This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
On June 27, 2007, the Minerals Management Service (MMS) issued its notice advising the public of its intention to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for proposed OCS Lease Sale 206, which is the Central Gulf of Mexico lease sale to be held in March 2008. Notably, the EA will not include approximately 5.8 million acres located in the southeastern part of the Central Planning Area, which was made available for leasing by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006.
By Robert E. Holden and Monica Derbes Gibson The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have released long-awaited guidance addressing jurisdictional determinations under the Clean Water Act (CWA) in the wake of Rapanos v. United States , 126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006). There is general agreement that Rapanos limited the reach of the CWA, but the Court did not articulate a clear standard for determining whether or not a wetland or body of water is covered by the CWA.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content