451 P.3d 493 (Mont. 2019), DA 18-0110, Montana Environmental Information Center v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Docket Nº: | DA 18-0110 |
Citation: | 451 P.3d 493, 397 Mont. 161, 2019 MT 213 |
Opinion Judge: | Mike McGrath, Chief Justice |
Party Name: | MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER and Sierra Club, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. Montana DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Defendant and Appellant, and Western Energy Company, Defendant, Intervenor, and Appellant. |
Attorney: | For Appellant Montana Department of Environmental Quality: Kirsten H. Bowers (argued), Edward Hayes, Special Assistant Attorneys General, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Helena, Montana For Appellant Western Energy Company: John C. Martin (argued), Kyle A. Gray, Holland & Hart LLP, J... |
Judge Panel: | We Concur: JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA, J., INGRID GUSTAFSON, J., BETH BAKER, J., LAURIE McKINNON, J., DIRK M. SANDEFUR, J., JIM RICE, J. |
Case Date: | September 10, 2019 |
Court: | Supreme Court of Montana |
Page 493
Argued: March 13, 2019
Submitted: March 19, 2019
Rehearing Denied: November 19, 2019
Page 494
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 495
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the First Judicial District, In and For the County of Lewis and Clark, Cause No. CDV 2012-1075, Honorable Kathy Seeley, Presiding Judge
For Appellant Montana Department of Environmental Quality: Kirsten H. Bowers (argued), Edward Hayes, Special Assistant Attorneys General, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Helena, Montana
For Appellant Western Energy Company: John C. Martin (argued), Kyle A. Gray, Holland & Hart LLP, Jackson, Wyoming, William W. Mercer, Victoria A. Marquis, Holland & Hart LLP, Billings, Montana
For Appellees: Shiloh Hernandez (argued), Matthew Bishop, Laura King, Western Environmental Law Center, Helena, Montana
For Amicus Treasure State Resource Association of Montana, Montana Petroleum Association, Montana Coal Council, Montana Mining Association, The Montana Association of Oil, Gas, and Coal Counties, and Rosebud County: Steven T. Wade, W. John Tietz, M. Christy S. McCann, Browning, Kaleczyc, Berry & Hoven, P.C., Helena, Montana
For Amicus Trout Unlimited: Laura S. Ziemer, Patrick Byorth, Meg K. Casey, Montana Trout Unlimited, Bozeman, Montana, Katherine K. OBrien, Jenny K. Harbine, Earthjustice, Bozeman, Montana
For Amicus Clark Fork Coalition: Andrew Gorder (argued), Clark Fork Coalition, Missoula, Montana, Katherin K. OBrien, Jenny K. Harbine, Earthjustice, Bozeman, Montana
OPINION
Mike McGrath, Chief Justice
Page 496
[397 Mont. 168][¶1] On September 14, 2012, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) issued Western Energy Company (Western Energy) a Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (MPDES) MT0023965 (2012 Permit), renewing its 1999 MPDES Permit (1999 Permit), to discharge pollutants from the Rosebud Mine adjacent to Colstrip, Montana, into Montana waters tributary to the Yellowstone River. Appellees, the Montana Environmental Information Center (MEIC) and the Sierra Club, filed suit arguing, inter alia, that DEQs permit renewal violated both the [397 Mont. 169] Montana Water Quality Act (WQA) and federal Clean Water Act (CWA). DEQ modified the 2012 Permit in 2014. DEQ and Western Energy presently appeal from a First Judicial District Memorandum and Order on Judicial Review granting summary judgment to MEIC and the Sierra Club and invalidating DEQs issuance of Western Energys final modified MPDES Permit MT0023965 (Modified Permit), effective in modified form September 8, 2014. We reverse and remand for a hearing on the factual allegations.
