Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/08pdf/07-588.pdf/07-588.pdf
Page Number: 13

10 

ENTERGY CORP. v. RIVERKEEPER, INC. 

Opinion of the Court 

added).  (We shall call this the “BPT” test.)  Following that
transition  period,  the  Act  initially  mandated  adoption,  by
July 1, 1983 (later extended to March 31, 1989), of stricter 
effluent  limitations  requiring  “application  of  the  best 
available  technology  economically  achievable  for  such 
category  or  class,  which  will  result  in  reasonable  further 
progress  toward  the  national  goal  of  eliminating  the  dis-
charge of all pollutants.”  §1311(b)(2)(A) (emphasis added); 
see  EPA  v.  National  Crushed  Stone  Assn.,  449  U. S.  64, 
69–70 (1980).  (We shall call this the “BATEA” test.)  Sub-
sequent amendment limited application of this standard to
toxic  and  nonconventional  pollutants,  and  for  the  remain-
der  established  a  (presumably  laxer)  test  of  “best  conven-
tional-pollutant  control  technology.”   §1311(b)(2)(E).6   (We
shall  call  this  “BCT.”)  Finally,  §1316  subjected  certain
categories  of  new  point  sources  to  “the  greatest  degree  of
effluent  reduction  which  the  Administrator  determines  to 
be  achievable  through  application  of  the  best  available 
demonstrated  control  technology.”  §1316(a)(1)  (emphasis 
added);  §1316(b)(1)(B). 
(We  shall  call  this  the  “BADT” 
test.)  The provision at issue here, applicable not to efflu-
ents but to cooling water intake structures, requires, as we
have described, “the best technology available for minimiz-
ing  adverse  environmental  impact,”  §1326(b)  (emphasis
added).  (We shall call this the “BTA” test.) 

The  first  four  of  these  tests  are  elucidated  by  statutory 
factor  lists  that  guide  their  implementation.    To  take  the 
standards  in  (presumed)  order  of  increasing  stringency, 
see  Crushed  Stone,  supra,  at  69–70:  In  applying  the  BPT 
test  the  EPA  is  instructed  to  consider,  among  other  fac-
tors, “the total cost of application of technology in relation 
—————— 

6 The statute does not contain a hyphen between the words “conven-
tional”  and  “pollutant.”    “Conventional  pollutant”  is  a  statutory  term, 
however,  see  33  U. S. C.  §1314(a)(4),  and 
in 
§1311(b)(2)(E)  the  adjective  modifies  “pollutant”  rather  than  “control
technology.”  The hyphen makes that clear. 

is  clear  that 

it