Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
By Russell Prugh, Associate, Marten Law PLLC
In this Emerging Issues Analysis, Russell Prugh of Marten Law PLLC discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in Sackett v. EPA, a Ninth Circuit decision barring defendants from obtaining pre-enforcement review of EPA administrative compliance orders issued pursuant to the Clean Water Act.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a Ninth Circuit decision barring defendants from obtaining pre-enforcement review of EPA administrative compliance orders issued pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA)-Sackett v. EPA. 'Pre-enforcement review' refers to the ability of a defendant to obtain judicial review of administrative compliance orders without having to wait to be sued by EPA in an enforcement action", writes Russell Prugh. "The Supreme Court's decision to grant certiorari in the CWA case stands in contrast to its decision a month earlier not to hear a case challenging CERCLA's pre-enforcement bar.""The CWA prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States without a § 404 permit," the author points out. "While the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) administers the § 404 permitting program, the Corps shares enforcement duties for unpermitted discharges of dredged or fill material with EPA.""The petitioners, Chantell and Michael Sackett, own a 0.63 acre undeveloped parcel in Idaho. In 2007, the Sacketts filled a portion of their property without a CWA permit, " Prugh explains. "EPA determined that the fill violated the CWA because the parcel contained a jurisdictional wetland and issued an administrative compliance order requiring the Sacketts to remove the fill and restore the parcel to its original condition. The Sacketts petitioned EPA for a hearing to challenge the wetland determination and, after EPA refused, filed suit in district court. Citing the pre-enforcement bar, the district court dismissed the Sackett's case for lack of jurisdiction, and the Sacketts appealed to the Ninth Circuit."
Russell Prugh is an associate at Marten Law PLLC's Seattle office. Russell's practice focuses on environmental and natural resources litigation and environmental permitting for facilities and projects in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. Russell has particular experience with stormwater compliance issues and in litigation arising under the Clean Water Act, CERCLA, MTCA, and other federal and state environmental laws. Russell earned his Juris Doctor, summa *** laude, from Vermont Law School, where he served as a National Moot Court Competition team member and as a managing editor of the Vermont Law Review. He received his Bachelor of Arts in Natural Resources from the University of the South (Sewanee). Prior to joining Marten Law Group, Russell served as a legal intern with the RCRA Enforcement Division of the Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C., and a full-time intern to the Honorable John A. Dooley, Associate Justice of the Vermont Supreme Court. Following law school, Russell served as law clerk to the Honorable Patrick J. McKay, Superior Court Judge, State of Alaska.
Lexis.com subscribers can access the complete commentary, Marten Law on Sackett v. EPA: Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Clean Water Act Bar on Pre-Enforcement Review. Additional fees may be incurred. (approx. 9 pages)
If you do not have a lexis.com ID, you can purchase this commentary on the LexisNexis Store or you can access this commentary and additional Environmental Law Emerging Issues Commentaries on the Store.
Lexis.com subscribers can access the complete set of Emerging Issues Analysis for Environmental Law.
Lexis.com subscribers can access the Lexis enhanced version of Sackett v. EPA, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 5010 (U.S. June 28, 2011).
Lexis.com subscribers can obtain all of the briefs filed in the Sackett v. EPA, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 5010 (U.S. June 28, 2011).
Lexis.com subscribers can access the Lexis enhanced Ninth Circuit decision in Sackett v. United States EPA, 622 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. Idaho 2010) with summary, headnotes, and Shepard's.
Non subscribers can access the free unenhanced version of the Ninth Circuit decision in Sackett v. United States EPA, 622 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. Idaho 2010) available from lexisONE Free Case law.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.