Opinion ID: 1269179
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Percentage of Kentucky Water Bodies Receiving Tier II Protection

Text: Finally, Plaintiffs argue that the district court's decision should be reversed because it is based on the misunderstanding that the approach [the] EPA approved provided for 90% of Kentucky's waters with Tier II protection. Pl. Br. at 27. Plaintiffs contend that the record only shows that 90% of the stream miles that had been studied as of the time of the decision were not listed as impaired and that the 90% stream mile figure does not address the extent to which lakes would be protected. Id. at 28. Plaintiffs maintain that [a]s Kentucky continues to collect data, the percentage of waters found to be impaired is likely to be much higher. Id. We find this final argument to be misguided. While Plaintiffs' criticisms of the district court's calculation of the percentage of Kentucky waters afforded Tier II protection may be well-foundedthe record only indicates that 90% of the stream miles that had been studied at the time of the EPA's decision are afforded Tier II protection, see J.A. at 187 (EPA Approval Document)Plaintiffs fail to explain how the district court's factual mischaracterization of the record is relevant to our de novo evaluation of whether the EPA's approval of Kentucky's antidegradation regulations was arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. Kentucky's criteria for identifying waters afforded Tier II protection are not to be evaluated based on the percentage of waters for which they provide Tier II protection, but rather upon their consistency with 40 C.F.R. § 131.12(a)(2). Neither the CWA nor its implementing regulations specify that a certain percentage of a State's waters must be afforded Tier II protection. As long as all waters whose quality exceed[s] levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water are granted Tier II protection, the regulation is satisfied. 40 C.F.R. § 131.12(a)(2). Plaintiffs' contention that less than 90% of Kentucky's waters are afforded Tier II protection does not, by itself, demonstrate that the EPA's approval of Kentucky's antidegradation implementation procedures was arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court's grant of summary judgment to Defendants with respect to the EPA's approval of Kentucky's method of selecting which waters merit Tier II protection.