Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 38
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 38, § 481 (2026)

Findings and purpose

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The Legislature finds that the economic and social well-being of the citizens of the State of Maine depends upon the location of state, municipal, quasi-municipal, educational, charitable, commercial and industrial developments with respect to the natural environment of the State; that many developments because of their size and nature are capable of causing irreparable damage to the people and the environment on the development sites and in their surroundings; that the location of such developments is too important to be left only to the determination of the owners of such developments; and that discretion must be vested in state authority to regulate the location of developments which may substantially affect the environment and quality of life in Maine.   [PL 1987, c. 812, §§1, 18 (AMD).]
The Legislature further finds that certain geological formations particularly sand and gravel deposits, contain large amounts of high quality ground water. The ground water in these formations is an important public and private resource, for drinking water supplies and other industrial, commercial and agricultural uses. The ground water in these formations is particularly susceptible to injury from pollutants, and once polluted, may not recover for hundreds of years. It is the intent of the Legislature, that activities that discharge or may discharge pollutants to ground water may not be located on these formations.   [PL 1981, c. 449, §3 (NEW).]
The purpose of this subchapter is to provide a flexible and practical means by which the State, acting through the department, in consultation with appropriate state agencies, may exercise the police power of the State to control the location of those developments substantially affecting local environment in order to insure that such developments will be located in a manner which will have a minimal adverse impact on the natural environment within the development sites and of their surroundings and protect the health, safety and general welfare of the people.   [PL 1989, c. 890, Pt. A, §40 (AFF); PL 1989, c. 890, Pt. B, §84 (AMD).]
The Legislature further finds that noise generated at development sites has primarily a geographically restricted and frequently transient impact that is best regulated at the municipal level pursuant to a municipality's economic development and land use plans. It is the intent of the Legislature that regulation of noise from developments be primarily the responsibility of local municipal governments.   [PL 1993, c. 383, §2 (AMD); PL 1993, c. 383, §42 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1969, c. 571, §2 (NEW). PL 1971, c. 613, §1 (AMD). PL 1971, c. 618, §12 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 466, §11 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 449, §3 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 513, §1 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 346, §1 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 812, §§1,18 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 890, §§A40,B84 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 383, §2 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 383, §42 (AFF). PL 1995, c. 704, §A2 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 704, §C2 (AFF). PL 1999, c. 468, §5 (AMD).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case: Widewaters Stillwater Co. v. Bangor Area Citizens Organized for Responsible Dev., 2002 ME 27 (Me. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Widewaters Stillwater Co. v. Bangor Area Citizens Organized for Responsible Dev., 2002 ME 27 (Me. 2002). · cites it 2× “For site developments needing approval under the provisions of 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 481 through 488, as amended, and which meet the provisions of 38 M.”
Valente v. Bd. of Env't Prot., 461 A.2d 716 (Me. 1983). · cites it 4× “See 38 M.R.S.A. § 481. In this case, the Board essentially concluded that a "drastic" reduction in the crop-growing capacity of the applicant's own land, even in the absence of any finding of adverse environmental impact on the surrounding area, per se constituted grounds for…”
In Re the Pittston Co. Oil Refinery & Marine Terminal at Eastport, 375 A.2d 530 (Me. 1977). · cites it 4× “Our discussion necessarily begins with the statute, 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 481 et seq., that gave life to the Site Location of Development Law (Article 6) under which Pittston sought to process its application.”
State Ex Rel. Brennan v. RD Realty Corp., 349 A.2d 201 (Me. 1975). · cites it 2× “The jurisdiction of the Maine Board of Environmental Protection to issue or deny approval of a development under the Site Location of Development statute, 38 M.R.S.A. § 481 et seq., is in issue in this case as a result of the denial of a permanent injunction.”
Matter of Lappie, 377 A.2d 441 (Me. 1977). “Pursuant to the Site Location of Development Law (38 M.R.S.A. § 481 et seq.) and the Solid Waste Management Act (38 M.”
In Re Maine Clean Fuels, Inc., 310 A.2d 736 (Me. 1973). “” 38 M.R.S.A. § 481. In accordance with the procedures established in Section 483, MCF notified the EIC of its intent to build an oil refinery and of the nature and location of the proposed development.”
City of Augusta v. Allen, 438 A.2d 472 (Me. 1981). “2d 25 (1981) [public road running through a tract does not necessarily establish separate “parcels of land” under the site location subdivision law, 38 M.R.S.A. §§ 481 et seq. (1978 & Supp.1981) ].”
Matter of Intern. Paper Co., Etc., 363 A.2d 235 (Me. 1976). “Instead, as 38 M.R.S.A. § 481 sets forth the basic purpose of the Site Law: "The .”
In Re Ryerson Hill Solid Waste Disposal Site, 379 A.2d 384 (Me. 1977). “In approving the application for the sludge disposal site, the Board heard an abundance of expert testimony in five days of public hearings, after which it specifically found that the proposal “generally incorporates known technology” and that the applicant “complied with the…”
In Re Belgrade Shores, Inc., 371 A.2d 413 (Me. 1977). “In 38 M.R.S.A. § 481 the Legislature empowered the Board to regulate the location of “developments substantially affecting local environment.”
Hildebrandt v. Dep't of Env't Prot., 430 A.2d 561 (Me. 1981). “The circumstances giving rise to plaintiff’s action stem from his efforts to have the Board of Environmental Protection approve, pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A. § 481 et seq., his proposed construction of a trailer park in Durham.”
Maine Tpk. Auth. v. Brennan, 342 A.2d 719 (Me. 1975). “See 38 M.R.S.A. § 481 et seq. The Attorney General answered the inquiry by an interdepartmental memorandum.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
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.