Federal Ruling Requires CWA Permit for Injection Wells

Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP
Contact

Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP

In a ruling July 15, U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway ordered Maui County to obtain a permit under the Clean Water Act (CWA) consistent with the analysis established by the Supreme Court’s April 2020 ruling that injection wells could fall under the CWA. The District Court decision marks a first-time application of the Supreme Court’s landmark test on when pollutants that travel through the groundwater require a permit. The Court reasoned that the discharge from the county’s injection wells into the groundwater, and ultimately into the ocean, is the functional equivalent of a direct discharge such that it triggers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit requirement.

In the case, Hawai’i Wildlife Fund, et al. v. County of Maui, the District Court applied the Supreme Court’s test set out in its April ruling which requires an NPDES “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.” In the Supreme Court Opinion, Justice Breyer writing for the 6-3 majority, noted that Courts should consider seven factors when determining if a discharge is the functional equivalent of a direct discharge:  transit time, distance traveled, the nature of the material through which the pollutant travels, the extent to which the pollutant is diluted or chemically changed as it travels, the amount of pollutant entering the navigable waters relative to the amount of pollutant that leaves the point source, the manner by or area in which the pollutant enters the navigable waters, and the degree to which the pollution at that point has maintained its specific identity. Justice Breyer noted that further “time and distance will be the most important factors in those cases, but not necessarily in every case.”

Future legal battles over water contamination from pollution sources such as leaking pipelines, feed lot manure lagoons, and coal ash ponds could be impacted by the federal court’s decision.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP
Contact
more
less

Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.