ELR Citation: ELR 20958
No(s). s. 85-0489-MA, 83-1614-MA (D. Mass. Feb 25, 1991)

The court grants the United States' motion for an order banning new sewer hookups in the Boston Harbor area until the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) complies with the court's previous order establishing a timetable for construction of a $6 billion sewage treatment system. The ban will remain in effect until the MWRA acquires a site suitable for a residuals landfill, a crucial element of the entire cleanup plan. The Massachusetts Legislature recently rejected a bill that would have authorized the transfer of a site in Walpole to the MWRA for the landfill, prompting the United States to file this motion. The court first rejects site-specific objections to the landfill site. The fact that certain petitions attacking the environmental effects of the landfill are still pending should not prevent the MWRA from proceeding with site acquisition or from beginning the design phase of the residuals management schedule. The pending cases do not provide a reason to delay court action concerning acquisition of a landfill site, especially where the environmental review process is complete. The MWRA properly rejected commercial options for disposal of grit, screenings, and sludge because it would deprive the MWRA of one of the critical elements in the cleanup process. Further, the proposal to build a prison on the Walpole site is not an adequate reason for rejecting the site for the landfill. The court holds that its order imposing the sewer hookup ban is not premature. There is an imminent threat to the remedial schedule because, if the Walpole site is not ultimately selected, another site must be selected immediately for there to be any chance of beginning construction on time. The court holds that a moratorium on sewer connections as authorized by Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) §402(h) is appropriate. Minimally treated raw sewage is discharged every day into Boston Harbor in violation of the FWPCA. The MWRA's inability to proceed with the residuals management portion of the remedial plan poses a severe threat to the schedule. The MWRA should not be allowed to increase pollution as long as it is not proceeding with a plan to alleviate the pollution.

Counsel for Appellant
Donald H. Wilkins, Ass't Attorney General
One Ashburton Pl., Boston MA 02108
(617) 727-2200

George Henderson, Ass't U.S. Attorney
1107 John McCormack Post Office & Courthouse, Boston MA 02109-9400
(617) 223-9400

Counsel for Appellee
John M. Stevens, Laurie Burt
Foley, Hoag & Eliot
One Post Office Sq., Boston MA 02109
(617) 482-1390