Opinion ID: 2075830
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Finding of Necessity

Text: Appellees assert that the Board failed to make the required finding that reclassification was necessary to accommodate important economic or social development. Under federal law, where the Board has determined that the quality of the waters exceed[s] levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the State finds ... that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located. 40 C.F.R. § 131.12(a)(2). It is not obvious that a reclassification from B to C necessarily constitutes a reduction in water quality, since the water quality criteria specified for B and C waters in the Vermont Water Quality Standards are identical. Indeed, the Board concluded that [t]he existing high quality of the waters in question will receive the same level of protection ... regardless of whether the waters are designated as Class B or Class C. Board Decision, Finding 1( o ). [11] Assuming that a reduction in quality would occur, however, we conclude that the Board made the requisite necessity finding. In its analysis under § 1253(e)(9), the Board looked at applicable town and regional plans. It expressly found that the continued development of the Sherburne service area was in the public's interest. Scattered development, the Board found, is discouraged by the plans as an inefficient and unaesthetic land-use strategy which increases the risk of water pollution. Board Decision, Finding 10(h). Moreover, area soils were found to be poorly suited to subsurface sewage disposal, id. 4(d), and an alternative central disposal method, spray irrigation, was found to be infeasible, id. 11(d)-(j). The Board determined that the reclassification was necessary: In order to achieve the goals expressed in all applicable municipal and regional plans that most new development be clustered rather than scattered, some provision for central sewage facilities within the region and the Town of Sherburne is necessary. Id. 10(t). Although the Board did not expressly find necessity under 40 C.F.R. § 131.12(a)(2), it is clear that the Board believed that any lowering of quality that might ensue from a reclassification would be justified as necessary to accommodate important public development goals. This conclusion is inescapable in light of Board Finding 1(m): Discharges from malfunctioning on-site waste disposal systems in the South Sherburne area currently have an adverse impact on the quality of the Ottauquechee River. Such discharges are likely to increase in the future increasing bacterial and protozoan contamination from domestic wastes. In short, the Board found that the quality of the waters would deteriorate without the proposed sewage plant, and that the plant would alleviate these problems. Appellees, however, charge the Board with arbitrarily disregard[ing] local and state water management goals precisely to expedite certain types of land development in Sherburne. They argue that the Board rejected contrary town, regional and state planning related to water quality and used the classification process to make land use decisions. Though the Board acknowledged that the classification process is not intended to make land use decisions or to reconcile inconsistent strategies or policies, it found that the Town needs central sewage facilities to achieve the goals expressed in the applicable plans, a finding that is supported in the record. [12] The question of land use inevitably arises in the Board's inquiry under § 1253(e)(9).