Case Law Index Clean Water Act

January 1, 2002 – May 25, 2021

This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving the Clean Water Act that were decided between the dates listed above.  The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion. These listings are for educational purposes only, and are not a substitute for legal counsel.


SUPREME COURT

Cty. of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, 140 S.Ct. 1462 (2020) (CWA requires permit for discharges of pollutants from a point source into navigable waters or its functional equivalent) Text

Nat. Ass’n of Mfrs. v. Dept. of Defense, 138 S.Ct. 617 (2018) (Challenges to EPA definition of WOTUS required to be brought in federal court) Text

US Army Corps of Engrs. v. Hawkes Co., 136 S.Ct. 1807 (2016) (Corps determination that a water was a WOTUS was a final decision-making) Text

Decker v. Northwest Envtl. Defense Ctr., 133 S.Ct. 1326 (2013) (Discharges of channeled stormwater runoff from logging roads do not require CWA permits) Text

LA Flood Ctrl. v. Nat. Resources Defense Council, 133 S.Ct. 710 (2013) (Flow of water out of concrete channel within river was not “discharge of a pollutant”) Text

Sackett v. EPA, 132 S.Ct. 1367 (2012) (Landowners could bring APA action challenging EPA issuance of CWA compliance order) Text

Couer Alaska, Inc. v. Se. Alaska Conservation Council, 129 S. Ct. 2458 (2009) (Corp was proper agency to get discharge permit from; defer to agency granting discharge permit)  Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 127 S. Ct. 2518 (2007) (criteria for EPA to transfer permitting authority to state)  Text

Rapanos v. U.S., 547 U.S. 715 (2006) (scope of the CWA to protect wetlands)  Text

S. Fla. Water Management Dist. v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians, 541 U.S. 95 (2004) (scope of NPDES permit)  Text


FIRST CIRCUIT

Blackstone Headwaters Coal., Inc. v. Gallo Builders, Inc., 995 F.3d 274 (1st Cir. 2021) (Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (MWPA) does not qualify as comparable state law for purposes of “state enforcement” bar to CWA citizen suit) Text

Conservation Law Found. v. N.H. Fish and Game Dep’t, No. 18-cv-996-PB, 2020 WL 1692430 (D. N.H. April 6, 2020) (Allegations of direct and indirect discharges in violation of CWA permit) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc. v. Longwood Venues & Destinations, Inc., 422 F. Supp. 3d 435 (D. Mass. 2019) (discharges into groundwater) Text

Rauseo v. Army Corps of Engrs., 368 F.Supp.3d 202 (D. Mass. 2019) (Plaintiffs did not establish nondiscretionary duty of either EPA or Corps under CWA) Text

Toxics Action Ctr., Inc. v. Casella Waste Sys., Inc., 347 F.Supp.3d 67 (D. Mass. 2018) (Landfill from which contaminants alleged flowed to wetlands was not a point source) Text

City of Taunton, Massachusetts v. U.S. EPA, 895 F.3d 120 (1st Cir. 2018) (EPA not arbitrary and capricious when issuing permit to limit nitrogen discharged by city) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc. v. Pruitt, 881 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2018) (EPA approval of TMDL did not trigger requirement to notify individual dischargers) Text

Clean Water Action v. Searles Auto Recycling, Corp., 268 F.Supp.3d 276 (D. Mass. 2017) (Group had standing to bring CWA claim) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc., v. U.S. EPA, 223 F.Supp.3d 124 (D. Mass. 2017) (EPA approval of TMDL was not determination that stormwater dischargers needed NPDES permits) Text

Paolino v. JF Realty, LLC, 830 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2016) (Court’s conclusion that property owner failed to show neighbor was emitting pollutants was not clearly erroneous) Text

Protect our Lakes v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., No. 1:13-CV-402-JDL, 2015 WL 732655 (D. Me. Feb. 20, 2015) (Challenging grant of § 404 permit) Text

Conservation Law Found., Inc., v. Plourde Sand and Gravel Co., Inc., No. 13-CV-214-SM, 2014 WL 5781457 (D. N.H. Nov. 6, 2014) (alleging that defendants had been making discharges without a valid NPDES permit in violation of CWA) Text

Friends of the Boundary, Mountains v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 24 F.Supp.3d 105 (D. Me. 2014) (Relationship between issuance of CWA permit and potential harm to migratory birds was too attenuated) Text

Upper Blackstone Water Pollution Abatement Dist. v. U.S. EPA, 690 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2012) (EPA properly issued discharge permit) Text

Friends of Merrymeeting Bay v. Olsen, 839 F.Supp.2d 366 (D. Me. 2012) (CWA did not preempt Maine’s Alewife law, which blocked alewife passage through a dam) Text

U.S. v. Agosto-Vega, 617 F.3d 541 (1st Cir. 2010) (Evidence was sufficient to convict defendants who discharged raw sewage under the criminal provisions of the CWA) Text

City of Pittsfield, Mass. v. U.S. EPA, 614 F.3d 7 (1st Cir. 2010) (Environmental Appeals Board’s denial of city’s challenge to CWA permit was not unreasonable) Text

Hernandez v. Esso Standard Oil Co., 599 F.Supp.2d 175 (D. P.R. 2009) (right to have jury hear CWA claims)  Text

U.S. v. Johnson, 467 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 375 (2007) (application of Rapanos) Text

Natural Res. Council of Me. v. Int’l Paper Co., 424 F.Supp.2d 235 (D. Me. 2006) (citizen suit standing, notice)  Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Atl. Salmon of Me., LLC., 339 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2003) (granting injunction to remedy past CWA violations)  Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Atl. Salmon of Me., LLC., 215 F.Supp.2d 239 (D. Me. 2002) (citizen suit against salmon farm)  Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Stolt Sea Farms, Inc., No. CIV.00-149-B-C, 2002 WL 240386 (D. Me. Feb. 19, 2002) (citizen suit, pollutant, navigable waters, point source)  Text

U.S. Pub. Interest Research Group v. Heritage Salmon, Inc., No. CIV.00-150-B-C, 2002 WL 240440 (D. Me. Feb. 19, 2002) (citizen suit, pollutant, navigable waters, point source)


SECOND CIRCUIT

United States v. Acquest Transit LLC, No. 09-CV-55S, 2021 WL 809984, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2021) (Since this NWPR is creating new regulation and not construing what already existing by clarifying existing law, it cannot be applied retroactively) Text

New York State Dep’t of Env’t Conservation v. Fed. Energy Regul. Comm’n, 991 F.3d 439 (2d Cir. 2021) (DEC could not extend CWA’s one-year time limit to issue or deny water quality certification through an agreement with natural gas company) Text

Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Wheeler, 373 F.Supp.3d 443 (S.D. N.Y. 2019) (EPA’s duty to prepare proposed regulations after state’s revised water quality standards fail to meet CWA requirements is discretionary) Text

Sierra Club v. Con-Strux, LLC, 911 F.3d 85 (2nd Cir. 2018) (Plaintiffs successfully stated claim that defendant was discharging without a CWA permit) Text

Cooling Water Intake Structure Coal. v. U.S. EPA, 905 F.3d 49 (2nd Cir. 2018) (EPA had authority to adopt case-by-case approach to cooling water intake structures) Text

Constitution Pipeline Co., LLC v. New York State Dep’t. of Envtl. Conservation, 868 F.3d 87 (2nd Cir. 2017) (State allowed to deny water quality certification after plaintiff refused to provide relevant information) Text

City Club of New York v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 246 F.Supp.3d 860 (S.D. N.Y. 2017) (Corps’ issuance of permit violated CWA) Text

Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. EPA, 846 F.3d 492 (2nd Cir. 2917) (Rule excluding water transfers from NPDES permitting requirements was reasonable) Text

Nat. Resources Defense Council v. U.S. EPA, 808 F.3d 556 (2nd Cir. 2015) (EPA improperly issued Vessel General Permit regulating discharge of ballast water) Text

Soundkeeper, Inc. v. A & B Auto Salvage, Inc., 19 F.Supp.3d 426 (D. Conn. 2014) (CWA citizen suit not barred by state environmental agency investigation) Text

Borough of Upper Saddle River, N.J. v. Rockland County Sewer Dist. #1, 16 F.Supp.3d 294 (S.D. N.Y. 2014) (Citizens had stand to bring CWA claims) Text

Murtaugh v. New York, 810 F.Supp.2d 446 (N.D. N.Y. 2011) (Landowners permitted to bring CWA claims) Text

Lewis v. FMC Corp., 786 F.Supp.2d 690 (W.D. N.Y. 2011) (Surrounding residents lacked standing to bring CWA claim against pesticide formulations facility operator) Text

Humane Soc’y of U.S. v. HVFG, No. 06 CV 6829(HB), 2010 WL 3322512 (S.D. N.Y. 2010) (violations for discharges by foie gras manufacturer)  Text

Humane Soc’y of United States v. HVFG, LLC, No. 06 CV 6829(HB), 2010 WL 1837785 (S.D.N.Y. May 06, 2010) (private party action for a violation of the Clean Water Act)

Peconic Baykeeper, Inc. v. Suffolk County, 600 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2010) (discharge of pesticide into “waters of the U.S.”)  Text

George v. Reisdorf Bros., Inc., — F.Supp.2d —, 2010 WL 502784 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2010) (standing; jurisdiction of CWA; pollutant)  Text

Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, Nos. 08-CV-5606 (KMK), 08-CV-8430 (KMK), 2009 WL 1174802 (S.D. N.Y. Apr. 29, 2009) (EPA’s exclusion of water transfers from NPDES permit requirements)  Text

Coon v. Willet Dairy, Ltd. P’shp, Nos. 5:02-CV-1195 FJS/GJD, 5:04-CV-917-FJS/GJD, 2009 WL 890580 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2009) (awarding attorneys’ fees under CWA and RCRA)  Text

Peconic Baykeeper, Inc. v. Suffolk County, 585 F.Supp.2d 377 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (discharge of an adulticide was not in violation of CWA)  Text

Coon ex rel. Coon v. Willet Dairy, Ltd. P’ship, 536 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2008) (permit shield)  Text

Coon v. Willet Dairy, LP, Nos. 5:02-CV-1195 (FJS/GJD), 5:04-CV-917 (FJS/GJD), 2007 WL 2071746 (N.D.N.Y. July 17, 2007) (filling and diversion of streams and wetlands, permit shield)  Text

