Recent federal court decisions continue to show that Article III standing can be a formidable defense to environmental citizen suits, particularly following the Supreme Court’s decision Spokeo v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016).
Continue Reading Article III Standing Still Proving to be a Formidable Defense to Environmental Citizen Suits
Courts are starting to apply the Supreme Court’s new standard under County of Maui to claims under the Clean Water Act, highlighting the fact-intensive and highly technical nature of the relevant inquiry.
Continue Reading Courts Begin to Apply County of Maui to Clean Water Act Claims
In April 2020, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund et al., 140 S. Ct. 1462 (2000), vacating the Ninth Circuit’s decision. The appeals court had affirmed a district court’s finding of Clean Water Act (“CWA”) liability for the County’s alleged failure to obtain a discharge permit for subsurface releases of pollutants into groundwater that conveys pollutants to navigable waters. In vacating the judgment below, the Supreme Court rejected the Ninth Circuit’s “fairly traceable” test and set forth a new standard for determining when a source needs an NPDES permit: “the statute requires a permit when there is a direct discharge from a point source into navigable waters or when there is the functional equivalent of a direct discharge.” Id. at 1468 (emphasis added). In other words, “an addition falls within the statutory requirement that it be ‘from any point source’ when a point source directly deposits pollutants into navigable waters, or when the discharge reaches the same result through roughly similar means.” Id. at 1476 (emphasis added).
Continue Reading Groups Seeking to Expand Reach of Clean Water Act
Environmental groups are raising the stakes for power companies facing allegations of coal-ash liability. Power plants that burn coal to produce electricity also create byproducts in the process, known as “coal combustion residuals,” or CCRs. CCRs go by several names, but are commonly known as “coal ash.”
Historically, power companies have stored CCRs in settling ponds, also known as “coal-ash basins.” Coal-ash storage and disposal can lead to allegations of groundwater contamination and environmental contamination claims. Environmental groups have sought to require companies to pay for remediation of disposal sites and alleged groundwater contamination; address alleged natural resource damages; and conduct extensive monitoring and sampling of onsite and offsite sediments, groundwater, fish, and other wildlife.
Over the past several years, the EPA and states have wrestled with the controversial question of how to manage ash and other residual materials produced by the combustion of coal in coal-fired power plants. The Water Infrastructure Improvements Act (“WIIN Act”), signed by President Obama on December 16, 2016, should help provide clarity to address this question by creating a state permitting program for managing coal ash based on site-specific conditions and potential risk to human health and the environment.
Continue Reading The WIIN Act: A Path to Risk-Based Management of Coal Ash