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

33 U.S.C. § 5

DESIGNATION OF STEWARDSHIP SITES.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)In General.—The Administrator may designate a stewardship site in accordance with this Act any area that contributes to accomplishing the purpose of this Act.“(b)Publication of List of Recommended Sites.—The Administrator shall—“(1) publish in the Federal Register and make available in general circulation in the States of Connecticut and New York the list of sites recommended by the Advisory Committee; and“(2) provide a 90-day period for—“(A) the submission of public comment on the list; and“(B) an opportunity for owners of such sites to decline designation of such sites as stewardship sites.“(c)Opinion Regarding Owner’s Responsibilities.—The Administrator may not designate an area as a stewardship site under this Act unless the Administrator provides to the owner of the area, and the owner acknowledges to the Administrator receipt of, a comprehensive opinion in plain English setting forth expressly the responsibility of the owner that arises from such designation.“(d)Designation of Stewardship Sites.—Not later than 150 days after receiving from the Advisory Committee its list of recommended sites, the Administrator—“(1) shall review the recommendations of the Advisory Committee; and“(2) may designate as a stewardship site any site included in the list.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: State, Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Alaska Riverways, Inc., 232 P.3d 1203 (Alaska 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State, Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Alaska Riverways, Inc., 232 P.3d 1203 (Alaska 2010). · cites it 14× “” DNR also maintained that commercial and non-commercial riparian landowners are not “similarly situated” such that DNR must treat them the same and that 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b), which prohibits the state from levying a tax for the use of navigable waters, is inapplicable because “DNR…”
Tax Appeal of Reel Hooker Sportfishing, Inc. v. State, Dep't of Taxation, 236 P.3d 1230 (Haw. App. 2010). · cites it 20× “2 We hold that 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b) does not preempt the assessment of Hawaii GET on the charter fishing revenue of these Hawaii businesses because GET is a tax assessed on gross business receipts for the privilege of doing business in Hawaii, and is not a tax on their vessels or…”
Kittatinny Canoes, Inc. v. Westfall Twp., 30 Pa. D. & C.5th 46 (2013). · cites it 29× “In regard to preemption, plaintiffs argue that 33 U.S.C. §5 (b), which prohibits the taxation of any watercraft operating on the navigable waters subject to the authority of the United States, preempts the Amusement Tax.”
State of Alaska, Dep't of Revenue v. North Pac. Fishing, Inc. & U.S. Fishing LLC., 485 P.3d 1040 (Alaska 2021). · cites it 14× “” The fishing companies argue that this landing tax violates the Import-Export and Tonnage Clauses of the United States Constitution and 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b). But we conclude that the tax is imposed before the fish product enters the stream of export commerce, that the tax does not…”
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Alabama Dep't of Revenue, 888 F.3d 1163 (11th Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “The Maritime Transportation Security Act The State points to another federal law as compelling the water carrier exemption, arguing that taxing them could expose it to suit under the Maritime Transportation Security Act, 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b). That statute provides: No taxes .”
Maher Terminals, LLC v. Port Auth. of New York & New Jersey, 805 F.3d 98 (3rd Cir. 2015). · cites it 4× “3; the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act (“RHA”), 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b); and the Water Resources Development Act (“WRDA”), 33 U.”
Izaak Walton League of Am. v. Marsh, 655 F.2d 346 (D.C. Cir. 1981). · cites it 3× “The Secretary granted approval, acting pursuant to Section 6 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1909, 33 U.S.C. § 5 (1976), which authorizes him to order maintenance and repair of existing navigation facilities.”
Cruise Lines Int'l Ass'n Alaska v. City & Borough of Juneau, 356 F. Supp. 3d 831 (D. Alaska 2018). · cites it 5× “In their second cause of action, plaintiffs assert that the MPF and PDF violate the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899 (RHAA), as amended, 33 U.S.C. § 5 . In their third cause of action, plaintiffs assert that the MPF and PDF violate the Commerce Clause of the United…”
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Callaway, 382 F. Supp. 610 (D.D.C. 1974). · cites it 6× “The Defendants contest these claims and allege that the proposed rebuilding of Locks and Dam 26 does not need the consent of Congress, but rather is specifically permitted by 33 U.S.C. § 5 . 11 The Defendants, in the alternative, maintain that even if Section 5 were found to be…”
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Alabama Dep't of Revenue, 247 F. Supp. 3d 1240 (N.D. Ala. 2017). · cites it 4× “33 U.S.C. § 5 (a). The MTSA amendment, codified as a new subsection (b), provides, in pertinent part: No taxes, tolls, operating charges, fees, or any other impositions whatever shall be levied upon or collected from any vessel or other water craft, or from its passengers or…”
Hartley Marine Corp. v. Mierke, 474 S.E.2d 599 (W. Va. 1996). · cites it 3× “§ 4042 , which imposes a federal excise tax on fuel consumption in commercial waterway traffic 9 and 33 U.S.C. § 5 (1994), 10 which prohibits the levying of tolls or operating charges from watercraft passing through any canalized river, as evidence of preemptive intent.”
Saloojas, Inc. v. Aetna Health of California, Inc., 80 F.4th 1011 (9th Cir. 2023). “4th at 960 (quoting 33 U.S.C. § 5 (b) (“No . . . fees . . . shall be levied upon or collected from any vessel or other water craft, or from its passengers or crew, by any non-Federal interest .”
Show all 27 citing cases →
— 33 U.S.C. § 5(b) — 1 case
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Alabama Dep't of Revenue, 247 F. Supp. 3d 1240 (N.D. Ala. 2017). “33 U.S.C. § 5 (a). The MTSA amendment, codified as a new subsection (b), provides, in pertinent part: No taxes, tolls, operating charges, fees, or any other impositions whatever shall be levied upon or collected from any vessel or other water craft, or from its passengers or…”
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.