pollution Control Act (later renamed the Clean Water Act), Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (which, surprisingly, covered deep mines as well), Clean Air Act, Federal Insecticide, Rodenticide, and Fungicide Act, and Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (which we now know as Superfund).»

Our successes range from protecting millions of acres of wilderness to helping pass the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act.

At the federal level, regulation is insufficient due to certain explicit exemptions from the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act granted by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.