National Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. E.P.A., Nos. 79-2256

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtJAMES HUNTER, III; GIBBONS
Citation719 F.2d 624
Parties, 13 Envtl. L. Rep. 21,042 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF METAL FINISHERS, Electroplaters of York, Inc. and Pioneer Metal Finishing, Inc., Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. The INSTITUTE FOR INTERCONNECTING AND PACKAGING ELECTRONIC CIRCUITS, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and Douglas M. Costle, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF METAL FINISHERS and Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits, Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and Walter Barber, Acting Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., Petitioner, v. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Douglas M. Costle, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents, Chemical Manufacturers Association, American Cyanamid Company, FMC Corporation, Union Carbide Corporation, Intervenors. UNITED STATES BREWERS ASSOCIATION, Petitioner, v. ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, and Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor. MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION, American Paper Institute, National Forest Products Association, National Paint and Coatings Association, Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., American Cyanamid Company, FMC Corporation, Hercules Incorporated, Shell Oil Company, and Union Carbide Corporation, Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor. ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE AGENCIES, Petitioner, v. UNITE
Decision Date24 October 1983
Docket Number81-1712,80-1008,81-1279,79-2443,81-1351,Nos. 79-2256,81-1210,81-1977

Page 624

719 F.2d 624
19 ERC 1785, 13 Envtl. L. Rep. 21,042
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF METAL FINISHERS, Electroplaters of
York, Inc. and Pioneer Metal Finishing, Inc., Petitioners,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
The INSTITUTE FOR INTERCONNECTING AND PACKAGING ELECTRONIC
CIRCUITS, Petitioner,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY, INC., Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and Douglas M.
Costle, Administrator, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Respondents,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF METAL FINISHERS and Institute for
Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits,
Petitioners,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and Walter
Barber, Acting Administrator, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., Petitioner,
v.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Douglas M. Costle,
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Respondents,
Chemical Manufacturers Association, American Cyanamid
Company, FMC Corporation, Union Carbide
Corporation, Intervenors.
UNITED STATES BREWERS ASSOCIATION, Petitioner,
v.
ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, and
Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION, American Paper
Institute, National Forest Products Association, National
Paint and Coatings Association, Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturers Association, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.,
American Cyanamid Company, FMC Corporation, Hercules
Incorporated, Shell Oil Company, and Union Carbide
Corporation, Petitioners,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE AGENCIES, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF METAL FINISHERS, Petitioner,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, American Cyanamid
Company, FMC Corporation, Union Carbide
Corporation, Petitioners,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
AMERICAN PAPER INSTITUTE and National Forest Products
Association, Petitioners,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., Petitioner,
v.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Chemical Manufacturers Association, American Cyanamid
Company, FMC Corporation, Union Carbide
Corporation, Intervenors.
METAL FINISHING ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Petitioner,
v.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent.
INTERLAKE, INC., Republic Steel Corporation and United
States Steel Corporation, Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor,
American Iron & Steel Institute, Rouge Steel Co., Intervenors.
CHICAGO ASSOCIATION OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, Illinois
Manufacturers' Association, and Mid-American Legal
Foundation, Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Intervenor.
Nos. 79-2256, 79-2443, 80-1008, 81-1210, 81-1279, 81-1351,
81-1712, 81-1977 to 81-1979, 81-1981 to 81-1985,
81-2119, 81-2150 and 81-2151.
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.
Argued June 20, 1983.
Decided Sept. 20, 1983.
As Amended Oct. 5, 1983.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 24, 1983.

Page 631

Theodore Garrett (argued), Constance J. Chatwood, Corinne A. Goldstein, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., for National Ass'n of Metal Finishers, The Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits, and Chemical Manufacturers Ass'n.

John M. Cannon (argued), Susan W. Wanat, Mid-American Legal Foundation, Chicago, Ill., for Chicago Ass'n of Commerce and Industry.

Robert J. Saner, II (argued), Lee C. White, White, Fine & Verville, Washington, D.C., for Ass'n of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies.

Turner T. Smith (argued), E. Milton Farley, III, William B. Ellis, Manning Gasch, Jr., Hunton & Williams, Richmond, Va., for Ford Motor Company and Rouge Steel.

