Opinion ID: 2333047
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Federal Statutory and Regulatory Scheme

Text: Section 404(a) of the Clean Water Act generally bans the discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable waters of the United States without a prior permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps). [51] Section 404 vests the Corps with the statutory authority to regulate wetlands development. [52] Section 404(b)(1) provides that the decision to issue a permit for the discharge of fill material into wetlands is made using guidelines developed by the Corps and the Environmental Protection Agency (the EPA). [53] Pursuant to section 404(b)(1), the EPA develops section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, in conjunction with the Corps, for use by the Corps as the permitting authority. [54] In evaluating all applications for Department of the Army permits, the Corps will deny a permit involving activities with section 404 discharges into navigable waters unless the discharge complies with the EPA's 404(b)(1) Guidelines. [55] In addition to ensuring compliance with the section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, the Corps considers wetlands mitigation throughout the permit application review process. [56] A general statement of the Corps' wetlands mitigation policy for evaluating permit applications is set forth in 33 C.F.R. § 320.4(r). [57] This general statement is not, however, a substitute for the mitigation requirements necessary to ensure that a permit action under section 404 of the Clean Water Act complies with the section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. [58] Provisions addressing compliance with the EPA's 404(b)(1) Guidelines are set forth in 40 C.F.R. pt. 230 at subpart B. In reviewing an application's compliance with the section 404(b)(1) Guidelines and determining whether to grant or deny a permit for the discharge of fill material into wetlands, the Corps must further follow the general policies of 33 C.F.R. pt. 320 and procedures of 33 C.F.R. pt. 325. [59] 33 C.F.R. § 320.4(g) states that [a]uthorization of work or structures by [the Department of the Army] does not convey a property right, nor authorize any injury to property or invasion of other rights. Under 33 C.F.R. § 320.4(g)(6), an applicant's signature on an application is an affirmation that the applicant possesses or will possess the requisite property interest to undertake the activity proposed in the application. [60] Similarly, 33 C.F.R. § 325.1(d)(7) states that an applicant's signature will be an affirmation that the applicant will possess the requisite property interest. Accordingly, the federal statutory and regulatory scheme clearly contemplates that an applicant will offer land that it owns for purposes of wetlands mitigation. In this case, the applicant, DelDOT, did not offer any land owned by the State of Delaware to the Corps for wetlands mitigation. Instead, DelDOT's application to the Corps for a wetlands permit only offered the Cannons' additional land on the assumption that DelDOT had the absolute authority to condemn any property that it wanted to seize for wetlands mitigation. Whether the Cannons' additional property could be condemned for compensatory wetlands mitigation is the crux of this matter.