A year after the Supreme Court held that groundwater-borne pollution can be the "functional equivalent" of a discharge to surface waters that requires a Clean Water Act (CWA) permit, attorneys say it remains unclear how EPA and courts will apply the justices' test in practice, amid a growing list of citizen suits. During a March 19 American Bar Association (ABA) webcast on recent Supreme Court decisions regarding water pollution and water rights, West Virginia University law professor Jesse Richardson said lower courts still have done little to clarify last April's 6-3 decision in County of Maui, HI v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund. "After the County of Maui decision, the word I heard used most was 'uncertainty.' There's still a lot of uncertainty, we're still not sure how it's going to play out," he said.
展开▼
