Case Study

Responsible Economic Development v. S.C. Department of Health and milieu Control 641 S.E.2d 425 (2007) Facts: Wal-Mart intended to build a new store in Florence, southmost Carolina. Because the store would have a parking lot, it postulate a permit that determined how rage pee outpouring would be handled. The parking lot was designed to make water flow in the direction of a detention (holding) pond. It could make up 100-year frequency storm events. From the pond, water would flow into assorted creeks. The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Controls (DHEC) granted a storm water permit. Procedural History: An administrative law reckon for DHEC ruled that the permit had been properly granted. crimson challenged that ruling, but it was upheld rootage by the DHEC board and then by the circuit court. RED appealed to the state high court. Issue: Whether the offspring of the storm water flood permit is allowed because it met state standards?

Decision: The Supreme court of law of South Carolina affirmed the ruling of the board and the Circuit Court. precept: The ALJ determined the requirements of Regulations 72-305 and -307 applied to this case, because Wal-Marts proposed development involves a go through disturbing activity. He effectuate the storm water runoff from Wal-Marts development would not flow directly into Jeffries Creek, an stricken water body, which is an unimpaired water body. He also found there was no significant evidence that qualified the pitiable measures alleged by Appellants. Based on the totality of the circumstances, the ALJ upheld the issuance of the storm water permit to Wal-Mart. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.