MDEQ Revises Wetland Determination Rules
Kenneth C. Gold of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP
The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has promulgated revisions to its rules on determining wheth.
Wetlands Permitting Alert!
Law Office of Brigit S. Barnes
All U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) nationwide permits (NWP) expired on January 21, 1997. Work already permitted under the NWP's in force prior to January 21, 1997 will be grand- fathered in.
Extension of Existing Drain Held to Require ILSA Permit
S. Lee Johnson of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP
The Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled that a project to extend an existing drain was not exempt from the permitti.
Appellate Court Upholds Tulloch Decision
Lawrence R. Liebesman
On June 19, 1998, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a significant decision conc.
New Permits Expand Wetlands Regulation-Half Acre or Less Now Regulated
Edward F. Meyers of Arter & Hadden LLP
The following is a list of commonly asked questions and answers regarding application of NWP 39.
Wetlands 'Protection' Threatens Property Owners
David H. Blackwell of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
If you own property that contains wetlands, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may attempt to assert its regulatory jurisdiction over those wetlands under the federal Clean Water Act. This jurisdictional issue is particularly important for landowners located in the East Bay, where the line between waters that are subject to regulation and those that are not is often blurred.
Energy & Mineral Law Foundation 29th Mineral Law Conference Corps of Engineers Permitting Issues
Marcus P. McGraw of Greenebaum Doll & McDonald PLLC
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' entire regulatory program, including permitting, as it relates to the mineral industry, has undergone some significant changes during the past several years. Most significantly, the very future of the nationwide permit as part of the Corps permitting process for coal mining (and very possibly many other industries) has been brought into serious question as a result of a federal court decision on July 8, 2004 in West Virginia. Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, et al. v. Bulen will be discussed in this outline.
Fourth Circuit Parts Company with Other Federal Appeals Courts in Significant Wetlands Decision
Lawrence R. Liebesman
On December 23, 1997, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned t.
Federal Courts Uphold Expansive Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Over Wetlands, Tributaries And Other Non-Navigable Waters
Chris Locke,Paul P. "Skip" Spaulding,David J. Lazerwitz and Andrew W. Ingersoll of Farella Braun + Martel LLP
The United States Supreme Court has been called upon repeatedly in the last five years to define the limits of federal regulatory jurisdiction over wetlands, isolated waters and other non-navigable water bodies. In the latest development under the federal Clean Water Act, the Supreme Court declined to review three federal appeals court decisions that uphold broad authority for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to regulate activities affecting tributaries and wetlands located far from, but nevertheless hydrologically connected to, traditionally navigable waters.
Supreme Court Vacates Wetland, MEPA Decisions
S. Lee Johnson of Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP
The Michigan Supreme Court has dismissed as moot an application for leave to appeal brought by the Friends of the C.
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Application of the Clean Water Act to Isolated Intrastate Waters
Larry P. Ausherman of Modrall Sperling
The United States Army Corps of Engineers ("Corps") and the regulated community have often disagreed about what types of water bodies should be regulated under Section 404(a) of the Clean Water Act ("CWA") - the so called "dredge and fill" permit section. Although all would agree that Section 404(a) subjects large, interstate, navigable bodies of water to federal regulation, there has been significant debate about whether it should extend to nonnavigable, intrastate, isolated waters.
Nationwide Permit Program Revised by Army Corps of Engineers
Saul Ewing LLP
On March 9, 2000, the Corps of Engineers issued a final notice in the Federal Register announcing five new Nationwi.
Environmental Law
Diviacchi Law Office
Wetlands Regulation A federal appellate court has struck down a permit requirement for wetlands development tha.
Appeals Court Ruling Challenges Federal Wetlands Authority
Lawrence R. Liebesman
On December 23, 1997, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned t.
U.S. Supreme Court Severely Narrows U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Jurisdiction Over Waters of the United States
Edward F. Meyers of Arter & Hadden LLP
Looks at a recent decision by the U.S.S.C. which limits the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers' in making determinations of "wetland" or "waters of the United States".
Wetlands Ruling
Robert W. Thomson of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
To the surprise of absolutely no one, EPA's Environmental Appeals Board narrowly construed the decision in National.
Wetlands Decision May Simplify Permitting
Judy V. Davidoff of Steefel, Levitt & Weiss
The complexity and delays typically associated with projects with wetland issues have long challenged developers. The landscape of federal regulation changed suddenly when the Supreme Court, in Solid Waste Associates of Northern Cook County v. US Corps of Engineers, ruled that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' policy of asserting jurisdiction over intrastate wetlands pursuant to the Migratory Bird rule was beyond its authority under the Clean Water Act of 1990.