33 U.S.C. § 708
Sale of surplus waters for domestic and industrial uses; disposition of moneys
The Secretary of the Army is authorized to make contracts with States, municipalities, private concerns, or individuals, at such prices and on such terms as he may deem reasonable, for domestic and industrial uses for surplus water that may be available at any reservoir under the control of the Department of the Army: Provided, That no contracts for such water shall adversely affect then existing lawful uses of such water. All moneys received from such contracts shall be deposited in the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1950–2009 · leading case: State of Alabama v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 424 F.3d 1117 (11th Cir. 2005).
State of Alabama v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 424 F.3d 1117 (11th Cir. 2005). “§ 390b (2003), the Flood Control Act (“FCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 708 (2003), the Water Resources Development Act of 1988 (“WRDA”), 33 U.”
Se. Fed. Power Customers, Inc. v. Geren, 514 F.3d 1316 (D.C. Cir. 2008). “§ 390b(d), the Flood Control Act ("FCA"), 33 U.S.C. § 708 , and the National Environmental Protection Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.”
S. Fed. Power Customers, Inc. v. Caldera, 301 F. Supp. 2d 26 (D.D.C. 2004). “§ 2312 (2003), and the Flood Control Act (“FCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 708 (2003). While these objections might at some later date present grounds upon which to prevent the implementation of portions of the Settlement Agreement, they are not sufficiently definite and imminent to justify…”
Am. Rivers v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 271 F. Supp. 2d 230 (D.D.C. 2003). “§ 460d, but also for contracting for use of surplus reservoir water and promulgating regulations for the use of water stored in the reservoirs, 33 U.S.C. § 708 , 709. The FCA also identified various substantive interests that the Corps was to consider in managing the Missouri…”
ETSI Pipeline Proj. v. Missouri, 484 U.S. 495 (1988). “” §6, 33 U. S. C. §708 (1946 ed.). (4) “Hereafter, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War to prescribe regulations for the use of storage allocated for flood control or navigation at all reservoirs constructed wholly or in part with Federal funds provided on the basis of…”
Chemehuevi Tribe of Indians v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 420 U.S. 395 (1975). “890 , as amended, 33 U. S. C. § 708 , demonstrate that “Congress has for a long time been concerned with the controlled disposition of surplus federal water and power, and has often expressed this concern by granting plenary control over such disposition to a federal agency.”
Missouri v. Andrews, 787 F.2d 270 (8th Cir. 1986). “4 The court held that the states were members of the class of users of Missouri River Basin water whose interests are protected by section 708 of the Flood Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 708 (1982). State of Missouri v.”
Rank v. Krug, 90 F. Supp. 773 (S.D. Cal. 1950). “” ( 33 U.S.C.A. § 708 .) *;!:*$** “Sec. 8. Hereafter, whenever the Secretary of War determines, upon recommendation by the Secretary of the Interior that any dam and reservoir project operated under the direction of the Secretary of War may be utilized for irrigation purposes,…”
The Chemehuevi Tribe of Indians v. Fed. Power Comm'n, Arizona Pub. Serv. Co., Intervenors, 489 F.2d 1207 (D.C. Cir. 1973). “33 U.S.C. § 708 . 180 . Cf. California Oregon Power Co.”
South Dakota v. Kansas City S. Indus., Inc., 880 F.2d 40 (8th Cir. 1989). “Section 708 of the Flood Control Act states: Sale of surplus waters for domestic and industrial uses; disposition of moneys The Secretary of the Army is authorized to make contracts with States, municipalities, private concerns, or individuals, at such prices and on such terms…”
In Re Tri-State Water Rights Litig., 639 F. Supp. 2d 1308 (M.D. Fla. 2009). “; the Flood Control Act (“FCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 708 et seq.; the Water Supply Act (“WSA”), 43 U.”
City of Virginia Beach v. Roanoke River Basin Ass'n, 776 F.2d 484 (4th Cir. 1985). “See 33 U.S.C. § 708 . On April 27, 1978, the governors of North Carolina and Virginia entered into a formal agreement to hold continuing discussions about water resources of mutual interest to the two states.”
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.