Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association

PETITIONER: Environmental Protection Agency
RESPONDENT: National Crushed Stone Association
LOCATION: Minnesota State Legislature

DOCKET NO.: 79-770
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

CITATION: 449 US 64 (1980)
ARGUED: Oct 07, 1980
DECIDED: Dec 02, 1980

ADVOCATES:
Andrew J. Levander - on behalf of the Petitioner
George C. Freeman, Jr. - on behalf of Consolidation Coal Company et al., Respondents
Theodore L. Garrett - on behalf of National Crushed Stone Association et al., Respondents

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - October 07, 1980 in Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - December 02, 1980 in Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association

Warren E. Burger:

The judgments and opinion of the Court in Environmental Protection Agency against National Crushed Stone Association and the consolidated case will be announced by Mr. Justice White.

Byron R. White:

This case is -- were brought here to review a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that the Environmental Protection Agency had misconstrued its powers under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

That Act authorizes the agency to issue a -- and pollution discharge limitations country wide, and in 1977 pursuant to that authority, the agency issued discharge limitations for the coal mining industry and for various categories of the -- of the mining and processing industries.

Each set of regulations contained a variance provisions and it was these provisions that the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held it to be too narrowly drawn and inconsistent with the statute, because the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbian Circuit had held precisely to the contrary.

We issued certiorari to settle the dispute.

We think the Environmental Protection Agency properly exercised its power and that the variance provisions were not too narrowly drawn.

Our reasons for thinking so are stated in an opinion on the file with the clerk and were not very instructive or useful to repeat them in this oral announcement.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is accordingly reversed.

The Court is unanimous except that Mr. Justice Powel took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Warren E. Burger:

Thank you, Mr. Justice White.