Simsbury-Avon Pres. Soc’y, LLC v. Metacon Gun Club, 472 F.Supp.2d 219 (D. Conn. 2007) (no significant nexus to navigable waters)   Text

No Spray Coal., Inc. v. City of N.Y., No. 00 Civ. 5395(GBD), 2005 WL 1354041 (S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2005) (discharge of pesticide)  Text

Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2d Cir. 2005) (challenge to CAFO rules)  Text

No Spray Coal. v. City of New York, No. 00 Civ. 5395(GBD), 2005 WL 1354041 (S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2005)  Text

No Spray Coal., Inc. v. City of N.Y., 351 F.3d 602 (2d Cir. 2003) (citizen suit to enforce CWA)  Text

Altman v. Town of Amherst, N.Y., 47 F. App’x 62 (2d Cir. 2002) (FIFRA preemption of NPDES permits)


THIRD CIRCUIT

Moss v. Sal Lapio, Inc., No. 19-3210, 2020 WL 3259983 (E.D. Pa. June 16, 2020) (Citizen suit alleging developers violated the CWA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Sunoco Pipeline L.P., Civ. No. 18-2447, 2020 WL 1888954 (E.D. Pa. April 16, 2020) (Defendant failed to seek CWA permit for pipeline project) Text

Dep’t. of Nat. Resources & Envtl. Control v. Mountaire Farms of Delaware, Inc., 375 F.Supp.3d 522 (D. Del. 2019) (Individuals permitted to intervene as of right in CWA brought by state against poultry plant) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Sec’y Pennsylvania Dep’t of Envtl. Protection, 903 F.3d 65 (3rd Cir. 2018) (Decision to issue water quality certification under CWA was not arbitrary) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 869 F.3d 148 (3rd Cir. 2017) (Corps’ rejection of compression alternative to proposed pipeline was permitted under CWA) Text

Pine Creek Valley Watershed Assoc. v. U.S. EPA, 137 F.Supp.3d 767 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (Plaintiffs brought claim under CWA to compel EPA to review state statute) Text

PennEnvironment v. PPG Indus., Inc., 127 F.Supp.3d 336 (W.D. Pa. 2015) (Glass manufacturer violated CWA by exceeding effluent limits) Text

Tri-Realty Co. v. Ursinus College, 124 F.Supp.3d 418 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (Bodies of water on property owner’s land were not navigable waters) Text

American Farm Bureau Fed’n v. U.S. EPA, 792 F.3d 281 (3rd Cir. 2015) (Term “total maximum daily loads” in CWA was ambiguous; term “total” subject to multiple meanings) Text

Pine Creak Valley Watershed Ass’n v. U.S. EPA, 97 F.Supp.3d 590 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (Sewage facilities statute not a water quality standard subject to EPA review) Text

PennEnvironment v. PPG Indus., Inc., 23 F.Supp.3d 553 (W.D. Pa. 2014) (Plaintiffs sufficiently alleged injury in fact for standing to bring CWA suit) Text

Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future v. Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Auth., 13 F.Supp.3d 493 (W.D. Pa. 2014) (Failure to enforce stormwater discharge ordinances did not violate city’s NPDES permit) Text

American Farm Bureau Fed’n v. U.S. EPA, 984 F.Supp.2d 289 (M.D. Pa. 2013) (EPA’s definition of TMDL allocations for Chesapeake Bay did not exceed authority under CWA) Text

Delaware Dep’t of Nat. Resources v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 685 F.3d 259 (3rd Cir. 2012) (Corps relieved of CWA permitting requirement for deepening Delaware River) Text

U.S. v. Donovan, 661 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 2011) (Corps had jurisdiction under CWA to compel removal of fill material from wetlands) Text

Delaware Dep’t of Nat. Resources and Envtl. Control v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 751 F.Supp.2d 715 (D. Del. 2010) (Invocation of CWA’s “navigation exception” appropriate in Delaware River dredging project) Text

PennEnvironment v. RRI Energy Northeast Mgmt. Co., 744 F.Supp.2d 466 (W.D. Pa. 2010) (State’s compliance action did not bar CWA citizen suit) Text

U.S. v. Righter, No. 1:08-CV-0670, 2010 WL 2640189 (M.D. Pa. 2010) (Land qualified as wetland under CWA) Text

Thompson v. Horsham Twp., 576 F.Supp.2d 681 (E.D. Pa. 2008) (lack of subject matter over stormwater management)  Text

Reynolds v. Rick’s Mushroom Serv., Inc., 246 F. Supp. 2d 449 (E.D. Pa. 2003) (“point source”; “pollutant”)  Text

Am. Littoral Soc’y v. U.S. EPA, 199 F.Supp.2d 217 (D. N.J. 2002) (state approved CWA water bodies lists)  Text


FOURTH CIRCUIT

Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 981 F.3d 251 (4th Cir. 2020) (United States Army Corps of Engineers’ issuance of a verification, determining that the pipeline project met the criteria for operation under the NWP 12, excusing the project from the individual permitting process) Text

Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. N. Carolina Dep’t of Env’t Quality, 990 F.3d 818 (4th Cir. 2021) (NCDEQ’s denial of CWA certification did not exceed its authority to institute comprehensive water quality standards.) Text

Nat’l Audubon Soc’y v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 991 F.3d 577 (4th Cir. 2021) (The decision to issue permit was not arbitrary and capricious because the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers collected a broad range of data drawn from the facts and objectives of the project at issue, historical statistics and records, computer analyses, and opinions of other specialized agencies, and it analyzed those data to make judgments ultimately based on its own special expertise under the numerous criteria imposed by NEPA) Text

Friends of Cap. Crescent Trail v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, No. 20-1544, 2021 WL 1923669, at *5 (4th Cir. May 13, 2021)(Corps decision to grant a state to discharge was not arbitrary or capricious because the Corps did unreasonably rely exclusively on alternatives project evaluated during a prior environmental review process since the analysis of the alternatives conducted was comprehensive and there was no evidence that the Corps merely rubber stamped the analysis or otherwise abandoned its duty under the CWA) Text

S. Appalachian Mountain Stewards v. Red River Coal Co., Inc., 992 F.3d 306 (4th Cir. 2021) (Although Virginia’s water-quality standards under the SMCRA are not inconsistent with the Clean Water Act (CWA), the relevant inconsistency between the statutes that triggers the SMCRA’s savings clause is not the substantive water-quality standards but the existence, or lack thereof, of a liability-shielding permit regime) Text

Friends of the Capital Crescent Trail v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 453 F.Supp. 3d 804) (D. Md. April 13, 2020) (Corps not at fault for relying on NEPA analysis to grant CWA permit) Text

Ohio Valley Envt’l Coal. v. Eagle Natrium, LLC, No. 5:19-CV-236 (N.D. W.Va. 2020) (CWA action barred by preclusion provisions) Text

Midshore Riverkeeper Conservancy, Inc. v. Franzoni, 429 F. Supp. 3d 67 (D. Md. 2019) (plausible allegations of discharges from point source) Text

Cooper v. Toledo Area Sanitary Dist., 797 F. App’x 920 (6th Cir. 2019) (citizen suit; failure to comply with CWA permit) Text

U.S. v Blankenship, No. 19-4072, 2019 WL 4805766 (4th Cir. 2019) (Affirming defendant’s CWA criminal conviction) Text

S. Appalachian Mountain Stewards, et al. v. Red River Coal Co., Inc., No. 2:17CV00028, 2019 WL 4674318 (W.D. Va. Sept. 24, 2019) (Discharging pollutants without a permit) Text

Foster v. U.S. EPA, No. 2:14-CV-16744, 2019 WL 4145583 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 29, 2019) (Filling a WOTUS without a Section 404 permit) Text

Sanitary Bd. of City of Charleston, West Virginia v. Wheeler, 918 F.3d 324 (4th Cir. 2019) (EPA not required to defer to state determination that water quality standard was consistent with CWA requirements) Text

Appalachian Voices v. State Water Control Bd., 912 F.3d 746 (4th Cir. 2019) (Issuing certification that natural gas pipeline would not degrade Virginia’s water resources was reasonable) Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 909 F.3d 635 (4th Cir. 2018) (Corps exceeded its authority under the CWA) Text

Sierra Club v. Virginia Elect. & Power Co., 903 F.3d 403 (4th Cir. 2018) (Water pollution caused by coal ash governed by RCRA, not CWA) Text

Sierra Club v. State Water Control Bd., 898 F.3d 383 (4th Cir. 2018) (Certifying natural gas pipeline under CWA) Text

Ohio Valley Entvl. Coal., Inc. v. Pruitt, 893 F.3d 225 (4th Cir. 2018) (Submission of TMDLs for biologically impaired waters to EPA) Text

Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., 887 F.3d 637 (4th Cir. 2018)  (Discharge directly from a point source into navigable waters not required for a violation of the CWA) Text

South Carolina Coastal Conservation League v. Pruitt, 318 F.Supp.3d 959 (D. S.C. 2018) (Agencies did not allow meaningful opportunity to comment on new WOTUS rule) Text

S. Appalachian Mountain Stewards v. Zinke, 279 F.Supp.3d 722 (W.D. Va. 2017) (Mine violated CWA by discharging without a permit) Text

Upstate Forever v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P., 252 F.Supp.3d 488 (D. S.C. 2017) (Discharge into groundwater not hydrologically connected to surface water not a CWA violation) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Foal Coal Co., LLC, 274 F.Supp.3d 378 (S.D. W. Va. 2017) (Surface mine operator barred from litigating CWA action) Text

Congaree Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Carolina Water Service, Inc., 248 F.Supp.3d 733 (S. S.C. 2017) (Plaintiffs had standing to bring CWA claim) Text

Sierra Club v. Virginia Elec. and Power Co., 247 F.Supp.3d 753 (E.D. Va. 2017) (Discharge into groundwater a violation of CWA) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Fola Coal Co., LLC, 845 F.3d 133 (4th Cir. 2017) (NPDES permit did not remove liability from coal company for unlawful discharges) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 828 F.3d 316 (4th Cir. 2016) (Corps did not violate CWA) Text

Sierra Club v. Virginia Elec. and Power Co., 145 F.Supp.3d 601 (E.D. Va. 2015) (Plaintiff had standing to bring CWA claim) Text

307 Campostella, LLC v. Mullane, 143 F.Supp.3d 407 (E.D. Va. 2015) (CWA claim for unauthorized dumping) Text

Yadkin Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 141 F.Supp.3d 428 (M.D. N.C. 2015) (Coal ash lagoons fell within CWA definition of point source) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Fola Coal Co., LLC, 120 F.Supp.3d 509 (S.D. W. Va. 2015) (Coal company violated water quality standards of three separate permits) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Alex Energy, Inc., 34 F.Supp.3d 632 (S.D. W. Va. 2014) Text

S. Appalachian Mountain Stewards v. A & G Coal Corp., 758 F.3d 560 (4th Cir. 2014) (Company did not meet CWA disclosure obligations) Text

Cape Fear River Watch, Inc. v. Duke Energy Progress, Inc., 25 F.Supp.3d 798 (E.D. N.C. 2014) (Lake was a WOTUS subject to CWA jurisdiction) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal. v. Elk Run Coal Co., Inc., 24 F.Supp.3d 532 (S.D. W. Va. 2014) (Coal company unlawfully discharging) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Alex Energy, Inc., 12 F.Supp.3d 844 (S.D. W. Va. 2014) (State agency not allowed to set no selenium limits for entire duration of NPDES permit) Text

Alt v. U.S. EPA, 979 F.Supp.2d 701 (N.D. W. Va. 2013) (Precipitation-caused runoff was agricultural stormwater discharge exempt from CWA permit requirement) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Marfork Coal Co., Inc., 966 F.Supp.2d 667 (S.D. W. Va. 2013) (Permit holder could not discharge pollutants that violated water quality standards) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 716 F.3d 119 (4th Cir. 2013) (Corps appropriately considered factors before issuing CWA permit) Text

Friends of the Back Bay v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 681 F.3d 581 (4th Cir. 2012) (Challenging Corps decision approving CWA permit) Text

Deerfield Plantation Phase II-B Property Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 801 F.Supp.2d 446 (D. S.C. 2011) (Corps’ determination of CWA jurisdiction over waters located on golf course was final agency action) Text

Sierra Club v. ICG Eastern, LLC, 833 F.Supp.2d 571 (N.D. W. Va. 2011) (CWA citizen suit barred by state enforcement action) Text

U.S. v. Freedman Farms, Inc., 786 F.Supp.2d 1016 (E.D. N.C. 2011) (CWA granted jurisdiction in event of significant nexus between wetlands and navigable waters) Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal., Inc. v. Coal-Mac, Inc., 775 F.Supp.2d 900 (S.D. W. Va. 2011) (Coal Companies discharged effluents into navigable waters) Text

Precon Dev. Corp., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 633 F.3d 278 (4th Cir. 2011) (No significant nexus between wetlands and navigable river) Text

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc. v. Huffman, 625 F.3d 159 (4th Cir. 2010) (Efforts to reclaim abandoned coal mining sites required NPDES permit) Text

Waltman v. King William County School Bd., No. 3:10CV72-HEH, 2010 WL 1006889 (E.D. Va. Mar. 16, 2010) (stormwater exemption)

Sierra Club v. Powellton Coal Co., No. 2:08-1363, 2009 WL 2524746 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 18, 2009) (citizen suit under CWA was not precluded by state law)  Text

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coal. v. Hurst, 604 F.Supp.2d 860 (S.D. W. Va. 2009) (nationwide permit did not take into account all environmental impacts required)  Text

W. Va. Highlands Conservancy v. Huffman, 588 F.Supp.2d 678 (N.D. W. Va. 2009) (emitting pollutants without NPDES permit)  Text

The Piney Run Pres. Ass’n v. County Comm’rs of Carroll County, Md., 523 F.3d 453 (4th Cir. 2008) (“diligent” prosecution by state)  Text

Wyatt v. Sussex Surry, LLC, 482 F.Supp.2d 740 (E.D. Va. 2007) (CWA does not preempt state common law claims)  Text

Potomac Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. RDB 04-38845, 2006 WL 890755 (D. Md. March 31, 2006) (lack of jurisdiction, time limits to create TMDLs)

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coalition v. Horinko, 279 F.Supp.2d 732 (S.D. W.Va. 2003) (state antidegradation policy)  Text

N.C. Shellfish Growers Ass’n v. Holly Ridge Assoc., L.L.C., 278 F.Supp.2d 654 (E.D.N.C. 2003) (jurisdiction, point source, pollutant, discharge)  Text

Am. Canoe Ass’n v. Murphy Farms, Inc., 326 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2003) (jurisdiction and standing)  Text

O’Brien v. Appomattox County, 213 F. Supp. 2d 627 (W.D. Va. 2002) (county ordinance to prevent the application of biosolids)  Text


FIFTH CIRCUIT

Stringer v. Town of Jonesboro, 986 F.3d 502 (5th Cir. 2021) (The district court erred in dismissing the property owner’s CWA claim against the town for injury caused by sewage overflows onto her land because the state health department’s enforcement of the Louisiana Sanitary Code was not “comparable” to the CWA) Text

Shrimpers & Fishermen of the RGV v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, No. 20-60281, 2021 WL 911171 (5th Cir. Mar. 9, 2021) (petition was not ripe for review because the permit had been suspended by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and a suspended permit was not in effect; and because the permit did not currently mark the consummation of the agency’s decision-making process) Text

San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper v. Formosa Plastics Corp. Texas, No. 20-40575, 2021 WL 1726813, at *1 (5th Cir. Apr. 30, 2021)([1]-Defendants’ interpretation was the only reasonable one because the text of the operative provisions indicated that only new, post-consent decree discharges triggered defendants’ payment and reporting obligations)Text

Melton Properties, LLC. v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co., No. 4:18-CV-79-DMB-JMV, 2020 WL 7335018, at *9 (N.D. Miss. Dec. 14, 2020) (Hamker has not been unequivocally overruled by Supreme Court precedent [Maui v. v. Haw. Wildlife Fund, 140 S. Ct. 1462] and thus remains good law) Text

Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., No. 18-23-SDD-EWD, 2020 WL 1450750 (M.D. La. 2020) (Corps correctly issued CWA permit) Text

Clean Water Action v. U.S. EPA, 936 F.3d 308 (5th Cir. 2019) (EPA did not violate CWA provisions regarding effluent limitations) Text

Southwestern Elec. Power Co. v. U.S. EPA, 920 F.3d 999 (5th Cir. 2019) (EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in promulgating effluent limitation guidelines) Text

Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 894 F.3d 692 (5th Cir. 2018) (Rational connection between project, CWA implications, and Corps’ decision to issue construction permit) Text

Daigle v. Cimarex Energy Co., 333 F.Supp.3d 604 (W.D. La. 2018) (CWA citizen suit provision inapplicable to claim against oil company) Text

Kleinman v. City of Austin, 310 F.Supp.3d 770 (W.D. Tex. 2018) (Denying injunctive relief granting citizen oversight over city’s plan to mitigate erosion) Text

Board of Comm’rs of Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Auth. v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., LLC, 850 F.3d 714 (5th Cir. 2017) (CWA does not impose duty on companies to protect authority from increased flood protection costs) Text

Gulf Restoration Network v. Jackson, 224 F.Supp.3d 470 (E.D. La. 2016) (EPA gave adequate explanation for not making determination about new water quality standard) Text

Winkler v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc., 205 F.Supp.3d 820 (E.D. La. 2016) (Tort claims not preempted by CWA) Text

Town of Abita Springs v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 153 F.Supp.3d 894 (E.D. La. 2015) (Corps determination of no practicable non-wetland alternatives to build test well on was reasonable) Text

In re Oil Spill by the Oil Rig “Deepwater Horizon” in the Gulf of Mexico, on April 20, 2010, 148 F.Supp.3d 563 (E.D. La. 2015) (Granting civil penalties under CWA) Text

Gulf Restoration Network v. McCarthy, 783 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2015) (EPA may decline to make a necessity determination under the CWA) Text

Belle Co., LLC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 761 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 2014) (Corps’ jurisdictional determination was not reviewable final agency action) Text

In re Deepwater Horizon, 753 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2014) (Owners of offshore oil well were subject to civil penalties under CWA for discharge into Gulf of Mexico) Text

Apalachicola Riverkeeper v. Taylor Energy Co., LLC, 954 F.Supp.2d 448 (E.D. La. 2013) (CWA citizen suit satisfied “pollutant” element of action) Text

U.S. v. ATP Oil & Gas Co., 955 F.Supp.2d 616 (E.D. La. 2013) (Government sufficiently state claim for injunction under CWA) Text

U.S. v. Pruett, 681 F.3d 232 (5th Cir. 2012) (CWA statute imposing criminal penalties for negligent violations of permit conditions required ordinary negligence) Text

Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. Chustz, 682 F.3d 356 (5th Cir. 2012) (CWA does not allow citizens to suit to enforce conditions of permits for discharge of dredged or fill material) Text

Board of Mississippi Levee Comm’rs v. U.S. EPA, 674 F.3d 409 (5th Cir. 2012) (Flood control project not within CWA exemption from regulation) Text

U.S. v. Brink 795 F.Supp.2d 565 (S.D. Tex. 2011) (Landowners deposited fill material into creek without a discharge permit) Text

Board of Mississippi Levee Comm’rs v. U.S. EPA, 785 F.Supp.2d 592 (N.D. Miss. 2011) (Flood control project not exempt from CWA regulation)Text

Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. E.P.A., 635 F.3d 738 (5th Cir. 2011) (petition for review of EPA rules regulating water pollutant emission by animal feeding operations) Text

Evntl. Conservation Org. v. City of Dallas, No. 07-11247, 2008 WL 5243638 (5th Cir. Dec. 17, 2008) (denial of attorneys’ fees under citizen suit provision)  Text

U.S. v. Lucas, 516 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2008) (discharges by septic tank into wetlands)  Text


SIXTH CIRCUIT

Cox v. Bd. of Cty. Commissioners of Franklin Cty., 436 F. Supp. 3d 1070 (S.D. Ohio 2020) (notice letter satisfied notice requirement to bring CWA citizen suit) Text

Ward v. Stucke, No. 3:18-CV-00263, 2019 WL 3350161 (S.D. Ohio July 24, 2019) (Wetlands were navigable water subject to CWA jurisdiction) Text

Envtl. Law & Policy Ctr. v. United States Envtl. Prot. Agency, 415 F. Supp. 3d 775 (N.D. Ohio 2019) (challenging approval of Ohio impaired waters list) Text

Envtl. Law and Policy Ctr. V. U.S. EPA, 349 F.Supp.3d 703 (N.D. Ohio 2018) (EPA approval of state impaired waters list was not final agency action) Text

