U.S. Code » Title 33 » Chapter CHAPTER 26— WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS

33 U.S.C. § 1253

Interstate cooperation and uniform laws

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The Administrator shall encourage cooperative activities by the States for the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution, encourage the enactment of improved and, so far as practicable, uniform State laws relating to the prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution; and encourage compacts between States for the prevention and control of pollution.(b) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or more States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts, not in conflict with any law or treaty of the United States, for (1) cooperative effort and mutual assistance for the prevention and control of pollution and the enforcement of their respective laws relating thereto, and (2) the establishment of such agencies, joint or otherwise, as they may deem desirable for making effective such agreements and compacts. No such agreement or compact shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party thereto unless and until it has been approved by the Congress.(June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, § 103, as added Pub. L. 92–500, § 2, Oct. 18, 1972, 86 Stat. 818.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1976–2014 · leading case: Lake Carriers' Ass'n v. Env't Prot. Agency, 652 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lake Carriers' Ass'n v. Env't Prot. Agency, 652 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “In a footnote to their reply brief, the petitioners observe that section 103 of the CWA tasks EPA to " 'encourage the enactment of improved and, so far as practicable, uniform State laws relating to the prevention, reduction and elimination of pollution.”
Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 8 F. Supp. 3d 500 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). “” 33 U.S.C. § 1253 (a). However, perhaps recognizing that such cooperation would not solve every issue, it also passed specific provisions establishing a federal conflict-resolution role, “the primary purpose” of which “was to provide uniformity among the federal and state…”
City of Albuquerque v. Browner, 97 F.3d 415 (10th Cir. 1996). “33 U.S.C. § 1253 (a). The need for a dispute resolution mechanism to resolve unreasonable consequences stems from the possibility that two sovereigns — a state and a tribe — may impose different water quality standards on a common body of water.”
Illinois v. City of Milwaukee, 731 F.2d 403 (7th Cir. 1984). “33 U.S.C. § 1253 . 1972 FWPCA contemplates cooperative exercise of jurisdiction by the state within which discharges occur.”
Env't Prot. Agency v. California Ex Rel. State Water Resources Control Bd., 426 U.S. 200 (1976). “under an interstate compact” (see § 103, 33 U. S. C. § 1253 (1970 ed., Supp. IV)), it is evident that Congress clearly contemplated that the EPA might suspend issuance of § 402 (a) permits only as to some of a *225 State’s navigable waters — those within the scope of the…”
Citizen For A Better Env't v. Agency, 596 F.2d 720 (7th Cir. 1979). “See § 103, 33 U.S.C. § 1253 (a); S.Rep. No. 414, 92d Cong.”
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.