Magistrate Judge Clarke’s Findings and Recommendation (ECF No. 58) is adopted in full. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 34) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Summary judgment is granted as to Plaintiff’s First Claim for Relief and denied as to Plaintiff’s Second and Third Claims for Relief. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
Actions taken by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) related to its proposed approval of water quality standards developed by the State of Oregon under the federal Clean Water Act (“CWA”) for temperature and intragravel dissolved oxygen run the risk of jeopardizing threatened and endangered species that depend upon habitat of the Willamette and Columbia Rivers. Specifically, EPA’s actions impact Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon (“LCR Chinook”), Upper Willamette River Chinook salmon (“UWR Chinook”), Lower Columbia River steelhead (“LCR steelhead”), Middle Columbia River steelhead (“MCR steelhead”), Upper Columbia River steelhead (“UCR steelhead”), and Upper Willamette River steelhead (“UWR steelhead”) (collectively, “imperiled salmon and steelhead” or the “impacted species”)—among the Pacific Northwest’s iconic salmonid species that depend on cold, clean water for their survival
Having considered all three reasons that EPA advanced in denying the petition and applied the highly deferential standard under Massachusetts, the Court finds that EPA’s denial of NWEA’s petition and refusal to make a necessity determination was arbitrary, capricious, and ungrounded in the CWA. Based on this finding, the Court VACATES EPA’s denial of NWEA’s petition and REMANDS this matter to EPA for further consideration consistent with this Order.
the crux of EPA’s motion is baseless.”
It is strange to settle a case and then continue to litigate it. But such is the strange path of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) in this case. As stated in EPA’s motion for an indefinite stay (ECF 71), the parties have reached a settlement in principle and are only awaiting final approval by senior counsel at the Department of Justice (“DOJ”).
A core component of NWEA’s mission is to ensure that Washington’s water quality standards—which must, by law, protect these salmonid species and the species that depend upon them, such as the Southern Resident killer whales—are both legally and scientifically supported. Often this has required litigation. And often that litigation has proved successful, which I view as a failing comment on Washington’s progress toward protecting these species as the law requires.