ELR Citation: 42 ELR 20079
No(s). 4:09cv165 (N.D. Fla. Mar 30, 2012) (Rodgers, J.)

A district court remanded to EPA its determination that several provisions of Florida's "impaired water rule" are not new or revised water quality standards and, thus, not subject to approval by the Agency. An environmental group argued that EPA's decision was arbitrary and capricious. In order to determine whether EPA acted arbitrarily or capriciously, the court must determine whether application of those provisions resulted in waterbodies being left off of or removed from the state's CWA §303(d) list. Because EPA failed to consider the effect of the amended impaired water rule on the state's listing decisions, there is insufficient evidence in the record from which the court can make such a determination. The court therefore remanded the matter to EPA for further development. The court, however, dismissed claims challenging EPA's approval of numeric nutrient thresholds as new or revised water quality standards as well as its approval of the state's binomial distribution method.