Kentucky Waterways All. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 905 F.3d 925 (6th Cir. 2018) (No CWA liability for pollution that reaches surface water via groundwater) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 905 F.3d 436 (6th Cir. 2018) (CWA did not prohibit discharge of pollutants to groundwater that connect to navigable waterway) Text

Kentucky Waterways All. v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 303 F.Supp.3d 530 (E.D. Ky. 2017) (Discharge of pollutants into groundwater that connected to navigable water was not subject to CWA permitting requirement) Text

Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. Sec’y of U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 286 F.Supp.3d 836 (E.D. Mich. 2017) (No standing to sue for alleged failure to ensure spill response plans met CWA requirements) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 273 F.Supp.3d 775 (M.D. Tenn. 2017) (Active ash pond complex violated CWA) Text

Ohio v. U.S. Army Corps of Engrs., 259 F.Supp.3d 732 (N.D. Ohio 2017) (Corps unlawfully refused to dispose of dredged material) Text

Tennessee Clean Water Network v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 206 F.Supp.3d 1280 (M.D. Tenn. 2016) (NPDES permit did not extend to any and all types of coal ash seepage) Text

In re U.S. Dep’t of Defense, U.S. EPA Final Rule: Clean Water Rule: Definition of Waters of U.S., 817 F.3d 261 (6th Cir. 2016) (Final WOTUS definition rule was subject to direct circuit court review) Text

Askins v. Ohio Dep’t of Agric., 809 F.3d 868 (6th Cir. 2016) (CWA does not allow citizen suit for state’s violation of notice requirement) Text

In re EPA, 803 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 2015) (Stay of enforcement of Clean Water Rule was reasonable) Text

Sierra Club v. ICG Hazard, LLC, 781 F.3d 281 (6th Cir. 2015) (Coal mining company’s discharges did not violate CWA) Text

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs., 746 F.3d 698 (6th Cir. 2014) (Corps determination that operator’s mitigation plan complied with CWA was reasonable) Text

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs., 963 F.Supp.2d 670 (W.D. Ky. 2013) (Corps complied with applicable federal law in approving CWA permit) Text

Kentucky Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Rowlette, 714 F.3d 402 (6th Cir. 2013) (Agency reauthorization of nationwide coal-mining waste-discharge permit was arbitrary and capricious) Text

Fitzgibbons v. Cook & Thorburn & Hancock County Drainage Dists., No. 1:08-CV-165, 2009 WL 2170364 (W.D. Mich. July 21, 2009) (denial of attorneys’ fees under CWA)  Text

United States v. Cundiff, 555 F.3d 200 (6th Cir. 2009) (jurisdiction over wetlands; “normal farming” exemption to permit)  Text

Nat’l Cotton Council of Am. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 553 F.3d 927 (6th Cir. 2009) (exemption of pesticides from the Clean Water Act)  Text

Ky. Waterways Alliance v. Johnson, 540 F.3d 466 (6th Cir. 2008) (review of state antidegradation water quality standards)  Text

Ky. Waterways Alliance v. Johnson, 426 F.Supp.2d 612 (W.D. Ky. 2006) (review of antidegradation standards, CAFO rules)  Text

Tungett v. Papierski, No. 3:05-CV-289, 2006 WL 51148 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 10, 2006) (subject matter over citizen suits) Text

Johnson County Citizen Committee for Clean Air and Water v. EPA, No. 3:05-0222, 2005 WL 2204953 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 9, 2005) (state NPDES permit)

Am. Canoe Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Louisa Water & Sewer Comm’n, 389 F.3d 536 (6th Cir. 2004) (standing to bring citizen suit)  Text


SEVENTH CIRCUIT

Prairie Rivers Network v. Dynegy Midwest Generation, LLC, 976 F.3d 761 (7th Cir. 2020) (appeal from the dismissal of its Clean Water Act action because the briefs were additive and offered something different, new, and important where one briefly presented the history of Illinois groundwater) Text

Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. U.S. EPA, 360 F.Supp.3d 847 (E.D. Wis. 2018) (CWA citizen suit provision does not waive sovereign immunity of Corps) Text

Prairie Rivers Network v. Dynergy Midwest Generation, LLC, 350 F.Supp.3d 697 (C.D. Ill. 2018) (CWA did not apply to discharges of pollutants into groundwater) Text

Orchard Hill Bldg. Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 893 F.3d 1017 (7th Cir. 2018) (Corps failed to give evidence that wetlands were jurisdictional WOTUS) Text

Nat. Res. Def. Council v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chicago, 226 F.Supp.3d 904 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (Plaintiffs not estopped from arguing city violated CWA due to state court litigation) Text

U.S. v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist. of Greater Chicago, 792 F.3d 821 (7th Cir. 2015) (Consent decree demonstrated diligent prosecution under CWA) Text

Quad Cities Waterkeeper v. Ballegeer, 84 F.Supp.3d 848 (C.D. Ill. 2015) (Pollutants discharge violated CWA) Text

Stillwater of Crown Point Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. Stiglich, 999 F.Supp.2d 1111 (N.D. Ind. 2014) (Property development companies’ managing director personally liable for CWA violations) Text

Wisconsin Res. Protection Council v. Flambeau Min. Co., 727 F.3d 700 (7th Cir. 2013) (Mining company did not incur civil liability under CWA) Text

Hoosier Envtl. Council v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 722 F.3d 1053 (7th Cir. 2013) (Corps fulfilled its duty in issuing CWA permit) Text

Long v. KZF Dev., 935 F.Supp.2d 889 (N.D. Ill. 2013) (Notice did not satisfy CWA citizen suit requirements) Text

Stillwater of Crown Point Homeowner’s Ass’n, Inc. v. Kovich, 820 F.Supp.2d 859 (N.D. Ind. 2011) (Ditch and wetlands were navigable waters under CWA) Text

Domino v. Didion Ethanol, LLC, 670 F.Supp.2d 901 (W.D. Wis. 2009) (standing; violations of permit)  Text

United States v. Fabian, 522 F.Supp.2d 1078 (N.D. Ind. 2007) (significant nexus to navigable waters, CWA violation)  Text

Greenfield Mills, Inc. v. Macklin, 361 F.3d 934 (7th Cir. 2004) (§ 404 permit)  Text

Save the Valley, Inc. v. EPA, 223 F. Supp. 2d 997 (S.D. Ind. 2002) (implementation of CWA)  Text


EIGHTH CIRCUIT

Wing Enterprises, Inc. v. Tricam Indus., Inc., No. 17-CV-1769 (ECT/ECW), 2021 WL 63108 (D. Minn. Jan. 7, 2021)(genuine issue of fact for degree of control exercised over online industry-certification statement precluding summary)

Garrison v. New Fashion Pork LLP, 449 F.Supp.3d 863 (N.D. Iowa 2020) (Misapplication of hog manure not a CWA violation) Text

Hammes v. City of Davenport, 381 F.Supp.3d 1038 (S.D. Iowa 2019) (Failure to give adequate pre-suit notice of CWA violations) Text

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of Lake Traverse Reservation v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 888 F.3d 906(8th Cir. 2018) Text

City of Kennett, Missouri v. EPA, 887 F.3d 424 (8th Cir. 2018) (City establish standing to challenge EPA’s approval of TMDLs) Text

North Dakota v. U.S. EPA, 127 F.Supp.3d 1047 (D. N.D. 2015) (States likely to succeed on the merits in action challenging EPA’s WOTUS rule) Text

U.S. v. STABL, Inc., 800 F.3d 476 (8th Cir. 2015) (No sufficient evidence to impeach discharge monitoring reports) Text

Hawkes Co., Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 782 F.3d 994 (8th Cir. 2015) (Corps determination that property constituted navigable waters was final decision) Text

El Dorado Chemical Co. v. U.S. EPA, 763 F.3d 950 (8th Cir. 2014) (EPA rejection of dissolved minerals water quality criteria was reasonable) Text

Iowa League of Cities v. EPA, 711 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2013) (EPA letter to Senator promulgated a legislative rule) Text

Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of Lake Traverse Reservation v. U.S. Corps of Eng’rs, 918 F.Supp.2d 962 (D. S.D. 2013) (Corps’ nationwide permit determinations were subject to judicial review) Text

U.S. v. Huseby, 862 F.Supp.2d 951 (D. Minn. 2012) (Landowner’s activities fell within CWA recapture provision) Text

Missouri Coal. for the Env’t Found. v. Jackson, 853 F.Supp.2d 903 (W.D. Mo. 2012) (EPA approval of water quality standards not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Serv. Oil, Inc. v. EPA, 590 F.3d 545 (8th Cir. 2009) (authority under CWA to assess administrative penalties)  Text

Thomas v. Jackson, 581 F.3d 658 (8th Cir. 2009) (upholding Iowa’s water quality assessment and standards)  Text

United States v. Bailey, 571 F.3d 791 (8th Cir. 2009) (enforcement of Corps’ order to restore wetlands)  Text

Thomas v. U.S. EPA, No. C06-0115, 2007 WL 4439483 (N.D. Iowa Dec. 17, 2007) (removal and addition of impaired waterbodies)

U.S. v. Bailey, 516 F.Supp.2d 998 (D. Minn. 2007) (scope of wetlands protection)  Text

Green Acres Enter., Inc. v. United States, F.3d 852 (8th Cir. 2005) (taking, “incidental fallback”)   Text

Minn. Ctr. for Envtl. Advocacy v. U.S. EPA, No. CIV03-5450(DWF/SRN), 2005 WL 1490331 (D. Minn. June 23, 2005) (invalidating state TMDL)

Mo. Soybean Ass’n v. EPA, 289 F.3d 509 (8th Cir. 2002) (jurisdiction)  Text


NINTH CIRCUIT

United States v. Lucero, No. 19-10074, 2021 WL 821948 (9th Cir. Mar. 4, 2021) (the 2020 regulation represented a change in the law, which applied prospectively only and not to this case) Text

San Francisco Baykeeper v. U. S. Env’t Prot. Agency, 492 F. Supp. 3d 1030 (N.D. Cal. 2020), appeal dismissed, No. 20-17359, 2021 WL 837485 (9th Cir. Mar. 3, 2021) (held that salt-water ponds remained subject to CWA jurisdiction) Text

Env’t Def. Fund v. U.S. Env’t Prot. Agency, No. 4:21-CV-03-BMM, 2021 WL 270246 (D. Mont. Jan. 27, 2021) (good cause did not exist to exempt the final rule from the Administrative Procedure Act’s 30-day notice requirement for substantive rules) Text

Cottonwood Envtl. Law Ctr. v. Edwards, No. 2:20-cv-00028-BU-BMM, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54922 (D. Mont. Mar. 23, 2021) (The Court held that scientific data collected from years before the MT DEQ had implemented this Nutrient Management Plan used in the complaint is not enough to determine whether an indirect discharge is the ‘functional equivalent’ of a direct discharge) Text

Wash. State Dairy Fed’n v. United States EPA, No. 20-70331, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 14350 (9th Cir. May 14, 2021) (Petition dismissed) Text

Coal. to Protect Puget Sound Habitat v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, F. App’x 77, 80 (9th Cir. 2021) (The Army Corps of Engineers must adequately explain why negative effects are insignificant or minimal when they issue nationwide permits authorizing discharges, structures, and work in waters of Puget Sound related to commercial shellfish aquaculture.”) Text

Clarke v. Pac. Gas & Elec. Co., 501 F. Supp. 3d 774 (N.D. Cal. 2020) (CWA claim accrued when, during the operation and demolition of the plant, contaminants were directly discharge) Text

California v. Wheeler, No. 20-cv-03005-RS, 2020 WL 3403072 (N.D. Cal. June 19, 2020) (Request for injunction on new “waters of the United States” regulations) Text

Coal. to Prot. Puget Sound Habitat v. U.S. Army Corps. Of Eng’rs, No. C16-0950RSL, 2020 WL 3100829 (W.D. Wash. June 11, 2020) (Vacating nationwide CWA permit in the state of Washington) Text

Eden Envtl. Citizen’s Grp., LLC v. Am. Custom Marble, Inc., No. 19-CV-03424-EMC, 2020 WL 733167 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2020) (citizen suit alleging NPDES permit violations) Text

Washington Cattlemen’s Ass’n v. United States Envtl. Prot. Agency, No. C19-0569-JCC, 2019 WL 7290590 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 30, 2019) (request to enjoin WOTUS rule) Text

Columbia Riverkeeper v. Wheeler, 944 F.3d 1204 (9th Cir. 2019) (failure to issued temperature TMDL) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Wheeler, No. C15-1342-JCC, 2019 WL 6310562 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 25, 2019) (challenge to WOTUS rule) Text

Waste Action Project v. Port of Olympia, No. C17-5445 BHS, 2019 WL 6215281 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 21, 2019) (claims that Port violated NPDES permit) Text

Pacific Coast Fed’n of Fishermen’s Ass’ns v. Glaser, No. 17-17130, 2019 WL 4230097 (9th Cir. 2019) (Summary judgment not warranted in suit alleging drainage system not in CWA agriculture exception) Text

United States v. Bobby Wolford Trucking & Salvage, Inc., No. C18-747 TSZ, 2019 WL 5693928 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 4, 2019) (discharge of dredge and fill without a CWA permit) Text

Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. U.S. EPA, 377 F.Supp.3d 1156 (D. Mont. 2019) (EPA was arbitrary and capricious in allowing dischargers 17 years to meet standards) Text

Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Schneider Dock & Intermodal Facility, Inc., 374 F.Supp.3d 897 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (Allegations sufficient to establish standing for CWA citizen suit) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Total Terminals Int’l, LLC, 371 F.Supp.3d 857 (W.D. Wash. 2019) (Port could be liable for tenant’s discharges) Text

City of Imperial Beach v. Int’l Boundary and Water Comm’n, U.S. Section, 356 F.Supp.3d 1006 (S.D. Cal. 2018) (Notice of intent was sufficient notice of clams relating to discharge of pollutants) Text

Columbia Riverkeeper v. Pruitt, 337 F.Supp.3d 989 (W.D. Wash. 2018) (EPA violated CWA by failing to issue TMDLs) Text

City of Imperial Beach v. Int’l Boundary & Water Comm’n-U.S. Section, 337 F.Supp.3d 916 (S.D. Cal. 2018) (Water treatment plant company discharged water from un-permitted area) Text

Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. Pruitt, 320 F.supp.3d 1115 (C.D. Cal. 2018) (EPA interpretation of CWA provision not entitled to deference) Text

Deschutes River All. v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 331 F.Supp.3d 1187 (D. Or. 2018) (CWA certification for project did not require strict compliance with state water quality criteria) Text

U.S. v. HVI Cat Canyon, Inc., 314 F.Supp.3d 1049 (C.D. Cal. 2018) (Wetlands had significant nexus with navigable water) Text

Friends of Santa Clara River v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 887 F.3d 906 (9th Cir. 2018) (Corps did not violate CWA by failing to select least environmentally damaging practicable alternative) Text

Olympic Forest Coal. v. Coast Seafoods Co., 884 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2018) (CWA permit required for discharging pollutants from non-concentrated aquatic animal production facilities) Text

Cent. Sierra Envtl. Res. Ctr. V. Stanislaus Nat’l Forest, 304 F.Supp.3d 916 (E.D. Cal. 2018) (Claim fell within CWA’s waiver of sovereign immunity) Text

Hawai’I Wildlife Fund v. Cty. of Maui, 881 F.3d 754 (9th Cir. 2018) (County’s discharge of pollutants into groundwater violated CWA) Text

U.S. v. Robertson, 875 F.3d 1281 (9th Cir. 2017) (Significant nexus is test used to determine jurisdiction of wetlands) Text

California Sportfishing Prot. All. v. Shiloh Group, LLC, 268 F.Supp.3d 1029 (N.D. Cal. 2017) (Plaintiff stated claim that industrial park landlord violated CWA) Text

Save Our Cabinets v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 254 F.Supp.3d 1241 (D. Mont. 2017) (USFS was arbitrary and capricious in approving project not in compliance with water quality standards)  Text

S. California All. of Publicly Owned Treatment Works v. U.S. EPA, 853 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 2017) (EPA did not deny draft permits by sending objection letter) Text

Deschutes River All. v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 249 F.Supp.3d 1182 (D. Or. 2017) (CWA authorizes citizens to initiate suit to require facility to obtain certification) Text

Ctr. for Envtl. Law and Policy v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., 228 F.Supp.3d 1152 (E.D. Wash. 2017) (Hatchery’s discharging pollutants without NPDES permit violated CWA) Text

Friends of Maha’ulepu, Inc. v. Hawai’I Dairy Farms, LLC, 224 F.Supp.3d 1094 (D. Haw. 2016) (Allegations that dairy farm violated CWA) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council v. Cty. of Los Angeles, 840 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2016) (Issuance of NPDES permit did not render request for injunctive relief moot) Text

U.S. v. HVI Cat Canyon, Inc., 213 F.Supp.3d 1249 (C.D. Cal. 2016) (Adjoining shorelines within the meaning of CWA includes the edge of intermittent streams) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Louis Dreyfus Commodities LLC, 192 F.Supp.3d 1165 (W.D. Wash. 2016) (Adequate notice provided to operator of grain facility of plaintiff’s intent to sue under CWA) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Cruise Terminals of America, LLC, 216 F.Supp.3d 1198 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Vessel maintenance required Industrial Stormwater General Permit) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Whitley Mfg. Co., Inc., 145 F.Supp.3d 1054 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Proof that stormwater contained any particular substance not required to establish CWA violation) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Rainer Petroleum Corp., 138 F.Supp.3d 1170 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Stormwater discharge violated CWA) Text

ONRC Action v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 798 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2015) (CWA permit not required for water flowing into river from human-made channel) Text

Alaska Eskimo Whaling Comm’n v. U.S. EPA, 791 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2015) (CWA did not require EPA to apply all statutory criteria to each permitting decision) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. EPA, 90 F.Supp.3d 1177 (W.D. Wash. 2015) (Challenging EPA decision not to identify any water experiencing ocean acidification as impaired under CWA) Text

Pebble Ltd. P’ship v. U.S. EPA, 155 F.Supp.3d 1000 (D. Ala. 2014) (EPA decision to initiate proceedings to restrict use of watershed not final agency action) Text

Alaska Cmty. Action on Toxics v. Aurora Energy Serv., LLC, 765 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2014) (General NPDES permit did not shield owner from CWA liability) Text

Hawai’I Wildlife Fund v. Cty. of Maui, 24 F.Supp.3d 980 (D. Haw. 2014) (Failure to obtain NPDES permit violated CWA) Text

Cook Inletkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 22 F.Supp.3d 1010 (D. Ala. 2014) (Corps decision to issue permit was reasonable) Text

San Francisco Baykeeper v. Levin Enter., Inc., 12 F.Supp.3d 1208 (N.D. Cal. 2013) (Intent to sue letter adequate under CWA) Text

Pace v. Bonham, 5 F.Supp.3d 1127 (N.D. Cal. 2013) (Live fish released into lakes as part of stocking program were not pollutants) Text

Alaska Cmty. Action on Toxics v. Aurora Energy Serv., LLC, 940 F.Supp.2d 1005 (D. Ala. 2013) (Owner of coal loading facility shielded from CWA liability) Text

Idaho Conservation League v. Atlanta Gold Corp., 879 F.Supp.2d 1148 (D. Idaho 2012) (Calculating penalties under CWA) Text

Snoqualmie Valley Preservation All. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 683 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2012) (Verification of discharge request by Corps was consistent with applicable regulations) Text

Remington v. Mathson, 42 F.Supp.3d 1256 (N.D. Cal. 2012) (No evidence to support claim of CWA violation) Text

Northwest Envtl. Advocates v. U.S. EPA, 855 F.Supp.2d 1199 (D. Or. 2012) (EPA required to review state’s nonpoint source provisions) Text

Barnum Timber Co., v. U.S. EPA, 835 F.Supp.2d 773 (N.D. Cal. 2011) (EPA properly decided to retain creek on list of impaired waters) Text

Northwest Envtl. Defense Ctr. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 817 F.Supp.2d 1290 (D. Or. 2011) (Corps’ analysis of practicable alternatives under CWA was sufficient) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council, Inc. v. Cty. of Los Angeles, 673 F.3d 880 (9th Cir. 2011) (NPDES permit violation) Text

Northwest Envtl. Defense Ctr. v. Brown, 640 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2011) (Stormwater runoff from logging roads was subject to NPDES permitting) Text

Ecological Rights Found. v. Pacific Gas and Elec. Co., 803 F.Supp.2d 1056 (N.D. Cal. 2011) (Contaminated rainwater was not point source discharge) Text

U.S. v. Vierstra, 803 F.Supp.2d 1166 (D. Idaho 2011) (Canal fell within WOTUS definition) Text

