§Why CasetextPricing

Riverkeeper, Inc. et al v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 17 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.. Document

65 Cited authorities

  1. Califano v. Sanders

    430 U.S. 99 (1977)   Cited 4,280 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the APA is not to be interpreted as an implied grant of subject-matter jurisdiction to review agency actions"

  2. Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Env. Study Group

    438 U.S. 59 (1978)   Cited 1,586 times
    Holding that "a ‘but for’ causal connection" between plaintiff's injury and defendant's act sufficed for traceability

  3. Gwaltney v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation

    484 U.S. 49 (1987)   Cited 950 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that jurisdiction is established "when the citizen-plaintiffs make a good-faith allegation of continuous or intermittent violation"

  4. Bell v. Hood

    327 U.S. 678 (1946)   Cited 4,309 times
    Holding that an asserted federal claim triggers federal question jurisdiction unless the claim "clearly appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction or where such a claim is wholly insubstantial and frivolous"

  5. Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida

    414 U.S. 661 (1974)   Cited 1,008 times
    Holding that tribe prohibited from giving land to state without federal government's approval

  6. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Train

    430 U.S. 112 (1977)   Cited 195 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress intended that no new source may be granted a variance from § 306 standards

  7. Escoe v. Zerbst

    295 U.S. 490 (1935)   Cited 403 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute's use of word "shall," though not controlling, is significant as indicating intent that statute should be mandatory.

  8. Fogel v. Chestnutt

    668 F.2d 100 (2d Cir. 1981)   Cited 262 times
    Finding that where the court previously held that the plaintiffs had stated a claim for breach of fiduciary duty pursuant to a federal statute, the court "necessarily assumed" that the federal statute included a private right of action

  9. Natural Resources Defense Council, v. Train

    510 F.2d 692 (D.C. Cir. 1974)   Cited 294 times
    Finding that the trial court acted reasonably in incorporating a publication schedule into its order that the EPA publish effluent limitation guidelines within one year to compel performance of the EPA's statutory duty

  10. Sierra Club v. Thomas

    828 F.2d 783 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 175 times
    Holding that non-readily ascertainable requirement “impose merely a ‘general duty’ ” that is not actionable under the Clean Air Act's citizen suit provision

  11. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,434 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  12. Section 551 - Definitions

    5 U.S.C. § 551   Cited 4,745 times   69 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the definition set out in the APA

  13. Section 1365 - Citizen suits

    33 U.S.C. § 1365   Cited 2,195 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Granting Administrator right to intervene in citizen suits

  14. 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"

  15. 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

  16. Section 7607 - Administrative proceedings and judicial review

    42 U.S.C. § 7607   Cited 784 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Granting the D.C. Circuit original jurisdiction to review "any other nationally applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator under this chapter" and granting regional circuits jurisdiction to review "any other final action of the Administrator under this chapter ... which is locally or regionally applicable"

  17. Section 1369 - Administrative procedure and judicial review

    33 U.S.C. § 1369   Cited 338 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Vesting jurisdiction in the Courts of Appeals to review the EPA’s action "in making any determination as to a State permit program submitted under section 1342(b) of [Title 33] ...."

  18. Section 1326 - Thermal discharges

    33 U.S.C. § 1326   Cited 62 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "[a]ny standard established pursuant to section 1311 . . . or section 1316" shall also regulate the cooling water intake structures of point sources

  19. Section 125.3 - Technology-based treatment requirements in permits

    40 C.F.R. § 125.3   Cited 29 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Discussing technology-based effluent limitations

  20. Appendix to Subpart G of Part 125 - Applicant Questionnaire for Modification of Secondary Treatment Requirements

    40 C.F.R. § 125 app to Subpart G of Part 125   Cited 17 times

    OMB Control Number 2040-0088 Expires on 2/28/96 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1,295 - 19,552 hours per response, for small and large applicants, respectively. The reporting burden includes time for reviewing instructions, gathering data, including monitoring and toxics control activities, and completing and reviewing the questionnaire. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection, including suggestions for

  21. Section 125.90 - Purpose of this subpart

    40 C.F.R. § 125.90   Cited 4 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) This subpart establishes the section 316(b) requirements that apply to cooling water intake structures at existing facilities that are subject to this subpart. These requirements include a number of components. These include standards for minimizing adverse environmental impact associated with the use of cooling water intake structures and required procedures (e.g., permit application requirements, information submission requirements) for establishing the appropriate technology requirements at

  22. Section 125.80 - What are the purpose and scope of this subpart?

    40 C.F.R. § 125.80   Cited 2 times

    (a) This subpart establishes requirements that apply to the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures at new facilities. The purpose of these requirements is to establish the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact associated with the use of cooling water intake structures. These requirements are implemented through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued under section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)

  23. Section 401.14 - Cooling water intake structures

    40 C.F.R. § 401.14

    The location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures of any point source for which a standard is established pursuant to section 301 or 306 of the Act shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact, in accordance with the provisions of part 402 of this chapter. 40 C.F.R. §401.14 41 FR 17389, Apr. 26, 1976 Sec. 501(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended; 33 U.S.C. 1326(b) and 1261(a)