Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), was a decision by the US Supreme Court that interpreted a provision of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 [1] of the Act requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill materials into "navigable waters," which is defined by the Act as ...
After passage of the CWA in 1972, a controversy arose as to the application of section 404 to agriculture and certain other activities. The Act was interpreted by some to place restrictions on virtually all placement of dredged materials in wetlands and other waters of the United States, raising concern that the federal government was about to ...
The Corps cited the Migratory Bird Rule when they initially denied the section 404 permit under the Clean Water Act. The migratory bird rule was meant to protect habitats used by migratory birds, which included the abandoned mining site that SWANCC had proposed to construct the waste disposal site.
The 1977 CWA used the term in describing the areawide waste treatment planning program [2] and in procedures for controlling toxic pollutants associated with industrial discharges. [3] The "Section 404" program, which covers dredge and fill permits, refers to BMPs in one of the enforcement exemptions. [4]
One of the major responsibilities of the Corps of Engineers is administering the wetlands permitting program under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. (also known as "The Clean Water Act"). This Act authorized the Secretary of the Army to issue permits for the discharge of dredged and fill material.
This began with the Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972. [30] Under Section 404 of the CWA, a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers is required to conduct certain activities that may impact wetlands. The developer must submit a Public Notice to their respective district of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requesting to carry out a project ...
Determining which wetlands are regulated under section 404 of the Clean Water Act [6] or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act is termed "jurisdictional determination". Determining the boundary of wetland, whether jurisdictional under sections 404 or 10, or not jurisdictional but still meeting the technical definition of a wetland, that is ...
Clean Water Act Hawaii Wildlife Fund , No. 18-260, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving pollution discharges under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The case asked whether the Clean Water Act requires a permit when pollutants that originate from a non-point source can be traced to reach navigable waters through ...