ELR Citation: ELR 20124
No(s). 73-1745 (4th Cir. Dec 10, 1973)

The EPA Administrator's impoundment of 55 percent of the funds allocated by Congress under §205 of the FWPCA Amendments of 1972 does not constitute on its face an abuse of discretion. The Administrator's obligational discretion under the statute is subject to judicial review since impoundment presents an essentially constitutional issue, and the proper standard for such review is whether the withholding action is so drastic as to represent a nullification of legislative purpose and make impossible the attainment of legislative goals. The district court's grant of plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, which held the impoundment illegal on its face, was insufficiently supported by findings of fact in view of the Administrator's contention that his action did not frustrate the purposes of the statute. On remand, the lower court is ordered to develop an evidentiary record and determine on that basis, in accordance with the standard here articulated, whether the Administrator's action was in fact an illegal abuse of discretion. For the district court's opinion, see 3 ELR 20602; see also Comment, Impoundment: Courts Move to Compel Release of Withheld Funds, 3 ELR 10102 (July 1973).

Counsel for Plaintiff
W. Thomas Jacks
Alan B. Morrison
Public Citizen Litigation Group
2000 P Street, NW, Suite 515
Washington, DC 20036

Counsel for Defendant
Irving Jaffe Asst. Attorney General
Edmund W. Kitch
William D. Appler
Walter H. Fleischer
Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530

Bruce P. Gettings U.S. Attorney
Rodney Segar
David G. Love Asst. U.S. Attorneys
U.S. Post Office Building
Alexandria, VA 22314