Northwest Envtl. Defense Ctr. v. Brown, 617 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2010) (discharge of stormwater from ditches without permits)  Text

Sequoia Forestkeeper v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 1:09-cv-00392-LJO-JLT, 2010 WL 2464857 (E.D. Cal. June 12, 2010) (alleged failure to provide an Environmental Impact Statement)

Wild Fish Conservancy v. EPA, No. C08-0156-JCC, 2010 WL 1734850 (W.D. Wash. April 28, 2010) (challenge to state regulations exempting salmon farms)  Text

Wild Fish Conservancy v. Quilcene Nat’l Fish Hatchery, No. C08-5585BHS, 2009 WL 3380655 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 19, 2009) (fish hatchery under CWA)

St. John’s Organic Farm v. Gem County Mosquito Abatement Dist., 574 F.3d 1054 (9th Cir. 2009) (citizen suit by organic farm for pesticide discharges without a permit; plaintiff entitled to attorney’s fees)  Text

Ctr. For Biological Diversity v. Wagner, No. 08-302-CL, 2009 WL 21706049 (D. Or. June 20, 2009) (best management practices did not violate CWA)  Text

Barnum Timber Co. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, No. C 08-01988 WHA, 2008 WL 5115088 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2008) (retention of water body on state’s impair list)

Barnum Timber Co. v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, No. C 08-01988 WHA, 2008 WL 4447690 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2008) (challenging EPA’s list of impaired state waters)

Coldani v. Hamm, No. 2:07-CV-0660- JAM EFB, 2008 WL 4104292 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2008) (joinder of necessary party in CWA suit against dairy)

Our Children’s Earth Found. v. U.S. E.P.A., 527 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2008) (review of EPA’s review of effluent guidelines)  Text

Coldani v. Hamm, No. Civ. S-07-660 RRB EFB, 2007 WL 2345016 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2007) (citizen suit requirements, navigable waters)

City of Los Angeles v. County of Kern, 509 F.Supp.2d 865 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (no preemption of land applications of biosolids)  Text

Lindner v. Meadow Gold Dairies, Inc., 515 F.Supp.2d 1154 (D. Haw. 2007) (the CWA did not frustrate a lease)  Text

S. Cal. River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, 496 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2007) (significant nexus to navigable waters)  Text

U.S. v. Moses, 496 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2007) (water of the United States, what is a discharge)  Text

San Francisco Baykeeper v. Cargill Salt Div., 481 F.3d 700 (9th Cir. 2007) (waters of the United States)  Text

Envtl. Prot. Info. Ctr. v. Pac. Lumber Co., 469 F.Supp.2d 803 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (discharge, point source, navigable waters)  Text

Or. Natural Desert Ass’n v. U.S. Forest Serv., No. 07-634-AS, 2007 WL 140657 (D. Or. Jan. 10, 2007) (grazing runoff is not a point source)  Text

Baccarat Fremont Developers, LLC v. U.S. Army Corps Eng’rs, 425 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 2005) (jurisdiction over wetlands)  Text

Fairhurst v. Hagener, 422 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2005) (pesticide applications)  Text

U.S. v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., No. CV-00-7409 CAS (RNBx), 2005 WL 5957827 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2005) (control of discharges in waters of the U.S.)

U.S. v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., 369 F.Supp.2d 1180 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (jurisdiction of the CWA)  Text

U.S. v. Phillips, 367 F.3d 846 (9th Cir. 2004) (navigability of waters)  Text

U.S. v. Adam Bros. Farming, Inc., 369 F.Supp.2d 1166 (C.D. Cal. 2003) (jurisdiction of the CWA)  Text

Friends of Wild Swan v. U.S. EPA, 74 F. App’x 718 (9th Cir. 2003) (review of state’s TMDLs for water quality limited segments)

City of Arcadia v. U.S. EPA, 265 F.Supp.2d 1142 (N.D. Cal. 2003) (approval of state-submitted TMDLs)  Text

N. Plains Res. Council v. Fid. Exploration & Dev. Co., 325 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2003) (state created CWA permit exemption)  Text

Nw. Envtl. Advocates v. U.S. EPA, 268 F.Supp.2d 1255 (D. Or. 2003) (water quality standards and antidegradation plan)  Text

Hiebenthal v. Meduri Farms, 242 F. Supp. 2d 885 (D. Or. 2002) (jurisdiction)  Text

League of Wilderness Defenders/Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Forsgren, 309 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2002) (“point source”)  Text

Comty. Ass’n for Restoration of the Env’t v. Henry Bosma Dairy, 305 F.3d 943 (9th Cir. 2002) (“citizen suit,” “navigable waters”)  Text

United States v. New Portland Meadows, Inc., No. 00-507-AS, 2002 WL 31180956 (D. Or. Sept. 9, 2002) (discharges by racetrack)

Ass’n to Protect Hammersley, Eld, and Totten Inlets v. Taylor Resources, Inc., 299 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002) (mussel farming discharges)  Text

San Francisco BayKeeper v. Whitman, 297 F.3d 877 (9th Cir. 2002) (state submitted TMDLs)  Text

Pronsolino v. Nastri, 291 F.3d 1123 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 926 (2003) (TMDL authority)  Text

Cal. Sportfishing Prot. Alliance v. Diablo Grande, Inc., 209 F.Supp.2d 1059 (E.D. Cal. 2002) (standing, navigable water, discharge)  Text

Borden Ranch P’ship v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 261 F.3d 810 (9th Cir. 2001), aff’d by an equally divided court, 537 U.S. 99 (2002) (normal farming exemption, recapture provision)  Text


TENTH CIRCUIT

Rio Hondo Land & Cattle Co., L.P. v. United States Env’t Prot. Agency, 995 F.3d 1124 (10th Cir. 2021) (permit’s increased mass-based nitrogen limit did not violate CWA’s anti-backsliding rule and permit’s elimination of concentration-based limits for nitrogen and phosphorous did not violate CWA’s anti-backsliding rule) Text

State v. U.S. Env’t Prot. Agency, 989 F.3d 874 (10th Cir. 2021) (a state agency official’s declaration did not specify when Colorado would have needed to take enforcement action in place of the federal government) Text

Colorado v. U.S. EPA, 445 F.Supp.3d 1295 (D. Colo. 2020) (Challenging regulations regarding scope of federal jurisdiction under CWA) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Swift Beef Co., No. 19-cv-01464, 2020 WL 2914868 (D. Colo. June 2, 2020) (Unpermitted discharges from slaughterhouse) Text

HEAL Utah v. Pacificorp, 375 F.Supp.3d 1231 (D. Utah 2019) (Failure to establish environmental injury from risk of runoff or groundwater contamination) Text

Benham v. Ozark Materials River Rock, LLC, 885 F.3d 1267 (10th Cir. 2018) (District court did not err in finding that mining company discharged without permit) Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. Bostick, 787 F.3d 1043 (10th Cir. 2015) (Corps permissibly interpreted CWA provision governing dredge and fill permits) Text

U.S. v. Hamilton, 952 F.Supp.2d 1271 (D. Wyo. 2013) (Creek was a WOTUS) Text

Colorado Tr. For Prot. & Benefits v. Souder, Miller & Associates, Inc., 870 F.Supp.2d 1173 (D. Colo. 2012) (Drilling did not discharge contaminants into WOTUS) Text

New Salida Ditch Co. v. United Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., No. 08-cv-00391-JLK, 2009 WL 5126498 (D. Colo. Dec. 18, 2009) (insurance duty to defend; unpermitted discharge of fill material)  Text

Ctr. for Native Ecosystems v. Cables, 509 F.3d 1310 (10th Cir. 2007) (grazing permits did not violate CWA)  Text

Kersenbrock v. Stoneman Cattle Co., LLC, No. 07-1044-MLB, 65 ERC 2016, 2007 WL 2219288 (D. Kan. July, 30, 2007) (standing to bring citizen suit)  Text

Karr v. Hefner, 475 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 2007) (diligent prosecution by EPA, adequacy of notice)   Text

U.S. v. Hubenka, 438 F.3d 1026 (10th Cir. 2006) (tributary rule, dredge and fill by irrigation district)  Text

Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. EPA, 415 F.3d 1121 (10th Cir. 2005) (state water quality standards)  Text

Swartz v. Beach, 229 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (D. Wyo. 2002) (CWA violations, takings issues)  Text


ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

United States v. Coleman, 833 F. App’x 810 (11th Cir. 2020) (proffer of evidence was not sufficient to satisfy “navigable waters” element of crime of discharge of oil into waters of the United States) Text

Glynn Env’t Coal., Inc. v. Sea Island Acquisition, LLC, No. CV 219-050, 2021 WL 313626 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 29, 2021) (property owner did not establish injury-in-fact as to confer associational standing, and plaintiffs did not establish injury-in-fact that was procedural in nature) Text

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 941 F.3d 1288 (11th Cir. 2019) (challenging approval of CWA dredge and fill permit) Text

Cahaba Riverkeeper v. U.S. EPA, No. 17-11972, 2019 WL 4309089 (11th Cir. 2019) (EPA did not abuse discretion in declining to comment proceedings to withdraw Alabama’s authority to administer NPDES program) Text

Georgia v. Wheeler, No. 2:15-CV-00079, 2019 WL 3949922 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 21, 2019) (Invalidating 2015 WOTUS rule) Text

Black Warrior River-Keeper, Inc. v. Drummond Co., In., 387 F.Supp.3d 1271 (N.D. Ala. 2019) (Sufficient evidence supported claim that acid mine discharged into stream) Text

Altamaha Riverkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 355 F.Supp.3d 1181 (S.D. Ga. 2018) (Corps adequately analyzed alternatives as required by CWA) Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 320 F.Supp.3d 1298 (M.D. Fla. 2018) (Corps did not violate CWA by permitting conversion of wetland mitigation bank) Text

Georgia v. Pruitt, 326 F.Supp.3d 1356 (S.D. Ga. 2018) (Preliminary injunction warranted against enforcement of WOTUS rule) Text

Flint Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Southern Mills, Inc., 276 F.Supp.3d 1359 (M.D. Ga. 2017) (Citizen-suit plaintiffs sufficient stated claim for CWA violation) Text

Black Warrior Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 833 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 2016) (Corps was not arbitrary and capricious in finding minimal adverse effects in new permit) Text

Black Warrior Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Black Warrior Minerals, Inc., 734 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir. 2013) (Environmental groups cannot evade CWA’s 60-day waiting period) Text

