Remove test
article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Narrows the Scope of the Clean Water Act by Limiting EPA’s Jurisdiction over Wetlands

MGKF Law

While the 9-0 decision was unanimous in judgment by holding that the Sacketts’ wetland was not subject to federal jurisdiction, the court was sharply divided as to the test to determine when an adjacent wetland qualifies as a Water of the United States (or “WOTUS”). United States, 547 U.S. 715, 754 (2006). See 88 Fed.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Issues Decision Sharply Limiting Clean Water Act Jurisdiction over Wetlands

E2 Law Blog

A few months later, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notified the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and ordered the couple to restore the site or face penalties of up to $40,000 a day. Thus began nearly two decades of litigation, culminating in the Supreme Court’s May 25, 2023 decision in Sackett v.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

2023 WOTUS Rule Enjoined in Texas and Idaho (Or “Here We Go Again”)

Acoel

Posted on March 27, 2023 by Karen Aldridge Crawford On March 19, 2023, a federal district court in Texas granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the January 2023 Revised Definition of Waters of the United States (2023 WOTUS rule) promulgated by Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers (the agencies), 88 Fed.

2023 105
article thumbnail

DEP: Widespread Presence Of PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ In Fresh Water Leading Shale Gas Operators To Use Contaminated Water In Fracking Operations; DEP Doesn’t Require Routine PFAS Testing

PA Environment Daily

Lisa Johnson, the attorney representing Latkanich said, “It was news to me that the Department is admitting that there's a widespread presence of PFAS in public water sources. “I Testing results from the University of Pittsburgh found PFAS in the water well and other locations in the Latkanich home. See Paragraph 71 in appeal.]

2012 104
article thumbnail

The Supreme Court Looks for a Middle Ground to Determine When Clean Water Act Permit is Required for Discharges to Groundwater

The Energy Law Blog

where the Court held that, in limited circumstances, a party discharging pollutants into groundwater that ultimately end up in navigable waters will need a permit under the Clean Water Act. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, et al. 33 U.S.C. §§ 1311(a), 1362(12)(A); see also 33 U.S.C. 1342 (NPDES provisions). 22250 (Apr.

article thumbnail

Guest Essay: Before The Federal Clean Water Act, There Was The Rivers And Harbors Act Of 1899 To Help Clean-Up Pittsburgh’s 3 Rivers

PA Environment Daily

All of this was addressed to US Attorney Dick Thornburgh and accompanied by a demand that the Department of Justice take action under the Rivers and Harbors act of 1899. The samples had been gathered by two Penn State McKeesport Campus faculty members, and tested at the Allegheny County Testing Lab. He died in 2020.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Curtails Federal Wetlands Protections; Developers Still Must Consider State and Local Wetlands Laws

Law and Environment

Environmental Protection Agency , which significantly narrowed the Clean Water Act’s (“CWA”) test for determining whether wetlands are protectedwaters of the United States” and the federal permitting requirements for development projects in covered wetlands areas.

Law 130