40 C.F.R. § 230.1
Purpose and policy
(a) The purpose of these Guidelines is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of waters of the United States through the control of discharges of dredged or fill material.
(b) Congress has expressed a number of policies in the Clean Water Act. These Guidelines are intended to be consistent with and to implement those policies.
(c) Fundamental to these Guidelines is the precept that dredged or fill material should not be discharged into the aquatic ecosystem, unless it can be demonstrated that such a discharge will not have an unacceptable adverse impact either individually or in combination with known and/or probable impacts of other activities affecting the ecosystems of concern.
(d) From a national perspective, the degradation or destruction of special aquatic sites, such as filling operations in wetlands, is considered to be among the most severe environmental impacts covered by these Guidelines. The guiding principle should be that degradation or destruction of special sites may represent an irreversible loss of valuable aquatic resources.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case: Ohio Valley Env't Coalition v. Aracoma Coal Co., 556 F.3d 177 (4th Cir. 2009).
Ohio Valley Env't Coalition v. Aracoma Coal Co., 556 F.3d 177 (4th Cir. 2009). “" 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (c) (2008). In each of the four challenged permitting decisions, the Corps found that no cumulatively significant impacts would occur.”
Ohio Valley Env't Coalition v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 479 F. Supp. 2d 607 (S.D.W. Va 2007). “40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (c). In considering the potential adverse impact of a proposed discharge, the Corps must determine in writing the short-term and long-term effects of the discharge on the “physical, chemical, and biological components of the aquatic environment.”
Sierra Club v. Flowers, 423 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (S.D. Fla. 2006). “See 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (d) (“The guiding principle should be that degradation or destruction of special sites [“such as filling operations in wetlands”] may represent an irreversible loss of valuable aquatic resources”).”
City of Elgin v. Cnty. of Cook, 660 N.E.2d 875 (Ill. 1995). “( 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (1994).) While the standing waters cannot be filled without the required section 404 permit, this is not the case regarding the felling of trees or the drilling of monitoring wells.”
John Buttrey & John Buttrey Developments, Inc. v. United States of Am., 690 F.2d 1170 (5th Cir. 1982). “See 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (d) (“The guiding principle should be that degradation or destruction of special sites [“such as filling operations in wetlands”] may represent an irreversible loss of valuable aquatic resources”).”
Town of Norfolk & Town of Walpole v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 968 F.2d 1438 (1st Cir. 1992). “§ 1251 (a); see also 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 . Section 301 of the CWA makes the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters unlawful, unless such discharge is authorized by permit.”
Audubon Naturalist Soc'y of the Cent. Atl. States, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 524 F. Supp. 2d 642 (D. Maryland 2007). “, as well as the EPA’s § 404(b)(1) Guidelines (“Guidelines”), 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 et seq. Individual permits are issued on a case-by-case basis after certain criteria are met: a resource-intensive process that involves extensive site-specific documentation and review, an…”
Mingo Logan Coal Co., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 70 F. Supp. 3d 151 (D.D.C. 2014). “Those guidelines are published at 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 et seq., and they are based upon the criteria for determining the degradation of waters set forth in section 403(c) of the CWA.”
Audubon Soc'y of Greater Denver v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 908 F.3d 593 (10th Cir. 2018). “40 C.F.R. §§ 230.1 - 230.98. When the Corps decides whether it may itself "discharge[ ] .”
Save Our Cmty., Save Our Cmty. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency, 971 F.2d 1155 (5th Cir. 1992). “40 C.F.R. 230.1(a); These Guidelines have been developed .”
City Club of New York v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 246 F. Supp. 3d 860 (S.D.N.Y. 2017). “See 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (a) (“The purpose of these Guidelines is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of waters of the United States through the control of discharges of dredged or fill material.”
Ohio Valley Env't Coalition v. Hurst, 604 F. Supp. 2d 860 (S.D.W. Va 2009). “§ 1344(e)(1); 40 C.F.R. §§ 230.1 -.7. Under the Corps’ regulations, the Corps must also conduct a review of twenty public interest factors identified in the Corps’ regulations.”
— 40 C.F.R. § 230.1(a) — 2 cases
Save Our Cmty., Save Our Cmty. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency, 971 F.2d 1155 (5th Cir. 1992). “40 C.F.R. 230.1(a); These Guidelines have been developed .”
Save Our Cmty. v. U.S. E.P.A. (5th Cir. 1992).
— 40 C.F.R. § 230.1(c) — 2 cases
1902 Atl. Ltd. v. Hudson, 574 F. Supp. 1381 (E.D. Va. 1983).
Surf & Env't Conservation Coalition v. Dep't of the Army United States, 322 F. Supp. 2d 126 (D.P.R. 2004).
— 40 C.F.R. § 230.1(d) — 3 cases
Sierra Club v. Flowers, 423 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (S.D. Fla. 2006). “See 40 C.F.R. § 230.1 (d) (“The guiding principle should be that degradation or destruction of special sites [“such as filling operations in wetlands”] may represent an irreversible loss of valuable aquatic resources”).”
Bersani v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 674 F. Supp. 405 (N.D.N.Y. 1987).
Sierra Club v. Van Antwerp, 709 F. Supp. 2d 1254 (S.D. Fla. 2009).
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.