Norman W. Bernstein (argued), Douglas E. Cutler, Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, Mich., for Ford Motor Company.

Louis E. Tosi (argued), William L. Patberg, Fuller & Henry, Toledo, Ohio, for General Motors.

James T. Harrington (argued), Dixie L. Laswell, Edward P. Kenney, Rooks, Pitts, Fullagar & Poust, Chicago, Ill., for Interlake, Inc., Republic Steel Corp., U.S. Steel Corp. and American Iron & Steel Institute.

R. Stuart Broom (argued), James W. Riddell, Dawson, Riddell, Fox, Holroyd, Wilson & Jackson, Washington, D.C., for U.S. Brewers Ass'n.

Alan S. Miller (argued), J. Taylor Banks, Frances Dubrowski, Washington, D.C., for NRDC.

Michael K. Glenn, Gary R. Feulner, Chadbourne, Parke, Whiteside & Wolff, Washington, D.C., for American Paper Institute and The National Forest Products Ass'n.

Donald T. Bliss, David T. Beddow, O'Melveny & Myers, Washington, D.C., and Mark R. Steinberg, O'Melveny & Myers, Los Angeles, Cal., for Metal Finishing Ass'n of Southern California.

Barry S. Neuman (argued), Michael Steinberg (argued), George E. Henderson, Lee R. Tyner, Carol E. Dinkins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jose R. Allen, Acting Chief, Environmental Defense Section, Lloyd S. Guerci, Joan Z. Bernstein, Anthony Z. Roisman, Ellen Maldonado, James W. Moorman, Donald W. Stever, Michael W. Stein, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Michael Dworkin (argued), Michael Murchison, Ellen Siegler, Daniel J. Berry, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., for EPA; Of Counsel: Robert M. Perry, Associate Administrator and Gen. Counsel, Susan G. Lepow, Asst. Gen. Counsel Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., of counsel.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Statute

B. The Regulations

1. The General Pretreatment Regulations

2. the Categorical Electroplating Standards

C. The Consolidated Cases

D. The Standard of Review

II. THE GENERAL PRETREATMENT

REGULATION

A. The Definitions of "Interference" and "Pass

Through"

1. Interference

2. Pass Through

B. Definition of "New Source"

C. The Fundamentally Different Factor

Variance

1. Variances from Pretreatment Standards

2. Variances for Toxic Pollutants

D. The Removal Credits Provision

1. EPA approval and Authorization

2. Unworkability

E. The Combined Wastestream Formula

1. Process Categories

2. Moving Target

3. Attainability and Cost of Combined

Pretreatment

III. THE CATEGORICAL ELECTROPLATING

STANDARDS

A. Methodology of the Standards

1. The Regression Analysis

2. Lead and Cadmium

B. The Cost to Segregated Facilities

1. The NAMF Settlement Agreement

2. The Cost-Benefit Analysis

C. The Compliance Deadline for Integrated

Facilities

IV. CONCLUSION

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

AISI American Iron and Steel Institute
                BAT Best Available Technology Economically
                 Achievable
                BDT Best available Demonstrated Control
                 Technology
                BPT Best Practicable Control Technology
                 Currently Available
                CACI Chicago Association of Commerce and
                 Industry
                CMA Chemical Manufacturing Association
                EPA Environmental Protection Agency
                FDF Fundamentally Different Factor
                GM General Motors Corp.
                IIPEC Institute for Interconnecting and
                 Packaging Electronic Circuits
                J. App. Joint Appendix
                Legis. Hist. Legislative History
                Me degrees Regulated Metal in Influent
                MFASC Metal Finishing Association of Southern
                 California
                NAMF National Association of Metal Finishers
                NPDES National Pollutant Discharge
                 Elimination System
                NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council
                PM Precipitable Metals in Influent
                POTW Publicly Operated Treatment Works
                R. Add. Addendum of Respondent
                TSS Total Suspended Solids
                TTO Total Toxic Organics
                USBA United States Brewers Association
                Xme Ratio of Me degrees to PM
                

Page 632

Before: GIBBONS, HUNTER and BECKER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

JAMES HUNTER, III, Circuit Judge:

Section 307 of the Clean Water Act 1 directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to promulgate regulations requiring industrial facilities to pretreat the pollutants that they discharge into public sewage treatment systems. The Administrator has promulgated both general pretreatment regulations 2 and regulations establishing categorical pretreatment standards for existing electroplating sources. 3 The petitioners in these consolidated cases seek review of the Administrator's actions in promulgating certain provisions of those regulations. Under section 509 of the Clean Water Act 4 we have jurisdiction to exercise a limited review of the Administrator's actions. We may overturn those actions only if they are arbitrary, capricious or otherwise contrary to law. 5 Under that standard of review, we find invalid certain provisions of the general

Page 633

pretreatment regulations. Because it is not for us to rewrite those provisions, we will remand them to the Administrator.

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Statute

In 1972 Congress amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ("the Act" or "the Clean Water Act"), 6 setting as a national goal the elimination, by 1985, of the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251(a)(1) (1976). To reach that goal the Act directed the Administrator of EPA to promulgate regulations setting limits on the pollution that can be discharged by three general types of "point sources," see id. Sec. 1362(14) (1976 & Supp. I 1977).

First, the Administrator was to establish effluent limitations for point sources which discharge pollutants directly into navigable waters ("direct...

To continue reading

Request your trial
48 practice notes
  • Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., Nos. 84-3530
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • April 30, 1986
    ...groups challenging the 1978 and 1981 regulations, all of which were heard by this Court in National Association of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3d Cir.1983) [hereinafter NAMF ] reversed in part sub nom. Chemical Manufacturers Ass'n v. NRDC, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 1102, 84 L.Ed.2d......
  • San Luis & Delta–mendota Water Auth. v. Salazar, No. 1:09–cv–00407 OWW DLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • December 14, 2010
    ...to the characteristics of the data to which it is applied.’ ” NWF v. EPA, 286 F.3d at 565; see Nat'l Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624, 657 (3rd Cir.1983) (“the choice of scientific data and statistical methodology to be used is best left to the sound discretion of the [agency]”......
  • Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. E.P.A., No. 87-4849
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • March 30, 1989
    ...Reynolds Metals Co. v. EPA, 760 F.2d 549 (4th Cir.1985) (metal and brewing industries); National Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3d Cir.1983) (electroplating industry), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. NRDC, 470 U.S. 116, 105 S.Ct. 1102, 84 L.Ed.2d 90 (......
  • Abdullah v. Am. Airlines, Inc., Civil Nos. 91–0277F, 93–0108F.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of the Virgin Islands
    • June 5, 1997
    ...apply when the legislative history and context are contrary to such a reading of the statute”); National Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624, 648 n. 33 (3d Cir.1983) (considering the maxim inapplicable because of “persuasive evidence of a contrary legislative intent”). According t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
43 cases
  • Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., Nos. 84-3530
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • April 30, 1986
    ...groups challenging the 1978 and 1981 regulations, all of which were heard by this Court in National Association of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3d Cir.1983) [hereinafter NAMF ] reversed in part sub nom. Chemical Manufacturers Ass'n v. NRDC, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 1102, 84 L.Ed.2d......
  • San Luis & Delta–mendota Water Auth. v. Salazar, No. 1:09–cv–00407 OWW DLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • December 14, 2010
    ...to the characteristics of the data to which it is applied.’ ” NWF v. EPA, 286 F.3d at 565; see Nat'l Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624, 657 (3rd Cir.1983) (“the choice of scientific data and statistical methodology to be used is best left to the sound discretion of the [agency]”......
  • Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. E.P.A., No. 87-4849
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • March 30, 1989
    ...Reynolds Metals Co. v. EPA, 760 F.2d 549 (4th Cir.1985) (metal and brewing industries); National Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3d Cir.1983) (electroplating industry), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. NRDC, 470 U.S. 116, 105 S.Ct. 1102, 84 L.Ed.2d 90 (......
  • Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., No. 80-1607
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • June 30, 1987
    ...similar "new source" definitions in the coal mine and general pretreatment regulations. See National Ass'n of Metal Finishers v. EPA, 719 F.2d 624 (3d Cir.1983), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Chemical Manufacturers Ass'n v. NRDC, 470 U.S. 116, 105 S.Ct. 1102, 84 L.Ed.2d 90 (1985); see als......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT