DOCSLIB.ORG

Table of Leading Cases Annual Institute Proceedings Volumes 37 Through 49 (1991­2003)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Table of Leading Cases Annual Institute Proceedings Volumes 37 Through 49 (1991­2003) Table of Leading Cases Annual Institute Proceedings Volumes 37 through 49 (1991­2003) [References are to volume and text section] You may search this web document by using your Internet controls, such as Edit/Find or Ctrl+F A­1 Contractors v. Strate, 76 F.3d 930 (8th Cir. 1996) (en banc), aff'd, 518 U.S. 1056 (1996) 42:11.03[4] [a][i] A­B Cattle Co. v. United States, 589 P.2d 57 (Colo. 1978) 39:19.04[2][b]; 42:24.10 Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967) 45:5.04 Abenaki Nation of Mississquoi v. Hughes, 805 F. Supp. 234 (D. Vt. 1992), aff'd per curiam, 990 F.2d 729 (2d Cir. 1993) 39:2.02[3][g]; 40:4.04[4]; 41:14.02[3] Abraxas Petroleum Corp. v. Hornburg, 20 S.W.3d 741 (Tex. App.­­El Paso 2000, no pet.) 47:15.03[2] Ackerman v. Levine, 788 F.2d 830 (2d Cir. 1986) 41:9.01[4][b] Acme Printing Ink Co. v. Menard, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 1498 (E.D. Wis. 1992) 40:6.05[1][a],[g]; 42:17.03[3] [c][ii] Adams v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n, 89 P.2d 1060 (Ariz. 1939) 39:19.04[2][b] Adams v. United States, 3 F.3d 1254 (9th Cir. 1993) 40:20.02[4] Adams v. Vance, 570 F.2d 950 (D.C. Cir. 1978) 38:2.01 Aerojet­General Corp. v. Transport Indem. Co., 948 P.2d 909 (Cal. 1997) 46:15.04, 15.11 Aetna Casualty & Sur. Co. v. Pintlar Corp., 948 F.2d 1507 (9th Cir. 1991) 40:6.06[2]; 46:15.05, 15.10, 15.11 Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980) 38:6.04[1], 38:19.04[4]; 42:2.05[2][c] Agip Petroleum Co. v. Gulf Island Fabrication, Inc., 17 F. Supp. 2d 658 (S.D. Tex. 1998), aff'd without opinion, 281 F.3d 1279 (5th Cir. 2001) 48:14.08[1][a] Agri Beef Co., 148 IBLA 52, GFS(MIN) 28(1999) 45:20.02[1][a], 20.02[4][a],[e], 20.06[1][b][iii] Aguinda v. Texaco, Inc., No. 93 CIV 7527 (VLB), 1994 WL 142006 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 11, 1994), on recon., 850 F. Supp. 282 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) 42:3.03[2]; 47:24.03[3][b] A.K. Management Co. v. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, 789 F.2d 785 (9th Cir. 1986) 39:2.03[2] [a] Al Haddad Bros. Enterprises, Inc. v. M/S Agapi, 635 F. Supp. 205 (D. Del. 1986), aff'd without opinion, 813 F.2d 396 (3d Cir. 1987) 41:9.02[4][a][iv] Al Odah v. United States, 321 F.3d 1134 (D.C. Cir. 2003) 49:18.02[2] A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935) 38:19.03 Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323 (D.C. Cir. 1979) 49:24.02[2] Alabama­Tombigbee Rivers Coalition v. Dep't of Interior, 26 F.3d 1103 (11th Cir. 1994) 47:22.05[3] Alameda County Water Dist. v. Niles Sand & Gravel Co., 112 Cal. Rptr. 846 (Cal. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 869 (1974) 38:23.07[3] Alaska v. Alaska Land Title Ass'n, 667 P.2d 714 (Alaska 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1040 (1984) 40:2.01[2][a] Alaska v. Carter, 462 F. Supp. 1155 (D. Alaska 1978) 38:2.04[8][c]; 43:4.03[4][d] Alaska v. EPA, 244 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2001) 49:24.03[1][b] Alaska v. EPA, 298 F.3d 814 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. granted, 537 U.S. 1186 (2003) 49:24.01, 24.03[1] Alaska v. United States, Civ. No. A87­450 (D. Alaska 1987) 38:2.04[5][c] Alaska v. United States, Original No. 84, U.S. Supreme Court 38:2.04[5][c] Alaska Copper Co., 32 L.D. 128 (1903) 45:14.02[1] Alaska Ctr. for the Env't v. Reilly, 762 F. Supp. 1422 (W.D. Wash. 1991) 43:8.02[1][b] Alaska Miners v. Andrus, 662 F.2d 577 (9th Cir. 1981) 38:11.02[2][d]; 44:24.02[1][d], [2][e]; 45:14.03[1] [b] Alaska Native Ass'n of Oregon v. Morton, 417 F. Supp. 459 (D.D.C. 1974) 38:2.04[3][a] Alaska Professional Hunters Ass'n v. Federal Aviation Administration, 177 F.3d 1030 (D.C. Cir. 1999) 47:5.03[1] Alaska Public Easement Defense Fund v. Andrus, 435 F. Supp. 664 (D. Alaska 1977) 38:2.04[6][d] Alberta Wilderness Ass'n v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) [1998] F.C.J. No. 540, 44:11.03[2][b] Aleut Corp. v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp., 410 F. Supp. 1196 (D. Alaska 1976) 38:2.04[4][b] Aleut Corp. v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp., 417 F. Supp. 900 (D. Alaska 1976) 38:2.04[4][b] Aleut Corp. v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp., 421 F. Supp. 862 (D. Alaska 1976) 38:2.04[4][b] Aleut Corp. v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp., 484 F. Supp. 482 (D. Alaska 1980) 38:2.04[4][b] Aleut Corp. v. Tyonek Native Corp., 725 F.2d 527 (9th Cir. 1984) 38:2.04[4][b] All Union Foreign Trade Association Sojuzneftexport v. Joc Oil, Ltd., 18 Y.B. Com. Arb. 92 (1993) 44:8.03[1][b] Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980) 46:16.04[6] Allen v. Westpoint­Pepperell, Inc., 945 F.2d 40 (2d Cir. 1991) 39:8.08[2] Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737 (1984) 45:5.05[2] Allied Corp. v. Acme Solvents Reclaiming, Inc., 691 F. Supp. 1100 (N.D. Ill. 1988) 40:6.02[5], 6.03 Allingham v. City of Seattle, 749 P.2d 160, 163 (Wash. 1988) 42:2.02[3][c][i] Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hague, 449 U.S. 302, reh'g denied, 450 U.S. 971 (1981) 37:23.04[4]; 38:17.02[2] Alpine Lakes Protection Soc'y v. United States Forest Service, 838 F. Supp. 478 (W.D. Wash. 1993) 40:20.02[2]; 41:5.04[3][b] Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans, 161 F. Supp. 2d 1154 (D. Or. 2001) 48:22.04[2][a] Altheimer & Gray v. Sioux Mfg. Corp., 983 F.2d 803 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1019 (1993) 39:2.03[2][c], [8][c]; 42:11.03[4][c][iv] Aluminum Co. of America v. Essex Group, Inc., 499 F. Supp. 53 (W.D. Pa. 1980) 42:10.03 AM Int'l, Inc. v. Int'l Forging Equipment Corp., 743 F. Supp. 525 (N.D. Ohio 1990) 38:22.04[2][a] AM Int'l, Inc. v. Int'l Forging Equipment Corp., 982 F.2d 989 (6th Cir. 1993) 49:4.04[1][a][i],[ii] Amador Queen Mining Co. v. DeWitt, 15 P. 74 (Cal. 1887) 43:13.03 Amarillo Oil Co. v. Energy­Agri Prods., Inc., 794 S.W.2d 20 (Tex. 1990) 46:19.03[3] Amax Petroleum Corp. v. Corporation Comm'n, 552 P.2d 387 (Okla. 1976) 45:12.03[2] Amazi v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 816 P.2d 431 (Mont. 1991) 47:15.03[4] Amerada Hess Corp., 52 F.E.R.C. ¶ 61,268 (1990) 39:18.02[1][d] American Civil Liberties Union v. Reno, 929 F. Supp. 824 (E.D. Pa. 1996), aff'd, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) 43:6.03[3], [3][a]­[c] American Colloid Co., 128 IBLA 257, GFS(MIN) 16(1994) 44:24.02[3][c] American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight Service, 397 U.S. 532 (1970) 47:5.03[4][b] American Forest & Paper Ass'n v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 137 F.3d 291 (5th Cir. 1998) 45:5.05[1] American Forest & Paper Ass'n v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 154 F.3d 1155 (10th Cir. 1998) 45:5.05[1] American Gas Ass'n v. FERC, 888 F.2d 136 (D.C. Cir. 1989) 38:16.03[3], 16.04 American Gas Ass'n v. FERC, 912 F.2d 1496 (D.C. Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1084 (1991) 37:16.03[3]; 38:16.04; 39:13.02, .02[4] American Indian Agricultural Credit Consortium, Inc. v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, 780 F.2d 1374 (8th Cir. 1985) 39:2.03[2][a] American Iron & Steel Inst. v. U.S.E.P.A., 886 F.2d 390 (D.C. Cir. 1989) 45:9.03[1]­[2] American Min. Co.v. Himrod­Kimball Mines Co., 235 P.2d 804 (Colo. 1951) 41:4.02[1][a],[b], [1][e][iv],[v] American Min. Cong. v. EPA, 965 F.2d 759 (9th Cir. 1992) 37:4.02[2][b]; 39:10.03[2][b] American Min. Cong. v. Mine Safety & Health Admin., 995 F.2d 1106 (D.C. Cir. 1993) 47:5.03[1] American Min. Cong. v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 951 F. Supp. 267 (D.D.C. 1997) 43:8.07; 44:26.03[1][a] American Nat'l Fire Ins. Co. v. B & L Trucking, 920 P.2d 192 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996) 46:15.11 American Petrofina Co. v. Nance, 697 F. Supp. 1183 (W.D. Okla. 1986), aff'd, 859 F.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OSB Representative Participant List by Industry
