§Why CasetextPricing

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

Brief

34 Cited authorities

  1. Arkansas v. Oklahoma

    503 U.S. 91 (1992)   Cited 600 times
    Holding that when using the substantial evidence standard, courts of appeals "should not supplant [an] agency's findings merely by identifying alternative findings that could be supported by substantial evidence"

  2. Environmental Protection Agency v. California ex rel. State Water Resources Control Board

    426 U.S. 200 (1976)   Cited 321 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Describing NPDES system

  3. 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”

  4. 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

  5. Natural Resources Defense Coun. v. U.S.E.P.A

    859 F.2d 156 (D.C. Cir. 1988)   Cited 94 times
    Holding that agency speculation is "not adequate grounds upon which to sustain an agency's action"

  6. Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Mirant Lovett, LLC

    675 F. Supp. 2d 337 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)   Cited 20 times
    Finding that, where terms of a DEC Consent Order only addressed permit violations that occurred in 2004, and “neither purported to modify the SPDES Permit, nor could validly have done so,” citizen suit seeking to enforce permit for years after 2004 could not be precluded

  7. Adams v. U.S.E.P.A

    38 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 1994)   Cited 27 times
    Applying standard of review to review of the EPA's issuance of a NPDES permit

  8. Sierra Club v. D.E.Q

    277 Mich. App. 531 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 12 times
    Concluding that pollution-discharge permit violated the Clean Water Act

  9. People v. MH Used Auto Parts

    22 A.D.3d 135 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 11 times

    2003-03019. August 8, 2005. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Arthur J. Cooperman, J.), rendered March 14, 2003. The judgment convicted defendants, upon a jury verdict, of violations of Environmental Conservation Law § 17-0701 (1) (a) and § 71-1933 (4) and endangering public health, safety or the environment in violation of Environmental Conservation Law § 71-2711 (3). David Samel, New York City, for appellants. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York City ( Robin A. Forshaw

  10. Pinto Creek v. U.S.

    504 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 9 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding "there are no plans or compliance schedules to bring the Pinto Creek segment ‘into compliance with applicable water quality standards,’ as required by § 122.4"

  11. Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

    33 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 3,541 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"

  12. Section 1365 - Citizen suits

    33 U.S.C. § 1365   Cited 2,192 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Granting Administrator right to intervene in citizen suits

  13. Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

    33 U.S.C. § 1311   Cited 1,967 times   47 Legal Analyses
    Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"

  14. Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

    33 U.S.C. § 1342   Cited 1,475 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges

  15. Section 1362 - Definitions

    33 U.S.C. § 1362   Cited 1,163 times   101 Legal Analyses
    Defining “pollutant” to include “rock”

  16. 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

  17. Section 122.4 - Prohibitions (applicable to State NPDES programs, see Section 123.25)

    40 C.F.R. § 122.4   Cited 60 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting NPDES permits for a new source or new discharger "if the discharge . . . will cause or contribute to the violation of water quality standards."

  18. Section 124.10 - Public notice of permit actions and public comment period

    40 C.F.R. § 124.10   Cited 35 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth specific public notice and comment requirements for the EPA

  19. Section 124.11 - Public comments and requests for public hearings

    40 C.F.R. § 124.11   Cited 16 times

    (Applicable to State programs, see §§ 123.25 (NPDES), 145.11 (UIC), 233.26 (404), and 271.14 (RCRA).) During the public comment period provided under § 124.10 , any interested person may submit written comments on the draft permit or the permit application for 404 permits when no draft permit is required (see § 233.39 ) and may request a public hearing, if no hearing has already been scheduled. A request for a public hearing shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the issues proposed to

  20. 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

  21. Section 124.12 - Public hearings

    40 C.F.R. § 124.12   Cited 10 times

    (a) (Applicable to State programs, see §§ 123.25 (NPDES), 145.11 (UIC), 233.26 (404), and 271.14 (RCRA).) (1) The Director shall hold a public hearing whenever he or she finds, on the basis of requests, a significant degree of public interest in a draft permit(s); (2) The Director may also hold a public hearing at his or her discretion, whenever, for instance, such a hearing might clarify one or more issues involved in the permit decision; (3) For RCRA permits only, (i) the Director shall hold a

  22. Section 124.13 - Obligation to raise issues and provide information during the public comment period

    40 C.F.R. § 124.13   Cited 10 times
    Requiring commenters on draft RCRA permits to "raise all reasonably ascertainable issues and submit all reasonably available arguments supporting their position"

  23. Section 122.43 - Establishing permit conditions (applicable to State programs, see Section 123.25)

    40 C.F.R. § 122.43   Cited 4 times

    (a) In addition to conditions required in all permits (§§ 122.41 and 122.42 ), the Director shall establish conditions, as required on a case-by-case basis, to provide for and ensure compliance with all applicable requirements of CWA and regulations. These shall include conditions under §§ 122.46 (duration of permits), 122.47(a) (schedules of compliance), 122.48 (monitoring), electronic reporting requirements of 40 CFR part 3 (Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation) and 40 CFR part 127 (NPDES

  24. Section 124.14 - Reopening of the public comment period

    40 C.F.R. § 124.14   Cited 3 times

    (a) (1) The Regional Administrator may order the public comment period reopened if the procedures of this paragraph could expedite the decisionmaking process. When the public comment period is reopened under this paragraph, all persons, including applicants, who believe any condition of a draft permit is inappropriate or that the Regional Administrator's tentative decision to deny an application, terminate a permit, or prepare a draft permit is inappropriate, must submit all reasonably available

  25. 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

  26. Section 750-1.3 - Prohibited discharges

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 750-1.3   Cited 1 times

    The following discharges into the waters of the State are hereby prohibited, and no SPDES or other permit shall be issued authorizing any such discharge: (a) the discharge of any radiological, chemical or biological warfare agent or high-level radioactive waste, pursuant to section 301(f) of the act (see section 750-1.25 of this Subpart); (b) any discharge that the Secretary of the Army, acting through the chief of engineers, finds would substantially impair anchorage or navigation; (c) any discharge