ELR Citation: ELR 20090
No(s). 86-4604 (E.D. Pa. Jun 22, 1989)

The court holds that a citizen whose health, recreational, aesthetic, and environmental interests are directly and adversely affected by a municipality's allegedly illegal effluent discharges has standing under §505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). The court also rules that FWPCA §309(g)(6), a provision of the 1987 FWPCA amendments barring citizen suits when a state is pursuing an administrative action, does not apply retroactively. The court first holds that the citizen's standing is not precluded under FWPCA §505(b)(1)(B) because neither the federal nor state government has prosecuted an action in any court concerning the municipality's FWPCA permit compliance. Similarly, citizens enjoy standing under §505(g) because Congress intended that standing may be based on an injury to noneconomic interests, including aesthetic, conservational, or recreational values. The citizen's health, recreation, aesthetic, and environmental interests are within the zone of interest protected by the FWPCA effluent limitations provisions and are injured as a result of the municipality's pollutant discharges. The court next holds that FWPCA §309(g)(6), included in the 1987 amendments to the FWPCA, does not revoke the citizen's standing because suit was commenced before the effective date of the amendments. Congress enacted §309(g)(6) to bar citizen suits when a state is pursuing an administrative action, and the language and legislative history of the 1987 amendments as well as the public policy goals underlying the FWPCA suggest that Congress intended only prospective, not retroactive, application of §309(g)(6). Congress molded the language of §309(g)(6) in recognition of the importance of citizen suits and the desire to avoid subjecting violators to dual enforcement actions. The court observes that Congress' intent is to encourage citizen participation rather than treat it as a curiosity or a theoretical remedy. Citizen plaintiffs are not nuisances or trouble-makers but are welcome participants in the vindication of environmental interests.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Randall J. Brubaker
125 S. Ninth St., Ste. 501 The Sheridan Bldg., Philadelphia PA 19107
(215) 627-6395

Counsel for Defendants
Denis W. Lanctot
300 W. Trenton Ave., Morrisville PA 19067
(215) 295-7100