    OSB Representative Participant List by Industry Aerospace • KAWASAKI • VOLVO • CATERPILLAR • ADVANCED COATING • KEDDEG COMPANY • XI'AN AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY • CHINA FAW GROUP TECHNOLOGIES GROUP • KOREAN AIRLINES • CHINA INTERNATIONAL Agriculture • AIRBUS MARINE CONTAINERS • L3 COMMUNICATIONS • AIRCELLE • AGRICOLA FORNACE • CHRYSLER • LOCKHEED MARTIN • ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS • CARGILL • COMMERCIAL VEHICLE • M7 AEROSPACE GROUP • AVICHINA • E. RITTER & COMPANY • • MESSIER-BUGATTI- CONTINENTAL AIRLINES • BAE SYSTEMS • EXOPLAST DOWTY • CONTINENTAL • BE AEROSPACE • MITSUBISHI HEAVY • JOHN DEERE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES • • BELL HELICOPTER • MAUI PINEAPPLE CONTINENTAL • NASA COMPANY AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS • BOMBARDIER • • NGC INTEGRATED • USDA COOPER-STANDARD • CAE SYSTEMS AUTOMOTIVE Automotive • • CORNING • CESSNA AIRCRAFT NORTHROP GRUMMAN • AGCO • COMPANY • PRECISION CASTPARTS COSMA INDUSTRIAL DO • COBHAM CORP. • ALLIED SPECIALTY BRASIL • VEHICLES • CRP INDUSTRIES • COMAC RAYTHEON • AMSTED INDUSTRIES • • CUMMINS • DANAHER RAYTHEON E-SYSTEMS • ANHUI JIANGHUAI • • DAF TRUCKS • DASSAULT AVIATION RAYTHEON MISSLE AUTOMOBILE SYSTEMS COMPANY • • ARVINMERITOR DAIHATSU MOTOR • EATON • RAYTHEON NCS • • ASHOK LEYLAND DAIMLER • EMBRAER • RAYTHEON RMS • • ATC LOGISTICS & DALPHI METAL ESPANA • EUROPEAN AERONAUTIC • ROLLS-ROYCE DEFENCE AND SPACE ELECTRONICS • DANA HOLDING COMPANY • ROTORCRAFT • AUDI CORPORATION • FINMECCANICA ENTERPRISES • • AUTOZONE DANA INDÚSTRIAS • SAAB • FLIR SYSTEMS • • BAE SYSTEMS DELPHI • SMITH'S DETECTION • FUJI • • BECK/ARNLEY DENSO CORPORATION
    [Show full text]
  • Fifth World Forestry Congress
    Proceedings of the Fifth World Forestry Congress VOLUME 1 RE University of Washington, Seattle, Washington United States of America August 29September 10, 1960 The President of the United States of America DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER Patron Fifth World Forestry Congress III Contents VOLUME 1 Page Chapter1.Summary and Recommendations of the Congress 1 Chapter 2.Planning for the Congress 8 Chapter3.Local Arrangements for the Congress 11 Chapter 4.The Congress and its Program 15 Chapter 5.Opening Ceremonies 19 Chapter6. Plenary Sessions 27 Chapter 7.Special Congress Events 35 Chapitre 1.Sommaire et recommandations du Congrès 40 Chapitre 2.Preparation des plans en vue du Congrès 48 Chapitre 3.Arrangements locaux en vue du Congrès 50 Chapitre 4.Le Congrès et son programme 51 Chapitre 5.Cérémonies d'ouverture 52 Chapitre 6.Seances plénières 59 Chapitre 7.Activités spéciales du Congrès 67 CapItullo1. Sumario y Recomendaciones del Congreso 70 CapItulo 2.Planes para el Congreso 78 CapItulo 3.Actividades Locales del Congreso 80 CapItulo 4.El Congreso y su Programa 81 CapItulo 5.Ceremonia de Apertura 81 CapItulo 6.Sesiones Plenarias 88 CapItulo 7.Actos Especiales del Congreso 96 Chapter8. Congress Tours 99 Chapter9.Appendices 118 Appendix A.Committee Memberships 118 Appendix B.Rules of Procedure 124 Appendix C.Congress Secretariat 127 Appendix D.Machinery Exhibitors Directory 128 Appendix E.List of Financial Contributors 130 Appendix F.List of Participants 131 First General Session 141 Multiple Use of Forest Lands Utilisation multiple des superficies boisées Aprovechamiento Multiple de Terrenos Forestales Second General Session 171 Multiple Use of Forest Lands Utilisation multiple des superficies boisées Aprovechamiento Multiple de Terrenos Forestales Iv Contents Page Third General Session 189 Progress in World Forestry Progrés accomplis dans le monde en sylviculture Adelantos en la Silvicultura Mundial Section I.Silviculture and Management 241 Sessions A and B.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Trends of Indicators of Ecosystem Health
    STATUS AND TRENDS OF INDICATORS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH THE ESTUARY SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER DELTA The San Francisco Estuary Partnership collaborates with partners throughout the Bay and Delta on regional, science-based programs to increase the health and resilience of the San Francisco Estuary. Established as part of the National Estuary Program over 25 years ago by the State of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Partnership manages multi-benefit projects that improve the well-being of wildlife and human communities from the inland rivers to the Golden Gate. More information can be found at sfestuary.org SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY PARTNERSHIP 375 Beale Street, Suite 700, San Francisco, CA 94105 © 2019 San Francisco Estuary Partnership. All rights reserved. Please cite as The State of the Estuary 2019, San Francisco Estuary Partnership. The Delta Stewardship Council was created in 2009 by the California Legislature to advance the state’s coequal goals for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta through the development and enforcement of a long-term sustainable management plan. Informed by the Delta Science Program and Delta Independent Science Board, the Council oversees implementation of this plan through coordination and oversight of state and local agencies proposing to fund, carry out, and approve Delta-related activities. More information can be found at deltacouncil.ca.gov STATUS AND TRENDS OF INDICATORS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH THE ESTUARY SAN FRANCISCO BAY AND SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER DELTA SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY A NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ESTUARY THAT INCLUDES THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, SUISUN BAY, SAN PABLO BAY, AND SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
    [Show full text]
  • March 2021 | City of Alameda, California
    March 2021 | City of Alameda, California DRAFT ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 CONTENTS 04 MARCH 2021 City of Alameda, California MOBILITY ELEMENT 78 01 05 GENERAL PLAN ORGANIZATION + THEMES 6 HOUSING ELEMENT FROM 2014 02 06 LAND USE + CITY DESIGN ELEMENT 22 PARKS + OPEN SPACE ELEMENT 100 03 07 CONSERVATION + CLIMATE ACTION 54 HEALTH + SAFETY ELEMENT 116 ELEMENT MARCH 2021 DRAFT 1 ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD: PRESIDENT Alan H. Teague VICE PRESIDENT Asheshh Saheba BOARD MEMBERS Xiomara Cisneros Ronald Curtis Hanson Hom Rona Rothenberg Teresa Ruiz POLICY, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS: Amie MacPhee, AICP, Cultivate, Consulting Planner Sheffield Hale, Cultivate, Consulting Planner Candice Miller, Cultivate, Lead Graphic Designer PHOTOGRAPHY: Amie MacPhee Maurice Ramirez Alain McLaughlin MARCH 2021 DRAFT 3 ALAMEDA GENERAL PLAN 2040 FORWARD Preparation of the Alameda General Plan 2040 began in 2018 and took shape over a three-year period during which time residents, businesses, community groups, and decision-makers reviewed, revised and refined plan goals, policy statements and priorities, and associated recommended actions. In 2020, the Alameda Planning Board held four public forums to review and discuss the draft General Plan. Over 1,500 individuals provided written comments and suggestions for improvements to the draft Plan through the General Plan update website. General Plan 2040 also benefited from recommendations and suggestions from: ≠ Commission on People with Disabilities ≠ Golden
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Natural Areas Program 2018- 2020 Review
    COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Colorado Natural Areas Program 2018- 2020 Review Triennial Report to Governor Polis 1 Pagosa skyrocket cpw.state.co.us Colorado Natural Areas Program Showcasing & protecting our state’s natural treasures since 1977 The Colorado Natural Areas Program (CNAP) is a statewide conservation program created in 1977 by the Colorado Natural Areas Act (C.R.S. 33-33). The Program is housed within Colorado Parks and Mission: Wildlife (CPW) and is advised by the Colorado Natural Areas Council To identity, evaluate, and protect specific examples of (CNAC), a seven member Governor appointed board. Program natural features and phenomena as enduring resources staff includes one full-time coordinator and one to two seasonal for present and future generations, through a statewide technicians. CNAP’s small base is supported by a contract botanist system of Designated Natural Areas. [C.R.S 33-33-102] and over 50 dedicated volunteer stewards. Table of Contents CNAP Background ......................................................................................2 Natural Features .........................................................................................3 t Natural Areas Council ...............................................................................4 Volunteer Steward Program ....................................................................5 Rare Plant Conservation ...........................................................................6 3 Year Program Highlights .......................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Clarifying Effects of Environmental Protections on Freshwater Flows to—and Water Exports from—the San Francisco Bay Estuary Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8mh3r97j Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 17(1) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Reis, Gregory J. Howard, Jeanette K. Rosenfield, Jonathan A. Publication Date 2019 DOI 10.15447/sfews.2019v17iss1art1 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California MARCH 2019 RESEARCH Clarifying Effects of Environmental Protections on Freshwater Flows to—and Water Exports from—the San Francisco Bay Estuary Gregory J. Reis1, Jeanette K. Howard2, and Jonathan A. Rosenfield* 1, 3 substantially increase freshwater flow to San Volume 17, Issue 1 | Article 1 https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2019v17iss1art1 Francisco Bay. We analyzed long-term trends in freshwater flow to San Francisco Bay relative to * Corresponding author: [email protected] annual runoff from its Central Valley watershed, and 1 The Bay Institute the frequency and magnitude of specific regulatory San Francisco, CA 94133 USA and physical constraints that govern operations 2 The Nature Conservancy San Francisco, CA 94105 USA of the water export facilities. We found that the 3 Present address: San Francisco Baykeeper percentage of Central Valley runoff that reached Oakland, CA 94612 USA San Francisco Bay during the ecologically sensitive These authors contributed equally to this work. winter-spring period declined over the past several decades, such that the estuary experienced drought conditions in most years. During a 9-year period that included a severe natural drought, exports were constrained to maintain salinity control as often as to ABSTRACT protect endangered fish populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Case3:09-Cv-05684-RS Document86-1 Filed09/08/14 Page1 of 217
    Case3:09-cv-05684-RS Document86-1 Filed09/08/14 Page1 of 217 1 SAM HIRSCH Acting Assistant Attorney General 2 Environment and Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice 3 Washington, DC 20530 PATRICIA L. HURST 4 Senior Counsel Environmental Enforcement Section 5 Environment and Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice 6 P.O. Box 7611 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 7 (202) 307-1242 (telephone); (202) 616-2427 (facsimile) [email protected] 8 MELINDA HAAG 9 United States Attorney Northern District of California 10 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 11th Floor San Francisco, California 94102 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America 12 (Additional Attorneys Listed on Following Pages) 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF Consolidated Case Nos. CALIFORNIA ex rel. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES C 09-00186-RS and 17 CONTROL BOARD and CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER C 09-05684-RS QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION, 18 FINAL CONSENT Plaintiffs, DECREE 19 SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER and OUR CHILDREN’S EARTH 20 FOUNDATION, 21 Intervenor-Plaintiffs, 22 v. 23 EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, 24 Defendant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 25 CALIFORNIA ex rel. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD and CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER 26 QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION, 27 Plaintiffs, 28 Page 1 Consent Decree - Case Nos. C09-00186 and 09-05684 Case3:09-cv-05684-RS Document86-1 Filed09/08/14 Page2 of 217 SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER, 1 Intervenor-Plaintiff, 2 v.
    [Show full text]
  • PCT Gazette, Weekly Issue No. 17, 2005
    17/2005 28 Apr/avr 2005 PCT Gazette - Section III - Gazette du PCT 10931 SECTION III WEEKLY INDEXES INDEX HEBDOMADAIRES INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION NUMBERS AND CORRESPONDING INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATION NUMBERS NUMÉROS DES DEMANDES INTERNATIONALES ET NUMÉROS DE PUBLICATION INTERNATIONALE CORRESPONDANTS International International International International International International Application Publication Application Publication Application Publication Numbers Numbers Numbers Numbers Numbers Numbers Numéros des Numéros de Numéros des Numéros de Numéros des Numéros de demandes publication demandes publication demandes publication internationales internationale internationales internationale internationales internationale AT BR CN PCT/AT2004/000289 WO 2005/037097 PCT/BR2004/000216 WO 2005/039243 PCT/CN2004/000931 WO 2005/037496 PCT/AT2004/000330 WO 2005/037565 PCT/CN2004/000973 WO 2005/038191 PCT/AT2004/000348 WO 2005/037472 CA PCT/CN2004/000975 WO 2005/037046 PCT/AT2004/000354 WO 2005/036997 PCT/CA2003/001603 WO 2005/038473 PCT/CN2004/001033 WO 2005/037351 PCT/AT2004/000356 WO 2005/037476 PCT/CA2004/000627 WO 2005/038335 PCT/CN2004/001050 WO 2005/038122 PCT/CA2004/001723 WO 2005/037386 PCT/CN2004/001061 WO 2005/039190 AU PCT/CA2004/001829 WO 2005/038378 PCT/CN2004/001062 WO 2005/038643 PCT/AU2003/001368 WO 2005/038476 PCT/CA2004/001835 WO 2005/037403 PCT/CN2004/001087 WO 2005/037335 PCT/AU2003/001371 WO 2005/037381 PCT/CA2004/001836 WO 2005/037541 PCT/CN2004/001092 WO 2005/039207 PCT/AU2003/001598 WO 2005/037666 PCT/CA2004/001838 WO 2005/037536
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests DRAFT Wilderness Evaluation Report August 2018
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forests DRAFT Wilderness Evaluation Report August 2018 Designated in the original Wilderness Act of 1964, the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness covers more than 183,000 acres spanning the Gunnison and White River National Forests. In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resources Defense Council • Southern Environmental Law Center • American Rivers • Sierra Club • Earthjustice • Environment America • Waterkeeper Alliance
    Natural Resources Defense Council • Southern Environmental Law Center • American Rivers • Sierra Club • Earthjustice • Environment America • Waterkeeper Alliance August 1, 2011 Water Docket Environmental Protection Agency Mail Code 2822T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20460 Attention: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2011– 0409 Submitted via www.regulations.gov and via email to [email protected] To Whom It May Concern: Please find enclosed comments on the document titled ―Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act.‖ These comments are submitted on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Southern Environmental Law Center, American Rivers, the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, Environment America, and the Waterkeeper Alliance. If you have any questions about this submission, please contact Jon Devine at NRDC at (202) 289-2361. Thank you in advance for considering our views. Sincerely, Jon Devine Bill Sapp Senior Attorney, Water Program Senior Attorney Natural Resources Defense Council Southern Environmental Law Center Katherine Baer Dalal Aboulhosn Senior Director, Clean Water Program Washington Representative American Rivers Sierra Club Joan Mulhern John Rumpler Senior Legislative Counsel Senior Attorney Earthjustice Environment America Kelly Hunter Foster Senior Attorney Waterkeeper Alliance Americans depend on and deserve clean water. People should feel safe when they swim that they will not get a water-borne illness. They should have confidence that the streams feeding their drinking water supplies will not be recklessly polluted or destroyed. They should have waters with abundant fish that are safe to eat, and they should be able to boat without fighting through rafts of disgusting, sometimes toxic, algae. The draft document released for public comment, titled ―Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act,‖1 will help to improve the condition of the nation‘s waters, so the undersigned organizations strongly support your efforts to clarify how to identify protected waters today.
