FARMER v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1:24-cv-01654
D.D.C.Dec 16, 2024Background
- Plaintiffs (farmers, a county, and environmental organizations) sued the EPA, alleging it failed to regulate certain PFAS chemicals in sewage sludge as required by the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
- PFAS are durable synthetic chemicals found in many consumer and industrial products, persist in the environment, and are present in sewage sludge.
- Plaintiffs assert that the EPA failed to identify and regulate 18 PFAS in its biennial report and to regulate 11 PFAS previously identified, constituting an unlawful failure to act under the CWA and APA.
- Plaintiffs seek an order requiring EPA to regulate the identified PFAS in sewage sludge.
- The National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), representing public water utilities, moved to intervene as a defendant due to the potential regulatory and financial impact new PFAS regulations would have on its members.
- EPA did not oppose NACWA's intervention, but plaintiffs did, questioning whether NACWA had Article III standing and met Rule 24 requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing for Intervention | NACWA's alleged regulatory harm is too speculative | NACWA's members face direct, concrete regulatory harm if suit succeeds | NACWA has associational standing; alleged harm is traceable and redressable |
| Timeliness of Motion to Intervene | Not contested | Motion was filed before any merits decision | Motion is timely |
| Legally Protected Interest | NACWA lacks sufficient interest | NACWA's members will be directly affected by any new regulations | NACWA has a legally protected interest |
| Adequacy of Representation | EPA can represent NACWA's interests | EPA's interests are broader; NACWA has unique financial/operational interests | Representation by EPA may be inadequate; NACWA may intervene |
Key Cases Cited
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333 (organizational standing requirements for suing on behalf of members)
- Fund for Animals, Inc. v. Norton, 322 F.3d 728 (D.C. Circuit standard for intervention as of right)
- Trbovich v. United Mine Workers of America, 404 U.S. 528 (minimal burden for showing inadequate representation in intervention)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (standing requires concrete injury, causation, and redressability)