United States v. Hamilton County Water and Wastewater Treatment Authority, No. 23-cv-00225 (E.D. Tenn. Sept. 29, 2023). Under a proposed consent decree, a settling CWA defendant that allegedly discharged to waters of the United States without an NPDES permit and violated the operations and maintenance conditions of its NPDES permit must perform injunctive relief and pay a civil penalty of $598,490.
United States v. Waco Oil & Gas Co., Inc., No. 23-cv-00078 (N.D.W. Va. Sept. 28, 2023). Under a proposed consent decree, a settling CWA defendant that discharged pollutants without a permit into waters of the United States must restore impacted areas, perform mitigation, and pay a civil penalty.
On May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court dropped an absolute bombshell with its ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. Early assessments of Sackett underscore two vital points: much has been lost for wetlands protection, and much has changed with respect to the Court’s broader environmental law jurisprudence. This Comment delves into both of these issues, providing some background on the unique and long-running controversy that was at the heart of Sackett, and parsing the four opinions from the case.
United States v. Mount Vernon, No. 18-5845 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2023). Under a proposed consent decree, a settling CWA defendant must take steps necessary to bring its municipal separate storm sewer system into compliance and pay a $100,000 civil penalty.
EPA revised and replaced the 2020 regulatory requirements for water quality certification under CWA §401.
EPA Region 1 announced the availability of the draft NPDES non-contact cooling water general permit for discharges to certain waters of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the state of New Hampshire.
United States v. Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc., No. 4:23-cv-03317 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 6, 2023). Under a proposed consent decree, a settling CWA defendant that discharged pollutants without obtaining coverage under an NPDES general permit and exceeded effluent limitations prescribed by the general permit must develop and implement a compliance system to ensure future compliance with the CWA and the general permit, and pay a $507,000 civil penalty.
EPA and the Department of the Army amended the provisions of the agencies’ definition of “waters of the United States” that are invalid under the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the CWA in Sackett v. EPA.
EPA entered into a proposed consent decree under the CWA in Center for Biological Diversity, v. Regan, No. 3:23-cv-535 (N.D. Cal.) in connection with the Agency’s alleged failure to satisfy its mandatory duty under the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act of 2018 to promulgate federal standards of performance for discharges incidental to the normal operation of large commercial vessels that would obligate the Agency to sign a decision taking final action by September 23, 2024.
EPA entered into a proposed interim consent decree under the CWA in Northwest Environmental Advocates v. EPA, No. 19-01537 (W.D. Wash.) in connection with the Agency’s alleged inaction concerning the state of Washington’s water quality assessment and listing program and TMDL program that would require Washington to submit three TMDLs to EPA by December 2025 and would prohibit the plaintiff from filing any new TMDL constructive submission lawsuits in Washington for a period of 34 months.