Utility Water Act Group v. Perciasepe
404 U.S. App. D.C. 395
| D.C. Cir. | 2013Background
- Defenders of Wildlife and Sierra Club sued EPA for alleged failure to promptly revise Steam Electric effluent guidelines and ELGs under the Clean Water Act.
- A proposed consent decree accompanied the complaint, setting a schedule for EPA to initiate notice-and-comment rulemaking and a final agency decision.
- UWAG moved to intervene; district court denied intervention and entered the consent decree.
- UWAG appealed the denial and moved to vacate the consent decree, arguing lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; court ultimately held no standing and dismissed rest of appeal.
- Court noted Steam Electric category history (1974 standards, 1982 last revision) and the consent-decree deadlines (notice by 7/23/2012; final action by 1/31/2014) and that EPA retained discretion under the CWA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UWAG has Article III standing to intervene | UWAG members have standing due to procedural injury or costly information requests | No concrete injury or redressable interest from consent decree; costs speculative | UWAG lacks standing; intervention denied |
| Whether UWAG should be allowed to intervene as of right under Rule 24(a) | UWAG has a protectable interest and impairment potential | Standing missing; no impairment to concrete interests shown | Intervention denied for lack of standing |
| Whether permissive intervention under Rule 24(b) was appropriate | Common questions of law/fact with main action; timely, cost/benefit ignored | Rule 24(b) requires standing; not met here | Pendent review not reached; standing lacking prevents permissive intervention |
| Whether UWAG may appeal despite non-party status | District court order binds non-parties; appeal appropriate | Non-parties generally cannot appeal district court orders; lack jurisdiction | Appeal dismissed due to lack of party status; jurisdiction not present |
Key Cases Cited
- Fund for Animals, Inc. v. Norton, 322 F.3d 728 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (standards for intervention and standing in environmental suits)
- In re Endangered Species Act Section I Deadline Litig., 704 F.3d 972 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (standing and intervention related to deadlines and settlements)
- National Ass’n of Home Builders v. EPA, 667 F.3d 6 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (standing and procedural injury in rulemaking context)
- N.Y. Reg’l Interconnect v. FERC, 634 F.3d 581 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (injury-in-fact and causation standards for standing)
- Veneman, 262 F.3d 406 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (stated framework for standing and agency action impact on intervenors)