[¶2] This Court consolidates and restates the issues on appeal as follows: 1. Whether DEQs permitting decision exempting receiving waters with ephemeral characteristics from the water quality standards set forth in Admin. R. M. 17.30.629 is: (a) unlawful; or (b) arbitrary and capricious.
a. Whether DEQ unlawfully interpreted the term "ephemeral" pursuant to Admin. R. M. 17.30.637(4) and reclassified state waters such that DEQ exceeded its authority under the Water Quality Act.
b. Whether DEQ applied its interpretation of Admin. R. M. 17.30.637(4) during the permitting process to arbitrarily and capriciously establish water quality standards for East Fork Armells Creek.
2. Whether the Modified Permits representative monitoring protocol for precipitation-driven discharges at the Mines outfalls in alkaline mine drainage and coal preparation areas is unlawful or arbitrary and capricious.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The Rosebud Mine
[¶3] The Rosebud Mine (Mine) is a 25,600-acre1 surface sub-bituminous coal mine owned by Western Energy, a subsidiary of Westmoreland Coal Company, adjacent to Colstrip, Montana. The Mine sits in the uplands area of the East Fork Armells Creek and Rosebud Creek drainages, which flow into the Yellowstone River. The 2012 Permit states that the Mine includes approximately 17,276 acres disturbed by mining, requires around 400 acres of surface disturbance each year, and is segregated into Areas A, B, C, D, and E. These designations include areas where coal is actively mined, areas where coal is washed [397 Mont. 170] and prepared for shipment, and areas in various stages of reclamation.
[¶4] In areas of active mining, topsoil and overburden are removed, exposing the Rosebud coal seam, which is located roughly 100 feet below the surface. Western Energy
Page 497
mines the coal seam using four draglines. An active mining area includes groundwater infiltration into the pit left by the extracted coal, storm water that collects in the pit, and storm water run-off over active mining areas. Pits require de-watering through pumping or siphoning. Mine drainage from active mining areas and drainage from coal preparation and storage areas carry suspended solids. Discharges2 of suspended solids entrained in water impacted by the Mine are the primary pollutants associated with the Mine.
[¶5] To minimize discharges of pollution from the Mine into surrounding waters in excess of effluent limitations established by state and federal law, Western Energy collects and treats water impacted by its coal mining processes in storage ponds. The ponds provide time for suspended solids to settle, such that discharges comply with applicable effluent limitations. The storage ponds are designed to hold the volume of run-off equivalent to that from a ten-year, twenty-four-hour-storm event during active mining operations. Storm events exceeding design capacity cause overflow or unscheduled discharges from the storage ponds and require monitoring. Additionally, accumulation of residual storm water and other mine drainage in excess of design capacity cause unscheduled discharges from storage ponds.
[¶6] To reclaim an actively-mined area, overburden is placed in the empty pit where coal was previously removed. The replaced overburden is graded to approximate the original land contour and scarified to relieve compaction. Soil is redistributed and revegetated for reclamation. Storage ponds are further reclaimed as suspended solids settle and water is discharged in compliance with water quality effluent limitations.
[¶7] Outfalls3 are associated with each storage pond. Throughout the mining process, outfalls must be monitored. The Mine has 151 [397 Mont. 171] permitted outfalls. However, discharges from outfalls in reclamation areas are monitored subject to different standards than discharges from outfalls associated with active mine drainage and coal preparation areas. A DEQ-approved Sediment Control Plan governs the monitoring of outfalls in reclamation areas consistent with federal regulations. Under the Modified Permit, sixty-nine of the Mines 151 outfalls are in reclamation areas, monitored subject to the Sediment Control Plan.
[¶8] The Mine discharges water from its outfalls into East Fork Armells Creek, West Fork Armells Creek, Lee Coulee, Stocker Creek, Black Hank Creek, Donley Creek, Pony Creek, Cow Creek, and Spring Creek, each considered state waters.[4] West Fork Armells Creek, Stocker Creek, Black Hank Creek, and Donley Creek are tributaries of East Fork Armells Creek, which is tributary to the Yellowstone River. Lee Coulee, Spring Creek, Cow Creek, and Pony Creek are tributaries of Rosebud Creek, which is tributary to the Tongue River, which then flows into the Yellowstone River. All receiving waters are classified as C-3 waters, subject to water quality standards set forth in Admin. R. M. 17.30.629.
