2 F.4th 1002
7th Cir.2021Background
- Prairie Rivers Network (PRN), an Illinois environmental nonprofit with >1,000 members, sued Dynegy under the Clean Water Act (CWA) citizen-suit provision, alleging coal-ash seepage from unlined ash ponds contaminated groundwater that reached the Middle Fork of the Vermilion River.
- PRN alleged the groundwater-transported pollutants (e.g., arsenic, lead, sulfates) harmed its members’ use, enjoyment, aesthetic and ecological interests in the river.
- The district court dismissed PRN’s suit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, relying on this court’s Village of Oconomowoc Lake precedent that CWA did not regulate certain groundwater discharges.
- The appeal was stayed pending the Supreme Court’s County of Maui decision; after County of Maui (recognizing a “functional equivalent” test for some groundwater discharges), the parties briefed the appeal and PRN sought to supplement the record with member declarations to establish standing.
- The Seventh Circuit held PRN lacked associational standing because the complaint failed to identify at least one individual member who could sue in their own right and refused to consider supplemental declarations filed for the first time on appeal; the dismissal was affirmed without prejudice (PRN may refile).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Associational standing under Article III | PRN alleged >1,000 members who live/ recreate/ work along the river and general harms to their use/enjoyment; no need to name a member at pleading stage | Complaint fails to identify any particular member with concrete, traceable, redressable injury; general/group allegations insufficient | PRN lacks associational standing; complaint must show at least one member could sue in their own right |
| Whether CWA covers groundwater discharges to navigable waters | County of Maui shows groundwater can be regulated if it is the "functional equivalent" of a direct discharge | Oconomowoc and Dynegy: CWA doesn’t reach groundwater discharges from artificial ponds | Court did not decide; resolved the appeal on standing and left CWA coverage question for another day |
| Use of supplemental member declarations filed on appeal to cure standing | PRN asked to supplement the appellate record with member declarations to demonstrate standing | Declarations were not in district-court record and cannot be introduced for the first time on appeal; Summers bars retroactive cures | Motion denied; court declined to consider post-judgment declarations |
| Timing/accountability for establishing standing | PRN argued Dynegy didn’t raise standing below, so PRN should be allowed to cure on appeal | Standing is a jurisdictional Article III requirement that plaintiff must plead and prove at each stage; failure at pleading is fatal | Plaintiff bears the burden at pleading; failure to identify a member with standing cannot be cured on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, 140 S. Ct. 1462 (2020) (SCOTUS decision adopting a “functional equivalent” multi-factor test for some groundwater-mediated discharges)
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (associational standing requires identification of members who have suffered or will suffer concrete injury; post-judgment affidavits not considered)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing elements and burden to establish them at successive litigation stages)
- Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Advert. Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333 (1977) (three-part test for associational standing)
- United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544 (1996) (associational standing permits organizations to sue on behalf of members if at least one member has standing)
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016) (clarifies injury-in-fact requirement is concrete and particularized)
- Village of Oconomowoc Lake v. Dayton Hudson Corp., 24 F.3d 962 (7th Cir. 1994) (previous Seventh Circuit decision limiting CWA reach over certain groundwater/artificial pond discharges)
- Disability Rights Wis., Inc. v. Walworth Cty. Bd. of Supervisors, 522 F.3d 796 (7th Cir. 2008) (affirming dismissal for lack of associational standing where association failed to identify a member with standing)
- Shakman v. Clerk of Cook Cty., 994 F.3d 832 (7th Cir. 2021) (illustrates satisfiable associational standing where a named member showed individualized injury)