Vote:
Cert. Pending
Lower Court:
Questions Presented:
<p>Whether the Third Circuit erred by deferring to EPA’s interpretation of the words “total maximum daily load” to permit EPA to impose a complex regulatory scheme that does much more than cap daily levels of total pollutant loading and that displaces powers reserved to the States.</p>
Filing Date:
Wed, 2015-12-09
Filing Headline:
U.S. Chamber Encourages U.S. Supreme Court To Review EPA Water Quality Regulations for the Chesapeake Bay
Filing Description:
<p>In its <a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/sites/default/files/U.S.%20Chamber%20Amicus%20Brief%20--%20American%20Farm%20Bureau%20v.%20EPA%20%28SCOTUS%29.pdf">brief</a>, the U.S. Chamber urged the Supreme Court tp review a Third Circuit decision affirming EPA’s “total maximum daily load” (“TMDL”) regulation for the Chesapeake Bay. Unlike previous TMDLs established by states, which fix a daily cap on the specific water body, this TMDL establishes pollutant limits for point and nonpoint sources across the 64,000 square mile Bay watershed, sets deadlines for states to implement control measures for those sources, and demands “reasonable assurances” from states that the deadlines will be met, backed by federal sanctions.</p><p>The brief, filed jointly with the<span style="font-size: 12px;"> <a href="http://www.nam.org"><span style="font-size: 16px;"><span style="font-size: 0.75em;">National Asssociation of Manufacturers</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 16px;"></span> and <a href="http://www.nfib.com/">National Federation of Independent Business</a>, argues that the TMDL will adversely affect National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permits and facility operations, and that the TMDL’s offset requirements further paralyze economic growth.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.hoganlovells.com/cate-stetson/">Catherine E. Stetson</a> and <a href="http://www.hoganlovells.com/james-banks/">James T. Banks</a> of <a href="http://www.hoganlovells.com/">Hogan Lovells</a> served as co-counsel for the amici with the U.S. Chamber.</p>
Outcome Content:
<p>This case has not been decided yet.</p>
Procedural History:
<p><a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/sites/default/files/scotus/files/Cert.%20Petition%20--%20American%20Farm%20Bureau%20v.%20EPA%20%28SCOTUS%29.pdf">Cert. petition</a> filed 11/6/2015. U.S. Chamber amicus <a href="http://www.chamberlitigation.com/sites/default/files/U.S.%20Chamber%20Amicus%20Brief%20--%20American%20Farm%20Bureau%20v.%20EPA%20%28SCOTUS%29.pdf">brief</a> filed 12/9/2015.</p>
Docket Number:
15-599
Related Documents:
Minor edit:
Recent Activity