Procedural Background
[¶9] On April 14, 2004, Western Energy applied to DEQ for renewal of its 1999 Permit, due to expire on September 30, 2004. MPDES permits expire every five years. DEQ automatically continued the terms and conditions of the 1999 Permit until a new permit could be issued. See Admin. R. M. 17.30.1313. From September 2004 until September 2012, Western Energy continued to mine coal under the terms of its 1999 Permit.
[¶10] On August 24, 2010, DEQ issued a proposed draft permit and accompanying fact sheet for public comment. Western Energy and MEIC submitted comments. The Department subsequently requested and received updated application materials from
Page 498
Western Energy. On May 14, 2012, DEQ issued a revised draft permit and accompanying fact sheet for public comment. Western Energy and MEIC again submitted comments.
[¶11] On September 14, 2012, DEQ renewed Western Energys 1999 Permit. The 2012 Permit exempted receiving waters with ephemeral characteristics from the water quality standards applicable to C-3 waters. The 2012 Permit also allowed Western Energy to [397 Mont. 172] representatively monitor precipitation-driven discharges at the Mines outfalls in alkaline mine drainage and coal preparation areas. Finally, the 2012 Permit acknowledged that the upper and lower reaches of East Fork Armells Creek were impaired and had no established total maximum daily load (TMDL) budget. DEQ stated it could issue the 2012 Permit before it established a TMDL budget because the 2012 Permit was not new and did not permit "increased discharges" of pollution into an impaired stream. See Friends of the Wild Swan v. United States EPA, 74 Fed.Appx. 718, 724 (9th Cir. 2003). On December 21, 2012, MEIC filed its complaint in District Court seeking a declaratory judgment invalidating the 2012 Permit.
[¶12] Western...
To continue reading
FREE SIGN UP-
Park County Environmental Council v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, 120820 MTSC, DA 19-0492
...agency expertise" are afforded "great deference." Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2019 MT 213, ¶ 20, 397 Mont. 161, 451 P.3d 493 (MEIC III) (citations omitted). Government actions that interfere with the exercise of a fundame......
-
Montana Environmental Information Center v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, 091019 MTSC, DA 18-0110
...2019 MT 213 MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER and SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiffs and MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Defendant and Appellant, and WESTERN ENERGY COMPANY, Defendant, Intervenor, and Appellant. No. DA 18-0110 Supreme Court of Montana September 10, 2019 Argue......
-
Vote Solar v. Montana Department of Public Service Regulation, 082420 MTSC, DA 19-0223
...between the facts found and the choice made. Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2019 MT 213, ¶ 26, 397 Mont. 161, 451 P.3d 493; Clark Fork Coal. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2008 MT 407, ¶ 47, 347 Mont. 197, 197 P.3d 482 (Clark Fork Coal. ......
-
Park County Environmental Council v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, 120820 MTSC, DA 19-0492
...agency expertise" are afforded "great deference." Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2019 MT 213, ¶ 20, 397 Mont. 161, 451 P.3d 493 (MEIC III) (citations omitted). Government actions that interfere with the exercise of a fundame......
-
Montana Environmental Information Center v. Montana Department of Environmental Quality, 091019 MTSC, DA 18-0110
...2019 MT 213 MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER and SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiffs and MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, Defendant and Appellant, and WESTERN ENERGY COMPANY, Defendant, Intervenor, and Appellant. No. DA 18-0110 Supreme Court of Montana September 10, 2019 Argue......
-
Vote Solar v. Montana Department of Public Service Regulation, 082420 MTSC, DA 19-0223
...between the facts found and the choice made. Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2019 MT 213, ¶ 26, 397 Mont. 161, 451 P.3d 493; Clark Fork Coal. v. Mont. Dep't of Envtl. Quality, 2008 MT 407, ¶ 47, 347 Mont. 197, 197 P.3d 482 (Clark Fork Coal. ......