    [Show full text]
  • Key New Victories to Reduce Sewage Spills to The
    Key New Victories to Reduce In This Issue Sewage Spills to the Bay Page 2 Recent San Francisco Baykeeper victories in Letter from the Baykeeper and the East Bay and South San Francisco will Executive Director help significantly reduce sewage spills to San Page 3 Francisco Bay and its tributaries. Baykeeper has Sea Level Rise been working for more than ten years to reduce King Tides in the Bay sewage spills, which are a major threat to the health of the Bay and local communities. Page 4 In March, Baykeeper, along with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Keeping Everyday Chemicals (EPA) and the California State Water Boards, negotiated an agreement that Out of the Bay requires ten East Bay cities to dramatically reduce illegal sewage spills. The Page 5 agreement applies to Oakland, Emeryville, Piedmont, Berkeley, Alameda, Micro-Plastics Pilot Program Albany and the cities served by the Stege Sanitary District, Kensington, El Baykeeper Member Survey Cerrito and the Richmond Annex section of Richmond. Page 6 Baykeeper has worked for many years to reduce sewage overflows from Hotline Tip Leads to Cleaner East Bay cities. Every rainy season, these cities’ debilitated sewer systems Streets in Redwood City allow rainwater to infiltrate leaky sewer pipes, sending massive amounts of Join the TransBay Relay rainwater mixed with raw sewage to the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) treatment plants, which are then forced to discharge the mixture to Page 7 the Bay before it is fully treated. Bay Species Spotlight This winter, more than 232 million gallons of undertreated sewage were Back Page discharged to the Bay because of these cities’ failure to upgrade their Sharks of the Bay polluting infrastructures.
    [Show full text]
  • Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC)
    Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Summits on the Air USA - Colorado (WØC) Association Reference Manual Document Reference S46.1 Issue number 3.2 Date of issue 15-June-2021 Participation start date 01-May-2010 Authorised Date: 15-June-2021 obo SOTA Management Team Association Manager Matt Schnizer KØMOS Summits-on-the-Air an original concept by G3WGV and developed with G3CWI Notice “Summits on the Air” SOTA and the SOTA logo are trademarks of the Programme. This document is copyright of the Programme. All other trademarks and copyrights referenced herein are acknowledged. Page 1 of 11 Document S46.1 V3.2 Summits on the Air – ARM for USA - Colorado (WØC) Change Control Date Version Details 01-May-10 1.0 First formal issue of this document 01-Aug-11 2.0 Updated Version including all qualified CO Peaks, North Dakota, and South Dakota Peaks 01-Dec-11 2.1 Corrections to document for consistency between sections. 31-Mar-14 2.2 Convert WØ to WØC for Colorado only Association. Remove South Dakota and North Dakota Regions. Minor grammatical changes. Clarification of SOTA Rule 3.7.3 “Final Access”. Matt Schnizer K0MOS becomes the new W0C Association Manager. 04/30/16 2.3 Updated Disclaimer Updated 2.0 Program Derivation: Changed prominence from 500 ft to 150m (492 ft) Updated 3.0 General information: Added valid FCC license Corrected conversion factor (ft to m) and recalculated all summits 1-Apr-2017 3.0 Acquired new Summit List from ListsofJohn.com: 64 new summits (37 for P500 ft to P150 m change and 27 new) and 3 deletes due to prom corrections.
    [Show full text]