Arkansas v. Oklahoma

503 U.S. 91 (1992)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D applied to the EPA, seeking a permit for a new sewage treatment plant under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). EPA issued a permit authorizing the plant to discharge up to half of its effluent (to a limit of 6.1 million gallons per day) into an unnamed stream in northwestern Arkansas. That flow passes through a series of three creeks for about 17 miles, and then enters the Illinois River at a point 22 miles upstream from the Arkansas-Oklahoma border. P challenged this permit before the EPA, alleging, that the discharge violated the Oklahoma water quality standards. Those standards provide that 'no degradation [of water quality] shall be allowed' in the upper Illinois River, including the portion of the river immediately downstream from the state line. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) concluded that the Oklahoma standards would not be implicated unless the contested discharge had 'something more than a mere de minimis impact' on the State's waters. He found that the discharge would not have an 'undue impact' on Oklahoma's waters and, accordingly, affirmed the issuance of the permit. On appeal, the EPA's Chief Judicial Officer first ruled that § 301(b)(1)(C) of the Clean Water Act 'requires an NPDES permit to impose any effluent limitations necessary to comply with applicable state water quality standards.' Specifically, the ALJ found that there would be no detectable violation of any of the components of Oklahoma's water quality standards. On judicial review, D argued that the Clean Water Act did not require an Arkansas point source to comply with P's water quality standards. P challenged the EPA's determination that the discharge would not produce a detectable violation of the Oklahoma standards. The Court of Appeals agreed with the EPA that the statute required compliance with Oklahoma's water quality standards. The Court of Appeals reversed the Agency's issuance of the permit. The court found that the Illinois River in Oklahoma was 'already degraded,' that the effluent would reach the Illinois River in Oklahoma, and that that effluent could 'be expected to contribute to the ongoing deterioration of the River' in Oklahoma even though it would not detectably affect the river's water quality. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.