In Re the Cities of Annandale & Maple Lake NPDES/SDS Permit Issuance for the Discharge of Treated Wastewater
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
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
- Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Bowen v. Georgetown University HospitalSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Arkansas v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- 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.