Opinion ID: 609716
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Reviewability of the EPA's Enforcement Policy

Text: 35 The EPA next argues that its Enforcement Policy Statement is immune from review under Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 105 S.Ct. 1649, 84 L.Ed.2d 714 (1985). In Heckler, the Supreme Court determined that an agency's decision not to prosecute or enforce, whether through civil or criminal process, is a decision generally committed to an agency's absolute discretion. Id. at 831, 105 S.Ct. at 1655. As a result, the Court concluded that such decisions are presumptively unreviewable under section 701(a)(2) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Id. at 832, 105 S.Ct. at 1656. 36 We find the EPA's Heckler argument unconvincing. Petitioners are not challenging the manner in which the EPA has chosen to exercise its enforcement discretion. Indeed, as petitioners point out, [i]f [they] agreed with the Agency's interpretation of section 3004(j), [they] would obviously support the enforcement policy because it places a low priority on enforcing the storage prohibition against generators of mixed waste.... Petitioners' Reply Br. at 6 n. 3 (emphasis in original). Instead, petitioners are challenging the EPA's interpretation of section 3004(j) and its implementing regulations. Under the EPA's interpretation, it is unlawful to store mixed wastes indefinitely pending the development of adequate treatment capacity. Clearly, this interpretation has to do with the substantive requirements of the law; it is not the type of discretionary judgment concerning the allocation of enforcement resources that Heckler shields from judicial review. Cf. International Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am. v. Brock, 783 F.2d 237, 245-46 (D.C.Cir.1986) (holding that [n]othing in ... the holding or policy of Heckler v. Chaney [ ] precludes review of a proper plaintiff's timely challenge of an agency's announcement of its interpretation of a statute, even when that interpretation is advanced in the context of a decision not to take enforcement action).