NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT
Act 451 of 1994
324.30101 Definitions.
Sec. 30101.
As used in this part:
(a) "Bottomland" means the land area of an inland lake or stream that lies below the ordinary high-water mark and that may or may not be covered by water.
(b) "Bulkhead line" means a line that is established pursuant to this part beyond which dredging, filling, or construction of any kind is not allowed without a permit.
(c) "Dam" means an artificial barrier, including dikes, embankments, and appurtenant works, that impounds, diverts, or is designed to impound or divert water.
(d) "Department" means the department of environmental quality.
(e) "Expand" means to occupy a larger area of an inland lake or stream than authorized by a permit issued under this part for marina mooring structures and watercraft moored at the marina.
(f) "Fund" means the land and water management permit fee fund created in section 30113.
(g) "Height of the dam" means the difference in elevation measured vertically between the natural bed of an inland lake or stream at the downstream toe of the dam, or, if it is not across a stream channel or watercourse, from the lowest elevation of the downstream toe of the dam, to the design flood elevation or to the lowest point of the top of the dam, whichever is less.
(h) "Impoundment" means water held back by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other barrier.
(i) "Inland lake or stream" means either of the following:
(i) An artificial or natural lake, pond, or impoundment that is a water of the United States as that term is used in section 502(7) of the federal water pollution control act, 33 USC 1362.
(ii) A natural or artificial lake, pond, or impoundment; a river, stream, or creek which may or may not be serving as a drain as defined by the drain code of 1956, 1956 PA 40, MCL 280.1 to 280.630; or any other body of water that has definite banks, a bed, and visible evidence of a continued flow or continued occurrence of water, including the St. Marys, St. Clair, and Detroit Rivers.
Inland lake or stream does not include the Great Lakes, Lake St. Clair, or a lake or pond that has a surface area of less than 5 acres.
(j) "Marina" means a facility that is owned or operated by a person, extends into or over an inland lake or stream, and offers service to the public or members of the marina for docking, loading, or other servicing of recreational watercraft.
(k) "Minor offense" means either of the following violations of this part if the project involved in the offense is a minor project or the department determines that restoration of the affected property is not required:
(i) The failure to obtain a permit under this part.
(ii) A violation of a permit issued under this part.
(l) "Mooring structures" means structures used to moor watercraft, including, but not limited to, docks, piers, pilings, mooring anchors, lines and buoys, and boat hoists.
(m) "Ordinary high-water mark" means the line between upland and bottomland that persists through successive changes in water levels, below which the presence and action of the water is so common or recurrent that the character of the land is marked distinctly from the upland and is apparent in the soil itself, the configuration of the surface of the soil, and the vegetation. On an inland lake that has a level established by law, it means the high established level. Where water returns to its natural level as the result of the permanent removal or abandonment of a dam, it means the natural ordinary high-water mark.
(n) "Project" means an activity that requires a permit pursuant to section 30102.
(o) "Property owners' association" means any group of organized property owners publishing a directory of their membership, the majority of which are riparian owners and are located on the inland lake or stream that is affected by the proposed project.
(p) "Reconfigure" means to, without expanding the marina, do either of the following:
(i) Change the location of the dock or docks and other mooring structures at the marina to occupy an area of the inland lake or stream that was not previously authorized by a permit issued under this part.
(ii) Decrease the distance available for ingress and egress to an outside slip as described in section 30106a.
(q) "Riparian interest area" means that portion of an inland lake or stream over which a riparian owner has an ownership interest.
(r) "Riparian owner" means a person who has riparian rights.
(s) "Riparian rights" means those rights which are associated with the ownership of the bank or shore of an inland lake or stream.
(t) "Seasonal structure" includes any type of dock, boat hoist, ramp, raft, or other recreational structure that is placed into an inland lake or stream and removed at the end of the boating season.
(u) "Seawall" means a vertically sloped wall constructed to break the force of waves and retain soil for the purpose of shore protection.
(v) "Structure" includes a wharf, dock, pier, seawall, dam, weir, stream deflector, breakwater, groin, jetty, sewer, pipeline, cable, and bridge.
(w) "Upland" means the land area that lies above the ordinary high-water mark.
History: Add. 1995, Act 59, Imd. Eff. May 24, 1995 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 106, Imd. Eff. July 7, 1999 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 275, Imd. Eff. July 7, 2006 ;-- Am. 2009, Act 139, Imd. Eff. Nov. 4, 2009 ;-- Am. 2014, Act 351, Eff. Jan. 16, 2015 ;-- Am. 2018, Act 631, Eff. Mar. 29, 2019
Compiler's Notes:
For transfer of authority, powers, duties, functions, and responsibilities of the Land and Water Management Division, with the exception of the farmland and open space preservation program, natural rivers program, and Michigan information resource inventory system, to the Director of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, see E.R.O. No. 1995-16, compiled at MCL 324.99901 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
PopularName Notes:
Act 451
PopularName Notes:
NREPA
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
21
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case:
Glass v. Goeckel, 703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005).
Glass v. Goeckel, 703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005).
· cites it 10× “301(j); Peterman, supra at 198 n 29 (noting a statutory definition regarding inland waters, now enacted as MCL 324.30101[i], when considering the ordinary high water mark on Lake Michigan).”
Holton v. Ward, 847 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 5× “Plaintiffs also raise a new argument on appeal, asserting that Part 301 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), MCL 324.30101 et seq., which concerns inland lakes and streams, provides them with a statutory basis for riparian rights in the wetland-pond.”
Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North Am. Inc, 737 N.W.2d 447 (Mich. 2007).
· cites it 2× “With respect to the MEPA claim, the court found that plaintiffs established an unrebutted prima facie case that Nestlé’s pumping activities violated environmental standards drawn from the inland lakes and streams act, MCL 324.30101 et seq., and the wetland protection act, MCL…”
Grass Lake Improvement Bd. v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 891 N.W.2d 884 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“The pivotal issue in the first contested case was whether the Board’s proposed augmentation well would “enlarge” Grass Lake as that term is used in Part 301 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), MCL 324.30101 et seq., specifically in MCL 324.”
Heeringa v. Petroelje, 760 N.W.2d 538 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “” The DEQ did, however, state that the Heeringas’ proposed riparian boundary lines would “make no sense and def[y] logic” and “may not even be physically possible” given the layout of the other docks throughout Pine Creek Bay and the “relative riparian interests in the sense of…”
Burleson v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 808 N.W.2d 792 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “732(b), as added by 1965 PA 291 ; see MCL 324.30101(m). Fourth, petitioner argues persuasively that the reference to reliction in the statute tends to negate respondent’s interpretation.”
Westfall Heights Prop. Owners Assn Inc v. Derek Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 7× “The court also finds that MCL 324.30101, 324.30106, and 324.30106a will not be violated with this limitation of use in place at the landings because this limited use is intended to be consistent with the correlative rights of other riparian owners in the area and it is…”
Lake Adrian Developers LLC v. City of Adrian (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 6× “Lake Adrian may indeed be an inland lake for purposes of Part 301 of the NREPA, but MCL 324.30101 does not confer riparian rights where none previously existed, and the statute does not abrogate or transcend the general common-law rule discussed above.”
Dep't of Env't Quality v. Boyd Rhodes (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 3× “See MCL 324.30101 et seq. Under MCL 324.30102, a person without a permit shall not “[c]reate, enlarge, or diminish an inland lake or stream,” nor “[s]tructurally interfere with the natural flow of an inland lake or stream.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(1)(b) — 1 case
Westfall Heights Prop. Owners Assn Inc v. Derek Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“The court also finds that MCL 324.30101, 324.30106, and 324.30106a will not be violated with this limitation of use in place at the landings because this limited use is intended to be consistent with the correlative rights of other riparian owners in the area and it is…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(f) — 2 cases
Glass v. Goeckel, 703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005).
“301(j); Peterman, supra at 198 n 29 (noting a statutory definition regarding inland waters, now enacted as MCL 324.30101[i], when considering the ordinary high water mark on Lake Michigan).”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(i) — 6 cases
Glass v. Goeckel, 703 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. 2005).
“301(j); Peterman, supra at 198 n 29 (noting a statutory definition regarding inland waters, now enacted as MCL 324.30101[i], when considering the ordinary high water mark on Lake Michigan).”
Holton v. Ward, 847 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“Plaintiffs also raise a new argument on appeal, asserting that Part 301 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), MCL 324.30101 et seq., which concerns inland lakes and streams, provides them with a statutory basis for riparian rights in the wetland-pond.”
Lake Adrian Developers LLC v. City of Adrian (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“Lake Adrian may indeed be an inland lake for purposes of Part 301 of the NREPA, but MCL 324.30101 does not confer riparian rights where none previously existed, and the statute does not abrogate or transcend the general common-law rule discussed above.”
Dep't of Env't Quality v. Boyd Rhodes (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“See MCL 324.30101 et seq. Under MCL 324.30102, a person without a permit shall not “[c]reate, enlarge, or diminish an inland lake or stream,” nor “[s]tructurally interfere with the natural flow of an inland lake or stream.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(i)(ii) — 1 case
Dep't of Env't Quality v. Boyd Rhodes (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
“See MCL 324.30101 et seq. Under MCL 324.30102, a person without a permit shall not “[c]reate, enlarge, or diminish an inland lake or stream,” nor “[s]tructurally interfere with the natural flow of an inland lake or stream.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(j) — 2 cases
Westfall Heights Prop. Owners Assn Inc v. Derek Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“The court also finds that MCL 324.30101, 324.30106, and 324.30106a will not be violated with this limitation of use in place at the landings because this limited use is intended to be consistent with the correlative rights of other riparian owners in the area and it is…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(m) — 1 case
Burleson v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 808 N.W.2d 792 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011).
“732(b), as added by 1965 PA 291 ; see MCL 324.30101(m). Fourth, petitioner argues persuasively that the reference to reliction in the statute tends to negate respondent’s interpretation.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(r) — 2 cases
Holton v. Ward, 847 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“Plaintiffs also raise a new argument on appeal, asserting that Part 301 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), MCL 324.30101 et seq., which concerns inland lakes and streams, provides them with a statutory basis for riparian rights in the wetland-pond.”
Lake Adrian Developers LLC v. City of Adrian (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“Lake Adrian may indeed be an inland lake for purposes of Part 301 of the NREPA, but MCL 324.30101 does not confer riparian rights where none previously existed, and the statute does not abrogate or transcend the general common-law rule discussed above.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(s) — 2 cases
Holton v. Ward, 847 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014).
“Plaintiffs also raise a new argument on appeal, asserting that Part 301 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), MCL 324.30101 et seq., which concerns inland lakes and streams, provides them with a statutory basis for riparian rights in the wetland-pond.”
Lake Adrian Developers LLC v. City of Adrian (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).
“Lake Adrian may indeed be an inland lake for purposes of Part 301 of the NREPA, but MCL 324.30101 does not confer riparian rights where none previously existed, and the statute does not abrogate or transcend the general common-law rule discussed above.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 324.30101(t) — 3 cases
Westfall Heights Prop. Owners Assn Inc v. Derek Carr (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
“The court also finds that MCL 324.30101, 324.30106, and 324.30106a will not be violated with this limitation of use in place at the landings because this limited use is intended to be consistent with the correlative rights of other riparian owners in the area and it is…”
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.