Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The first FWPCA was enacted in 1948, but took on its modern form when completely rewritten in 1972 in an act entitled the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. [ 4 ] [ 1 ] Major changes have subsequently been introduced via amendatory legislation including the Clean Water Act of 1977 [ 5 ] and the Water Quality Act (WQA) of 1987.
In addition, the case held that a civil penalty could be enforced against an entity even though the interests protected were private. The court agreed with Congress in holding that civil penalties in the Clean Water Act cases "do more than promote immediate compliance by limiting the defendant's economic incentive to delay its attainment of ...
interpreting scope of activities covered by the Clean Water Act: Brigham City v. Stuart: 547 U.S. 398 (2006) reasonableness of officers' warrantless entry into a home to stop a fight under the "emergency aid exception" Garcetti v. Ceballos: 547 U.S. 410 (2006) extent of public employees' First Amendment right to free speech in the workplace Anza v.
Title 40 is a part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations.Title 40 arranges mainly environmental regulations that were promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), based on the provisions of United States laws (statutes of the U.S. Federal Code).
Citizen suits come in three forms. First, a private citizen can bring a lawsuit against a citizen, corporation, or government body for engaging in conduct prohibited by the statute. For example, a citizen can sue a corporation under the Clean Water Act (CWA) for illegally polluting a waterway. Second, a private citizen can bring a lawsuit ...
Therefore, a single family residence would pay much smaller fees and charges than a food processing plant. Some POTWs are eligible for low-interest loans to finance system improvements, from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. This program is administered by EPA and state agencies, using a combination of federal and state funds. [8]
V, Clean Water Act, Administrative Procedure Act Environmental Protection Agency , 566 U.S. 120 (2012), also known as Sackett I (to distinguish it from the 2023 case ), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act are subject to the ...
Civil penalties occupy a strange place in some legal systems - because they are not criminal penalties, the state need not meet a burden of proof that is "beyond a reasonable doubt"; but because the action is brought by the government, and some civil penalties can run into the millions of dollars, it would be uncomfortable to subject citizens ...