Leakey v. Corridor Materials, LLC, 839 F.Supp.2d 1340 (M.D. Ga. 2012) (Consent order did not bar private citizen suit under CWA) Text

Florida Wildlife Fed’n, Inc. v. Jackson, 853 F.Supp.2d 1138 (N.D. Fla. 2012) (Determination that numeric nutrient standard was needed was not arbitrary or capricious) Text

New Hope Power Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 746 F.Supp.2d 1272 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (Corps violated APA by adopting rules related to prior converted croplands without public notice period) Text

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. U.S. — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 1506267 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (challenge forcing EPA to modify water quality standards and NPDES permits)  Text

Friends of Everglades v. S. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist., 570 F.3d 1210 (11th Cir. 2009) (transfer of pollutant from one navigable body of water to another did not require NPDES permit)  Text

Ogeechee-Canoochee Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. 606CV102, 2008 WL 2199369 (S.D. Ga. May 27, 2008) (silviculture exemption to § 404)  Text

U.S. v. Robison, 505 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2007) (“navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act)  Text

Sierra Club, Inc. v. Leavitt, 488 F.3d 904 (11th Cir. 2007) (impaired waters list)  Text

Sierra Club v. U.S. EPA, 377 F.Supp.2d 1205 (N.D. Fla. 2005) (EPA’s review of state’s NPDES authorization)  Text

Fla. Pub. Interest Research Group Citizen Lobby, Inc. v. EPA, 386 F.3d 1070 (11th Cir. 2004) (state’s impaired waters list)  Text

Sierra Club v. Hankinson, 351 F.3d 1358 (11th Cir. 2003) (attorney’s fees for citizen suit)  Text

Fishermen Against Destruction of Env’t, Inc. v. Closter Farms, Inc., Sierra Club v. Meiburg, 296 F.3d 1021 (11th Cir. 2002) (TMDL standards, abuse of court’s discretion), 300 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir. 2002) (“stormwater discharge”)  Text


D.C. CIRCUIT

D.C. v. Miss Dallas Trucking, LLC, 240 A.3d 355 (D.C. 2020), as amended (Nov. 12, 2020) (if violating entity is a small company, unable to absorb the penalty sought by the District, the trial court might still determine the violation was serious enough to fine) Text

Blue Water Baltimore v. Wheeler, No. CV 16-452 (RBW), 2019 WL 6464974 (D.D.C. Dec. 2, 2019) (challenging EPA approval of Maryland report on surface water quality) Text

Anacostia Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Wheeler, No. 16-CV-1651 (CRC), 2019 WL 3803639 (D. D.C. Aug. 12, 2019) (EPA erred in approving TMDLs) Text

Potomac Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Wheeler, 381 F.Supp.3d 1 (D. D.C. 2019) (Plaintiff had standing to challenge EPA approval of impaired water list) Text

Hoopa Valley Tribe v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 913 F.3d 1099 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (States waived authority under CWA to issue water quality certification for hydroelectric project) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council, Inc. v. EPA, 301 F.Supp.3d 133 (D. D.C. 2018) (Trash pollution plan violated CWA) Text

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 857 F.3d 388 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (FERC conditional approval of pipeline did not violate CWA) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. EPA, 829 F.3d 710 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (EPA adequately explain decision to modify discharge permit) Text

Envtl. Integrity Project v. U.S. EPA, 177 F.Supp.3d 36 (D. D.C. 2016) (CWA provision requiring information from point source owners to be public does not displace FOIA exemption) Text

Envtl. Integrity Project v. McCarthy, 139 F.Supp.3d 25 (D. D.C. 2015) (EPA notice withdrawing proposed rule was adequate) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 70 F.Supp.3d 151 (D. D.C. 2014) (EPA not required to rely on new information in vetoing disposal sites after permit had been granted) Text

Nat’l Min. Ass’n v. McCarthy, 758 F.3d 243 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (CWA did not prohibit interagency consultation and coordination plan) Text

Flood and Water Watch v. U.S. EPA, 5 F.Supp.3d 62 (D. D.C. 2013) (References to programs included in EPA’s TMDL was not final agency action) Text

City of Dover v. U.S. EPA, 956 F.Supp.2d 272 (D. D.C. 2013) (Report addressing nutrient levels for tidal estuary was not a water quality standard) Text

Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. U.S. EPA, 945 F.Supp.2d 39 (D. D.C. 2013) (Failure to revise a vessel permit was not a final agency action) Text

Alaska Cmty. Action on Toxics v. U.S. EPA, 943 F.Supp.2d 96 (D. D.C. 2013) (CWA citizen suit was time-barred) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. U.S. EPA, 714 F.3d 608 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (EPA had authority under CWA to withdraw disposal site specification post-permit) Text

Mingo Logan Coal Co. Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 850 F.Supp.2d 133 (D. D.C. 2012) (EPA lack authority to modify or revoke discharge permit) Text

Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, 661 F.3d 1147 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Corps acted in its discretion in analysis of CWA permit) Text

Anacostia Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Jackson, 798 F.Supp.2d 210 (D. D.C. 2011) (TMDL did not protect all designated uses) Text

Lake Carriers’ Ass’n v. EPA, 652 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (EPA did not need to provide notice and opportunity to comment before issuing final CWA permit) Text

Alcoa Power Generating Inc. v. FERC, 643 F.3d 963 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (State did not waive authority to certify water quality under CWA) Text

Nat’l Ass’n of Home Builders v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’r, 699 F.Supp.2d 209 (D. D.C. 2010) (challenge of permit issued under CWA based upon interpretation of “navigable waters”)  Text

New Hope Power Co. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, — F.Supp.2d —-, 2010 WL 2838538 (D.D.C. 2010) (prior converted croplands; renewable energy; jurisdiction on CWA)  Text

Weaver’s Cove Energy, LLC v. R.I. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt., 524 F.3d 1330 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (lack of standing to challenge dredge and fill inaction) Text

Friends of Earth, Inc. v. EPA, 446 F.3d 140 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (EPA approved TMDLs)  Text

Gem County Mosquito Abatement Dist. v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 398 F.Supp.2d 1 (D.D.C. 2005) (declaratory judgment that NPDES permit not required)  Text

Bravos v. Green, 306 F.Supp.2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004) (state implementation TMDL plan)  Text

Friends of Earth v. U.S. EPA, 333 F.3d 184 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (lack of subject matter jurisdiction to review TMDL)  Text


FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Taylor Energy Co., L.L.C. v. Dep’t of the Interior, 990 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (held that transfer was barred lack of jurisdiction)  Text

City of Wilmington v. United States, 152 Fed. Cl. 373 (2021) (representations defendant made in application for water quality certification did not judicially estop defendant from presenting evidence that properties contained wetlands) Text 

Kiewit Infrastructure West, Co. v. United States, 86 Env’t Rep. Cas. (BNA) 6108, 2019 U.S. Claims LEXIS 505 (Fed. Cl. May 15, 2019), rev’d, remanded, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 27142 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 26, 2020) (Motion for summary judgment denied for inconsistency in meaning of “environmental impacts” in contract) Text

City of Wilmington, Delaware v. United States, 136 Fed. Cl. 628 (Fed. Cl. 2018) (Government’s failure to file administrative appeal did not violate CWA) Text

Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States, 787 F.3d 1111 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (Corps’ denial of wetland fill permit was a taking) Text

Pioneer Reserve, LLC v. United States, 119 Fed.Cl.201 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (Wetlands mitigation banking instrument was a contract) Text

Lost Tree Village Corp. v. United States, 115 Fed.Cl.219 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (Denial of wetland fill permit was a taking) Text

Brace v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 337 (Fed. Cl. 2006), aff’d, 250 F. App’x 359 (Fed. Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 1658 (2008) (CWA restoration plan was not a taking)

Brace v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 649 (Fed. Cl. 2002)(“navigable waters”, takings)


ALABAMA

Alabama Dep’t of Env’t Mgmt. v. Wynlake Dev., LLC, No. 2190999, 2021 WL 1324013 (Ala. Civ. App. Apr. 9, 2021) (ADEM’s assessment of the civil penalty was not arbitrary and capricious) Text

Ala. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt. v. Ala. Rivers Alliance, Inc., 14 So.3d 853 (Ala. Civ. App. 2007) (reversing approval of NPDES permit)  Text

Ala. Dep’t of Envtl. Mgmt. v. Legal Envtl. Assistance Found., Inc., 922 So.2d 101 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005) (review of water quality antidegradation regulations)  Text

Ex parte Legal Envtl. Assistance Found., Inc., 832 So.2d 61 (Ala. 2002) (review of antidegradation policy)  Text


CALIFORNIA

Lent v. California Coastal Comm’n, 62 Cal. App. 5th 812, 277 Cal. Rptr. 3d 106 (2021), as modified on denial of reh’g (Apr. 16, 2021), review filed (May 13, 2021) (California Coastal Commission’s issuance of a cease and desist was valid because coastal zone landowners undertook activity inconsistent with permit by maintaining structures in a public easement area, although they had not built the structures) Text

City of Gardena v. State Water Res. Control Bd., No. G058540, 2021 WL 289363, at *3 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2021), as modified on denial of reh’g (Feb. 19, 2021), review denied (Apr. 28, 2021) (water quality control boards satisfied the requirement to consider economic in issuing a NPDES permit for discharges) Text

Sweeney v. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Dev. Comm’n, 62 Cal. App. 5th 1, 276 Cal. Rptr. 3d 482 (2021), as modified on denial of reh’g (Mar. 18, 2021), as modified (Apr. 14, 2021), review filed (Apr. 20, 2021) (penalty imposed by BCDC was supported by BCDC’s findings4 fine imposed did not violate Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines) Text

Malaga Cty. Water Dist. v. Cent. Valley Reg’l Water Quality Control Bd., 58 Cal. App. 5th 396, 272 Cal. Rptr. 3d 437 (2020), reh’g denied (Jan. 4, 2021), review denied (Mar. 17, 2021) (permit improperly delegated to executive officer the Board’s exclusive authority to modify waste discharge requirements.) Text

Santa Clara Valley Water Dist. v. San Francisco Bay Reg’l Water Quality Control Bd., 59 Cal. App. 5th 199, 273 Cal. Rptr. 3d 333 (2020) (project’s sedimentation effects constituted discharge of “waste”) Text

Dep’t of Finance v. Comm’n on State Mandates, 18 Call.App.5th 662 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (CWA did not mandate “maximum extend practicable” standard in providing for pollutant reduction in permits) Text

