February 8, 2012

Ninth Circuit Rules that NPDES Permits Are Required for Logging Road Ditches and Culverts

In a decision that may eventually have significance far beyond the nine states encompassed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, that court ruled on August 17, 2010 that timber companies are required to obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permits for stormwater discharges from logging roads that collect such runoff in ditches, culverts and other channels prior to discharge to streams and rivers. Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown, No. 07-35266 (9th Cir., Aug. 17, 2010). In doing so, the court emphasized that it was applying a long-standing interpretation of the term "point source" as defined in the federal Clean Water Act, under which "point and nonpoint sources are not distinguished by the kind of pollution they create or by the activity causing the pollution, but rather by whether the pollution reaches the [stream] through a confined, discrete conveyance." Northwest Environmental Defense Center, at *12010 (citing the Tenth Circuit's decision in United States v. Earth Sciences, Inc., 599 F.2d 368 (10th Cir. 1978)). Since the stormwater runoff in question is directed to ditches and culverts, the court found that it is discharged through point sources -- regardless of whether that water would otherwise properly be classified as "natural runoff." Northwest Environmental Defense Center, at *12024. In the court's words, only such "'natural runoff' that remains natural" may properly be excluded from NPDES permitting. The court rejected the argument that EPA's Silvicultural Rule excluded such discharges from the definition of “point source,” finding that such an interpretation would be inconsistent with the Clean Water Act.

In the course of addressing the objections of the defendant Oregon forestry agencies and intervenor trade groups, the court noted that "infeasibility" -- either from the perspective of state permitting agencies faced with enormous numbers of permit applications, or from the logging companies that will be required to obtain those permits before starting operations -- was not a concern when Congress passed the 1987 Amendments to the Clean Water Act establishing the phased-in stormwater permitting program. According to the Ninth Circuit panel, the only question to be asked is whether the activity that captures stormwater runoff is "industrial in nature"; if it is, then those who undertake such activity must obtain NPDES permit coverage.

Acknowledging the potentially heavy burden this ruling will impose on EPA and state permitting agencies, the court concluded the opinion by stating that "[I]n some respects, we are sympathetic with EPA." As a possible means of alleviating this concern, the court observed that Congress has also authorized the use of general NPDES permits in appropriate circumstances, in response to situations where there were "a vast number of de minimus stormwater sources, many of which pose[] no environmental threat." Northwest Environmental Defense Center, at *12038, 12040.

Should this ruling be applied nationally by EPA and states with delegated NPDES permit programs, it will likely add another layer of environmental permitting and compliance concerns to those engaged in forestry, mineral extraction and other earth-disturbing activities that are required to maintain drainage control over disturbed areas. Even for those companies that are already required to obtain NPDES permits for process wastewater or certain portions of large disturbed areas, the requirement to obtain specific coverage for roadside ditches and the like will undoubtedly present substantial administrative and managerial challenges. For those with operations that may be affected, this is an issue that is worth monitoring for future developments.

© 2012 Dinsmore & Shohl LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Christopher B. Power is a Partner in the Litigation Department and is a member of the Natural Resources and Environmental Practice Groups. Kip's practice encompasses civil and administrative litigation related to the energy industry, with a particular emphasis on natural resources extraction and related operations. His practice also includes compliance counseling and representation of manufacturers and other industrial clients in matters arising under federal environmental statutes and their state counterparts, including emerging issues associated with climate change. ...

304-357-0902

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.