Opinion ID: 519994
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The EPA's Determination of the Average of the Best Dischargers

Text: 160 The EPA is required to promulgate BPT regulations based on the average of the best performers in the industry. 105 We accord some deference to the EPA's interpretation of its controlling statute; therefore, if the statute is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation, we must accept the EPA's interpretation, if reasonable. 106 161 NRDC claims that the EPA used data from 71 of 99 plants, approximately 72%, as representing the group of best dischargers for purposes of promulgating BPT regulations. How can the group of best dischargers encompass 72% of the industry, queries NRDC, leading it to argue that the EPA should have further tightened its editing criteria, which would have led to more stringent regulations. 162 NRDC's argument is misleading, however. Out of 304 direct dischargers in the industry that will be subject to regulation, the EPA chose a particular technology, namely biological treatment with secondary clarification, which is used by 99 plants. Out of these 99 plants, the EPA then chose data from 71 plants to determine the average of the best for the purpose of promulgating its BODS regulations. The EPA defends its decision by noting that its initial edit reduced the field from 304 to 99. Thus, the NRDC's complaint that the EPA used 71 of 99 plants is mistaken because the edit in question was the second edit, 205 dischargers having already been weeded out. 163 We hold, therefore, that the EPA's class of performers for determining the average of the best was not unreasonably broad. 164 Another question is whether the CWA requires the EPA to consider the average of the best performers within an industrial category, or the average of the best performers that use a particular chosen technology within an industry. We hold that it is appropriate to extract a group of best performers from an industry category; this was done in this case when the EPA selected 99 out of 304 plants in its initial edit. In fact, the EPA went further by narrowing the 99 plants down to 71. The EPA was not required to take the average of the best 99 plants using a particular technology, but merely to take the average of the best 304 plants in the industrial category. The legislative history of the 1972 amendments to the CWA specifies that [t]he administrator should establish the range of 'best practicable' levels based upon the average of the best performance by plants of various sizes, ages, and unit processes within each industrial category. 107 Therefore, we find that the EPA's methods for setting the BPT standards for BODS were in compliance with the CWA. 165 Lastly, NRDC argues that the EPA's editing criteria for its representative best performers, which were 95% biological oxygen demand (BOD) removal and 40 mg/l concentration, are actually below the industry's median. In support of this contention NRDC quotes from the preamble to the final rule, which it interprets as saying that the industry median is 95.8% removal and 29 mg/l concentration. Again, NRDC mischaracterizes the statistics. The median 95.8% removal and 29 mg/l concentration statistics apply to the 99 plants using biological treatment methods, not the 304 plants comprising the industry. 108 166