Northwest Environmental Advocates v United States Environmental Protection Agency, No. 2:2020cv01362 - Document 84 (W.D. Wash. 2022)

Court Description: ORDER granting Parties' 83 Joint Motion to Amend. The Court hereby VACATES the Order of its 12/29/2021 Opinion and Order (ECF No. 57 at 21, lines 17-19 and 22, lines 6 to 8). In addition, it is hereby ORDERED that: EPA will issue a new decis ion on Plaintiff's 2013 Petition relating to water quality standards for the State of Washington to protect aquatic life (the "Petition") no later than 9/1/2022. The 1/19/2022 Judgment (ECF No. 61 ) is likewise amended to incorporate the terms of this Order. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (SB)

Download PDF
Northwest Environmental Advocates v United States Environmental Protection Agency Doc. 84 Case 2:20-cv-01362-MJP Document 84 Filed 08/30/22 Page 1 of 3 1 The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 11 NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL 12 ADVOCATES, 13 14 Plaintiff, v. 15 THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 16 AGENCY, 17 Case No. 2:20-cv-01362-MJP ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND AND MODIFYING THE COURT’S DECEMBER 29, 2021 ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant. 18 19 20 21 22 Based on the foregoing motions and the parties’ joint request, and for good cause shown, the Court hereby VACATES the Order of its December 29, 2021 Opinion and Order (ECF No. 57 at 21, lines 17-19 and 22, lines 6 to 8). In addition, it is hereby ORDERED that: EPA will 23 24 25 issue a new decision on Plaintiff’s 2013 Petition relating to water quality standards for the State of Washington to protect aquatic life (the “Petition”) no later than September 1, 2022. The 26 Petition decision will contain the following provisions, which shall be enforceable as terms of 27 this Order: 28 MODIFIED ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 1 Case No. 2:20-cv-01362-MJP Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-01362-MJP Document 84 Filed 08/30/22 Page 2 of 3 1 1. EPA shall grant the Petition for the following pollutants: Arsenic, Cadmium, 2 Copper, Cyanide, Mercury, Selenium, Nickel, Acrolein, and Aluminum. 3 2. EPA shall issue a CWA section 303(c)(4)(B) Necessity Determination for these 4 nine pollutants within nine months of the petition response, no later than June 1, 5 6 2023. If EPA finds that no new or revised criteria are necessary under CWA 7 section 303(c)(4)(B) for any one or more of these nine pollutants within nine 8 months of the petition response (and no later than June 1, 2023), then the district 9 court’s original December 29, 2021 order and January 19, 2022 judgment will be 10 reinstated—including page 21, lines 17-19 and page 22, lines 6 to 8 of the order— 11 and EPA will be obligated to comply within 180 days of reinstatement. 12 3. EPA will defer a decision on the Petition for three years for the following 13 14 pollutants: Chromium III, DDT and its metabolites, Endosulfan, Endrin, 15 Tributyltin, Zinc, Lead, and Nonylphenol. EPA shall issue a decision on the 16 Petition for these eight pollutants within three years of the effective date of this 17 Order. 18 19 4. EPA will deny the Petition for any remaining pollutants covered by the Petition. The January 19, 2022 Judgment (ECF No. 61) is likewise amended to incorporate the 20 21 terms of this Order. 22 23 DATED this 30th day of August, 2022. A 24 25 The Honorable Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge 26 27 28 MODIFIED ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 2 Case No. 2:20-cv-01362-MJP Case 2:20-cv-01362-MJP Document 84 Filed 08/30/22 Page 3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Presented by: Elisabeth H. Carter U.S. Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Division Environmental Defense Section P.O. Box 7611 Washington, D.C. 20044 (202) 598-3141 Elisabeth.carter@usdoj.gov 8 Attorney for Defendant 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MODIFIED ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - 3 Case No. 2:20-cv-01362-MJP

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.