U.S. Code » Title 33 » Chapter CHAPTER 33— PREVENTION OF POLLUTION FROM SHIPS

33 U.S.C. § 1411

SAVINGS CLAUSE.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a) Nothing in this title shall be construed as restricting, affecting, or amending any other law or the authority of any department, instrumentality, or agency of the United States.“(b) Nothing in this title shall in any way affect or restrict, or be construed to affect or restrict, the authority of the State of Alaska or any political subdivision thereof—“(1) to impose additional liability or additional requirements; or“(2) to impose, or determine the amount of a fine or penalty (whether criminal or civil in nature) for any violation of law; relating to the discharge of sewage (whether treated or untreated) or graywater in the waters of the Alexander Archipelago and the navigable waters of the United States within the State of Alaska or within the Kachemak Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case: Middlesex Cnty. Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clammers Assn., 453 U.S. 1 (1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Middlesex Cnty. Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clammers Assn., 453 U.S. 1 (1981). · cites it 2× “33 U. S. C. § 1411 (a). [19] In addition, it requires a permit for the dumping of material transported from outside the United States into the territorial seas or in the zone extending 12 miles from the coastline, "to the extent that it may effect the territorial sea or the…”
United States v. William P. Reilly, United States of Am. v. John Patrick Dowd, 33 F.3d 1396 (3rd Cir. 1994). · cites it 3× “§ 1623 (a), and of transporting incinerator ash from the United States for the purpose of dumping it into the ocean, 33 U.S.C. § 1411 (a). The charges against Dowd and Reilly arose from three sources: a Delaware indictment alleging that they knowingly made false material…”
Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Douglas M. Costle, in His Off. Capacity as Adm'r, Env't Prot. Agency (Ocean Dumping), 629 F.2d 118 (D.C. Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “Marine Protection Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) § 101, 33 U.S.C. § 1411 (1976). 4 . As originally enacted the Act absolutely prohibited dumping, and transporting for the purpose of dumping, of “any radiological, chemical, or biological warfare agent [and] any…”
United States v. Baytank (Houston), Inc., United States of Am. v. Baytank (Houston), Inc., 934 F.2d 599 (5th Cir. 1991). “1052 ) [ 33 U.S.C. § 1411 et seq.]; or "(B) in knowing violation of any material condition or requirement of such permit; or "(C) in knowing violation of any material condition or requirement of any applicable interim status regulations or standards; "shall, upon conviction, be…”
United States of Am. v. West Indies Transp., Inc.; Wit Equip. Co., Inc.; & W. James Oelsner, Appellants, 127 F.3d 299 (3rd Cir. 1997). “The second entrapment by estoppel claim arises out of defendants' convictions under the Ocean Dumping Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1411 (a) and 1415(b)(1). Defendants were convicted for dumping large quantities of scrap metal and other debris into the ocean under cover of darkness, without…”
Pac. Legal Found. v. Quarles, 440 F. Supp. 316 (C.D. Cal. 1977). · cites it 2× “33 U.S.C. §§ 1411 , 1402(f). Thus, the general demarcation line between the two Acts’ jurisdictions, with the exception of pipes or outfalls, is the three-mile limit of the territorial seas.”
United States v. James Ralph Sellers, 926 F.2d 410 (5th Cir. 1991). “[ 33 U.S.C. § 1411 et seq.]” On appeal, Sellers argues that the jury charge should have required the government to prove that Sellers knew that the paint waste could be hazardous or harmful to persons or the environment.”
Town of Southold v. Wheeler, 48 F.4th 67 (2d Cir. 2022). “New York then sued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), alleging that the agency’s designation violates the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 33 U.S.C. § 1411 , (“MPRSA”)…”
Reeger v. Mill Serv., Inc., 593 F. Supp. 360 (W.D. Pa. 1984). “and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1411 et seq. While plaintiffs argue that Sea Clammers was concerned .”
United States v. Reilly, 811 F. Supp. 177 (D. Del. 1993). “The Indictment specifically references 33 U.S.C. § 1411 which prohibits the transportation of any material from the United States for the purposes of dumping it into ocean waters.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. U. S. Env't Prot. Agency, 656 F.2d 768 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “The Marine Protection Act sets up a permit system to regulate the dumping of pollutants into the ocean from vessels, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1411 , 1412 (1976), but does not govern the discharge of pollutants from sewer outfalls.”
United States v. Reilly, 827 F. Supp. 1076 (D. Del. 1993). · cites it 3× “The Information, which was issued on January 28, 1993, charges Reilly with one count of violating 33 U.S.C. § 1411 (a), a Class A misdemeanor.”
Show all 19 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.