§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al., Appellants,v.New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Respondent.

Brief

39 Cited authorities

  1. Decker v. Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr. Ga.-Pac. W., Inc.

    568 U.S. 597 (2013)   Cited 288 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that agencies' interpretations of their own regulations are entitled to deference

  2. Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of Ecology

    511 U.S. 700 (1994)   Cited 162 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to achieve goals of CWA, EPA is required to “establish and enforce technology-based limitations on individual discharges into the country's navigable waters from point sources”

  3. South Fla. Water Management Dist. v. Miccosukee Tribe

    541 U.S. 95 (2004)   Cited 119 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the transfer of polluted water between “two parts of the same water body” does not constitute a discharge of pollutants under the CWA

  4. Flacke v. Onondaga Landfill

    69 N.Y.2d 355 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 332 times
    Discussing the doctrine

  5. Riverkeeper v. Planning Bd.

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9064 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 165 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 149. Argued October 18, 2007. Decided November 19, 2007. APPEAL, in the first three above-entitled proceedings, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered August 8, 2006. The Appellate Division (1) reversed, on the law, three judgments (one as to each proceeding) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Francis A. Nicolai, J.; op 2003 NY Slip Op 50776[U] [Riverkeeper, Inc. v Planning Bd. of Town

  6. Environmental Defense Ctr., Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A.

    344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 169 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the compelled disclosure of educational materials about the hazards of stormwater discharges and the proper disposal of waste “involve[d] no compelled recitation of a message and no affirmation of belief” because “[i]nforming the public about safe toxin disposal is non-ideological,” and nothing prohibited a regulated entity “from stating its own views about the proper means of managing toxic materials”

  7. Texas Ind. Prod., Royalty Owners v. E.P.A

    410 F.3d 964 (7th Cir. 2005)   Cited 94 times
    Holding that "[r]epeating the conclusory allegations of a complaint is not enough" to establish standing

  8. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Muszynski

    268 F.3d 91 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 96 times
    Holding that judicial review under the APA "is narrow, limited to examining the administrative record to determine whether the agency decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment." (quotations, alterations and citation omitted)

  9. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

    966 F.2d 1292 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 116 times
    Holding arbitrary and capricious EPA rule exempting various types of light industry and construction sites of less than five acres from permitting requirements

  10. Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A

    399 F.3d 486 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 74 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding manure spread across fields is a point source

  11. Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

    33 U.S.C. § 1311   Cited 1,970 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"

  12. Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

    33 U.S.C. § 1342   Cited 1,478 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges

  13. Section 1313 - Water quality standards and implementation plans

    33 U.S.C. § 1313   Cited 545 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a State to submit new or revised water regulations for EPA's review

  14. Section 1318 - Records and reports; inspections

    33 U.S.C. § 1318   Cited 146 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that monitoring and reporting requirements may be imposed when necessary to fulfill the objectives of the Act

  15. Section 122.26 - Storm water discharges (applicable to State NPDES programs, see Section 123.25)

    40 C.F.R. § 122.26   Cited 184 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Requiring permits for discharges from oil and gas activities that contribute to a violation of a water quality standard

  16. Section 130.2 - Definitions

    40 C.F.R. § 130.2   Cited 93 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Stating a TMDL is "[t]he sum of the individual [waste load allocations or "WLAs"] for point sources and [load allocations or "LAs"] for nonpoint sources and natural background"

  17. Section 131.3 - Definitions

    40 C.F.R. § 131.3   Cited 70 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that “[w]ater quality standards are provisions of State or Federal law”

  18. Section 123.44 - EPA review of and objections to State permits

    40 C.F.R. § 123.44   Cited 33 times

    (a) (1) The Memorandum of Agreement shall provide a period of time (up to 90 days from receipt of proposed permits) to which the Regional Administrator may make general comments upon, objections to, or recommendations with respect to proposed permits. EPA reserves the right to take 90 days to supply specific grounds for objection, notwithstanding any shorter period specified in the Memorandum of Agreement, when a general objection is filed within the review period specified in the Memorandum of Agreement

  19. Section 122.34 - Permit requirements for regulated small MS4 permits

    40 C.F.R. § 122.34   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Mandating compliance with the requirements, standards and conditions "developed consistent with the provisions of §§ 122.41 through 122.49"

  20. Section 621.8 - Determination to conduct a public comment hearing or adjudicatory proceeding

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 621.8   Cited 12 times

    (a) After a permit application for a major project is complete (see provisions of sections 621.3, 621.4 and 621.6 of this Part), and notice in accordance with section 621.7 of this Part has been provided, the department must evaluate the application and any comments received to determine whether a public comment hearing will be held, whether the department will refer the matter to OHMS for adjudicatory proceedings pursuant to Part 624 of this Title, or that neither is necessary. This must be done

  21. Section 750-1.21 - SPDES general permits

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 750-1.21   Cited 10 times

    (a) The department may issue a general permit, upon application or on its own initiative, to cover a category of point sources of one or more discharges within a stated geographical area that: (1) involve the same or substantially similar types of operations; (2) discharge the same types of pollutants; (3) require the same effluent limitations or operating conditions; (4) require the same or similar monitoring; and (5) that will result in minimal adverse cumulative impacts. (b) Discharges may be

  22. Section 750-1.14 - Schedules of compliance and other requirements in issued SPDES permits

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 750-1.14   Cited 5 times
    Stating SPDES permit must be obtained before construction of wastewater treatment plant begins

  23. Section 702.17 - Variances to effluent limitations based on standards and guidance values

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 702.17   Cited 2 times

    (a) The department may grant, to an applicant for a SPDES permit or to a SPDES permittee, a variance to a water quality-based effluent limitation or groundwater effluent limitation included in a SPDES permit. (1) A variance applies only to the permittee identified in such variance and only to the pollutant specified in the variance. A variance does not affect or require the department to modify a corresponding standard or guidance value. A variance does not affect or require the department to modify

  24. Section 750-1.2 - Definitions

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 750-1.2   Cited 1 times

    (a) Whenever used in this Part, unless a different meaning is stated in a definition applicable to only a portion of this Part, the following terms will have the meanings set forth below: (1)Act means the Clean Water Act formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 USC 1251et seq. (see section 750-1.25 of this Subpart). (2)Action level means, when used in a SPDES permit, a monitoring requirement characterized by a numerical value that, when exceeded, triggers additional permittee