Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re the Cities of Annandale & Maple Lake NPDES/SDS Permit Issuance for the Discharge of Treated Wastewater

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 9, 2005No. A04-2033Published

1DissentRobert H. Schumacher, Judge

I respectfully dissent. I agree with the majority that 40 C.F.R. § 122.4(f) (2005) does not bar the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA) from issuing a permit in the period between the initial listing of a water body as impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the implementation of a Total Maximum Daily Load. I also agree that the PCA was not barred as a matter of law from issuing a permit due to the impact of the proposed plant on dissolved oxygen levels in the North Fork of the Crow River.

But I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the PCA erred by…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Bowen v. Georgetown University HospitalSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Arkansas v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  5. Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API