Coastal Envtl. Rights Found. v. California Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 12 Cal.App.5th 178 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (Approval of NPDES general permit complied with CWA) Text

Conway v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 235 Cal.App.4th 671 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) (Water Quality Control Board could state TMDL pollution allocation in terms of concentrations of pollutants) Text

Surfrider Found. v. California Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 211 Cal.App.4th 557 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (Challenge to Water Quality Control Board’s approval of NPDES permit) Text

Garland v. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 210 Cal.App.4th 557 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (Discharge to navigable waters was governed by CWA) Text

San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Auth. v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 183 Cal.App.4th 1110 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (Water quality plan amendment could measure salinity levels on average rather than daily) Text

Cmtys. for a Better Env’t v. State of Water Res. Control Bd., 109 Cal.App.4th 1089 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) (water quality-based effluent limitations did not need to be numeric standards)  Text


CONNECTICUT

Burton v. Dep’t of Env’t Prot., No. 20466, 2021 WL 222039 (Conn. Jan. 21, 2021) (Because radiological discharge by nuclear power plants was regulated exclusively by the federal government, the hearing officer’s decision to preclude paragraph 5B for lack of jurisdiction was not an abuse of discretion)


DELAWARE

Delaware Solid Waste Auth. v. Delaware Dep’t of Nat. Res. & Env’t Control, No. 81, 2020, 2021 WL 1345557 (Del. Apr. 9, 2021) (DSWA was strictly liable for not ensuring that all transporters hauling waste from transfer station had valid permits) Text

Food & Water Watch v. Delaware Dep’t of Nat. Res. & Envtl. Control, No. CV N19A-04-006 FWW, 2019 WL 6481888 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 27, 2019) (general permit lack of monitoring contrary to CWA requirements) Text


FLORIDA

Siesta Key Ass’n of Sarasota, Inc. v. City of Sarasota, No. 2D19-3833, 2021 WL 1395233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2021) (existence of valid permit authorizing city’s beach restoration project precluded suit for injunctive relief) Text


GEORGIA

City of Guyton v. Barrow, 828 S.E.2d 366 (Ga. 2019) (CWA antidegradation rule did not require state agency to complete antidegradation analysis for nonpoint source discharge) Text


IDAHO

Asarco, Inc. v. State, 69 P.3d 139 (Idaho 2003) (invalidating state TMDLs)  Text


ILLINOIS

Valstad v. Cipriano, 828 N.E.2d 854 (Ill. Ct. App. 2005) (state fees for NPDES permits)  Text


KENTUCKY

Louisville Gas and Elec. Co. v. Kentucky Waterways All., 517 S.W.3d 479 (Ky. 2017) (Discharge permit subject to analysis under EPA regulations imposing limits on pollutants) Text


MARYLAND

Maryland Small MS4 Coal. v. Maryland Dep’t of Env’t, No. 1865, SEPT.TERM,2019, 2021 WL 1684657 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Apr. 29, 2021) (Department did not exceed its authority under CWA when it directed calculation of impervious surface to be restored based on total impervious surface within urbanized area of county that had little or no stormwater management) Text

GenOn Mid-Atl., LLC v. Maryland Dep’t of the Env’t, 248 Md. App. 253, 241 A.3d 40 (2020) (the Department had enough information on plaintiffs’ capacity to meet the effluent limitation guideline (ELG) requirements to issue the permits and it was their responsibility to inform the Department during the comment period if it was unable to meet the guidelines) Text

Maryland Dep’t of Env’t v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, 134 A.3d 892 (Md. Ct. App. 2016) (Discharge permits complied with CWA) Text

Maryland Dep’t of Env’t v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, 112 A.3d 979 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2013) (Permit was subject to standard for NPDES permits) Text


MICHIGAN

Michigan Farm Bureau v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 807 F.W.2d 866 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011) (DEQ had authority to require feedlot operators to apply for NPDES permit) Text

Sierra Club Mackinac County v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 766 N.W.2d 857 (Mich. 2009) (upholding reversal of declaratory judgment for state CAFO program)  Text

Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 747 N.W.2d 321 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008) (invalidating state general CAFO permit)  Text


MINNESOTA

Matter of Determination of Need for Env’t Impact Statement for Mankato Motorsports Park, No. A20-0952, 2021 WL 1604359, at *1 (Minn. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2021) (the city’s negative EIS declaration was arbitrary and capricious, requiring a new EIS determination.)  Text

Matter of Reissuance of an NPDES/SDS Permit to United States Steel Corp., 954 N.W.2d 572 (Minn. 2021) (Groundwater was a Class 1 water such that MPCA properly applied Class 1 secondary drinking water standards to steel company’s NPDES permit) Text

Matter of Reissuance of NPDES/SDS Permit to United States Steel Corp., 937 N.W.2d 770 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019) (discharges into groundwater) Text

Matter of Decision to Deny Petitions for a Contested Case Hearing, 924 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019) (Agency not required to designated separate TMDLs for affected lake) Text

Coal. of Greater Minn. Cities v. Minn. Pollution Control Agency, 765 N.W.2d 159 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009) (standing to challenge pre-enforcement of phosphorus effluent discharges)  Text

Hentges v. Minn. Bd. of Water and Soil Res., 638 N.W.2d 441 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) (denial of wetlands exemption)  Text


MISSOURI

Steck v. Missouri Dep’t of Nat. Res., No. WD 83568, 2021 WL 1375870 (Mo. Ct. App. Apr. 13, 2021), reh’g and/or transfer denied (June 1, 2021) (CWC’s decision to adopt the AHC’s recommendation affirming the conditional approval of property owner’s proposed wastewater treatment system was not improperly based on facts or evidence outside of the AHC hearing record, and thus the CWC did not exceed its statutory authority) Text

Matter of PVC Mgmt. II, LLC, No. WD 82525, 2021 WL 1179401 (Mo. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2021) (the Clean Water Commission erred in approving the permit) Text

Mo. Soybean Ass’n v. Mo. Clean Water Comm’n, 102 S.W.3d 10 (Mo. 2003) (subject-matter jurisdiction to review state list of rivers)  Text


MONTANA

Montana Env’t Info. Ctr. v. Montana Dep’t of Env’t Quality, 2020 MT 288, 402 Mont. 128, 476 P.3d 32 (2020) (DEQ acted arbitrarily, capriciously, and unlawfully by relying on expired order of Board of Health and Environmental Sciences when it issued permit) Text

Clark Fork Coal. v. Montana Dep’t of Nat. Res. & Conservation, 2021 MT 44, 403 Mont. 225, 481 P.3d 198) (MWUA section limiting scope of objections to permits did not violate their constitutional right to clean and healthful environment) Text

Clark Fork Coal. v. Mont. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 197 P.3d 482 (Mont. 2008) (granting of state discharge permit)  Text


NEBRASKA

D B Feedyards, Inc. v. Envtl. Sci., Inc., 745 N.W.2d 593 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008) (breach of CWA consulting agreement)  Text


NEW JERSEY

In re Freshwater Wetlands Prot. Act Rules, 852 A.2d 167 (N.J. 2004) (allowing expansion of cranberry operations)  Text


NEW MEXICO

The Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. N.M. Water Quality Control Comm’n, 94 P.3d 788 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004) (water quality standards for waters used for fisheries)  Text


NEW YORK

Application of Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Seggos, 75 N.Y.S. 3d 854 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2018) (Challenging CAFO general permit under CWA) Text

Nat. Res. Defense Council. Inc. v. New York State Dep’t of Envtl. Conservation, 34 N.E.3d 782 (N.Y. 2015) (Stormwater discharge permitting system did not violate CWA) Text

Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. Sheehan, 892 N.Y.S.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (“water transfer” exemption from NPDES permit requirement)  Text


NORTH DAKOTA

New Manchester Resort & Golf v. Douglasville Dev., No. 1:09-CV-504-TWT, 2010 WL 3271509 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 16, 2010) (CWA action for storm-water discharges and placement of fill material)  Text


OREGON

Eastern Oregon Mining Ass’n v. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 445 P.3d 251 (Or. 2019) (State could issue CWA permit regulating discharge) Text

Eastern Oregon Mining Ass’n v. Dep’t Envtl. Quality, 398 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2017) (DEQ could issue permit regulating discharge) Text

Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. State Land Bd., 154 P.3d 734 (Or. Ct. App. 2007), review denied, 174 P.3d 1016 (Or. 2007) (state dredge and fill permit exemptions)  Text

Hawes v. State, 125 P.3d 778 (Or. Ct. App. 2005) (load limits for nonpoint source streams)   Text

Owen v. Div. of State Lands, 76 P.3d 158 (Or. Ct. App. 2003) (farm road maintenance exempted from permit requirements)  Text


PENNSYLVANIA

Food & Water Watch v. Dep’t of Env’t Prot., No. 565 C.D. 2020, 2021 WL 1344772, at *1 (Pa. Commw. Ct. Apr. 12, 2021) (Standing present to pursue appeal) Text


SOUTH CAROLINA

Deerfield Plantation Phase II B Prop. Owners Ass’n v. S.C. Dep’t of Health & Envtl. Control, 414 S.C. 170, 777 S.E.2d 817 (2015) (declaration of federal jurisdiction over a portion of existing stormwater pond does not invalidate a state-issued permit for the entire pond) Text


TEXAS

City of Waco v. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm’n, 83 S.W.3d 169 (Tex. App. 2002) (CAFO permits)  Text


 

VIRGINIA

Crutchfield v. State Water Control Bd., 612 S.E.2d 249 (Va. Ct. App. 2005) (farmers challenging approval of NPDES permit)  Text


WASHINGTON

Snohomish Cty. v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 368 P.3d 194 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016) (CWA did not preempt vested rights doctrine) Text

Puget Soundkeeper All. v. State, Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 356 P.3d 753 (Wastewater discharge permittee violated CWA) Text

Cmty. Ass’n for Restoration of Env’t v. Dep’t of Ecology, 205 P.3d 950 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009) (state approval of general permit for livestock operations)  Text

Dep’t of Ecology v. Douma, 193 P.3d 1102, 2008 WL 4567130 (Wash. Ct. App. June 24, 2008)(violation of state clean water act by diary)  Text

Uselmann v. Clark County, 114 Wash. App. 1045, 2002 WL 31630855 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002) (upholding regulatory fee for storm water regulation)


WYOMING

Wyo. Outdoor Council v. Wyo. Dep’t of Envtl. Quality, 225 P.3d 1054 (Wyo. 2010) (water quality rules)  Text