§Why CasetextPricing

Mingo Logan Coal Company, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

MOTION for Summary Judgment

99 Cited authorities

  1. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,037 times   505 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  2. Duncan v. Walker

    533 U.S. 167 (2001)   Cited 5,487 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the statute of limitations is not tolled during the pendancy of a federal petition

  3. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assoc. of the United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

    463 U.S. 29 (1983)   Cited 6,654 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that " `settled course of behavior embodies the agency's informed judgment that, by pursuing that course, it will carry out the policies [of applicable statutes or regulations]'"

  4. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council

    490 U.S. 360 (1989)   Cited 2,003 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts must defer to the "informed discretion" of federal agencies where the agencies’ decisions require "a high level of technical expertise" (quoting Kleppe v. Sierra Club , 427 U.S. 390, 412, 96 S.Ct. 2718, 49 L.Ed.2d 576 (1976) )

  5. Nat'l Assoc. Home v. Defenders of Wildlife

    551 U.S. 644 (2007)   Cited 874 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a stray erroneous statement in the Federal Register "which could have had no effect on the underlying agency action being challenged" is not "the type of error that requires a remand"

  6. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.

    531 U.S. 457 (2001)   Cited 1,094 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Chevron deference is due only to a " reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency"

  7. Burlington Truck Lines v. U.S.

    371 U.S. 156 (1962)   Cited 1,947 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding a rule invalid under the APA where "the Commission made no findings specifically directed to the choice between two vastly different remedies with vastly different consequences to the carriers and the public . . . [and failed to] articulate any rational connection between the facts found and the choice made"

  8. International Paper Co. v. Ouellette

    479 U.S. 481 (1987)   Cited 456 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Clean Water Act does not preclude aggrieved individuals from bringing a "nuisance claim pursuant to the law of the source State"

  9. Group Life Health Ins. Co. v. Royal Drug Co.

    440 U.S. 205 (1979)   Cited 441 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "contractual arrangements" between an insurance company and pharmacies did not constitute the business of insurance because they concerned a relationship with third parties and not the relationship "between insurer and insured"

  10. Ohio Valley Envtl. Coalition v. Aracoma

    556 F.3d 177 (4th Cir. 2009)   Cited 452 times
    Holding that the court cannot "simply substitute the judgment of plaintiff's experts for that of the agency's experts" because the court must defer to agency choices and methodology

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 329,861 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,510 times   185 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

  13. Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

    33 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 3,551 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"

  14. Section 4321 - Congressional declaration of purpose

    42 U.S.C. § 4321   Cited 3,501 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Describing the purposes of NEPA as including "encourag[ing] productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment"

  15. Section 1311 - Effluent limitations

    33 U.S.C. § 1311   Cited 1,976 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Imposing general prohibition on "the discharge of any pollutant by any person"

  16. Section 1342 - National pollutant discharge elimination system

    33 U.S.C. § 1342   Cited 1,483 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Granting EPA the authority to require a permit for such discharges

  17. Section 1362 - Definitions

    33 U.S.C. § 1362   Cited 1,166 times   102 Legal Analyses
    Defining “pollutant” to include “rock”

  18. Section 1344 - Permits for dredged or fill material

    33 U.S.C. § 1344   Cited 1,150 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Providing that federal agencies issue permits for navigable waters—defined as those waters used or susceptible to use in interstate commerce

  19. Section 403 - Obstruction of navigable waters generally; wharves; piers, etc.; excavations and filling in

    33 U.S.C. § 403   Cited 644 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Requiring federal permission to "excavate or fill, or in any manner to alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of, any ... canal"

  20. Section 1313 - Water quality standards and implementation plans

    33 U.S.C. § 1313   Cited 550 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a State to submit new or revised water regulations for EPA's review

  21. Section 122.2 - Definitions

    40 C.F.R. § 122.2   Cited 192 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Defining a person as, among other things, a "State or Federal agency"

  22. Section 230.3 - Definitions

    40 C.F.R. § 230.3   Cited 111 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Defining "waters of the United States" to include wetlands

  23. Section 123.25 - Requirements for permitting

    40 C.F.R. § 123.25   Cited 70 times
    Imposing various procedural requirements on state-run permit programs

  24. 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."

  25. Section 230.11 - Factual determinations

    40 C.F.R. § 230.11   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining a "cumulative impact" for the purposes of the CWA as "changes in an aquatic ecosystem that are attributable to the collective effect of a number of individual discharges of dredged or fill material"

  26. Section 325.7 - Modification, suspension, or revocation of permits

    33 C.F.R. § 325.7   Cited 43 times

    (a)General. The district engineer may reevaluate the circumstances and conditions of any permit, including regional permits, either on his own motion, at the request of the permittee, or a third party, or as the result of periodic progress inspections, and initiate action to modify, suspend, or revoke a permit as may be made necessary by considerations of the public interest. In the case of regional permits, this reevaluation may cover individual activities, categories of activities, or geographic

  27. Section 131.21 - EPA review and approval of water quality standards

    40 C.F.R. § 131.21   Cited 38 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that state water quality standards must be used in “evaluating proposed discharges of dredged or fill material under section 404”

  28. 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

  29. Section 122.62 - Modification or revocation and reissuance of permits (applicable to State programs, see Section 123.25)

    40 C.F.R. § 122.62   Cited 31 times

    When the Director receives any information (for example, inspects the facility, receives information submitted by the permittee as required in the permit (see § 122.41 ), receives a request for modification or revocation and reissuance under § 124.5 , or conducts a review of the permit file) he or she may determine whether or not one or more of the causes listed in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section for modification or revocation and reissuance or both exist. If cause exists, the Director may

  30. Section 131.5 - EPA authority

    40 C.F.R. § 131.5   Cited 29 times

    (a) Under section 303(c) of the Act, EPA is to review and to approve or disapprove State-adopted water quality standards. The review involves a determination of: (1) Whether the State has adopted designated water uses that are consistent with the requirements of the Clean Water Act; (2) Whether the State has adopted criteria that protect the designated water uses based on sound scientific rationale consistent with § 131.11 ; (3) Whether the State has adopted an antidegradation policy that is consistent