33 C.F.R. § 328.2
General scope
Waters of the United States include those waters listed in § 328.3(a). The lateral limits of jurisdiction in those waters may be divided into three categories. The categories include the territorial seas, tidal waters, and non-tidal waters (see 33 CFR 328.4 (a), (b), and (c), respectively).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2024 · leading case: Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006).
Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006). “, at 163 (citing 33 CFR § 328.2 (a)(3) (1999), which is the later regulatory equivalent to § 323.”
Norman v. United States, 63 Fed. Cl. 231 (Fed. Cl. 2004). “2 (a)(2) (1982); 33 C.F.R. § 328.2 (2004). . These characteristics are: (1) hydrology, (2) hydric soil, and (3) hydrophytic vegetation.”
Hoffman Homes, Inc., Formerly Known as Hoffman Grp. v. Adm'r, United States Env't Prot. Agency, 961 F.2d 1310 (7th Cir. 1992). “The Corps definition of "waters of the United States,” 33 C.F.R. § 328.2 , is identical. 6 . As noted above, the CJO held that the EPA regulation, 40 C.”
United States v. Newdunn Assocs., 195 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. Va. 2002). “The fact that the term “wetlands” is defined identically by the state statute as by the Corps regulations, 33 C.F.R. § 328.2 (b) and Va.Code § 62.1-44.”
United States v. Boccanfuso, 695 F. Supp. 693 (D. Conn. 1988). “” 33 C.F.R. § 328.2 (1985) and § 328.3(d) (1987).”
United States v. Deaton, 209 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2000). “” 33 C.F.R. § 328.2 (a)(3). In Wilson this court held that the “could affect” language swept too broadly and exceeded the scope of the Corps’ authority trader the statute.”
Seafreeze Shoreside, Inc. v. US Dep't of the Interior (1st Cir. 2024). “§§ 1311(a), 1344(a), 1362(7); 33 C.F.R. §§ 328.2 , 328.3(a)(1), 328.4(a).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.