Environmental Groups Sue EPA Over Delays in Testing Nation's Drinking Water Supply
Despite a congressional mandate, environmental groups say the Environmental Protection Agency has not properly reviewed, revised and updated regulations on chemicals and other contaminants in the nation's water supply.
January 30, 2019 at 02:54 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
The Environmental Protection Agency is failing its congressionally-mandated mission to monitor the nation's water supply, a new lawsuit by a trio of environmental groups allege in a new federal lawsuit filed Wednesday.
The Waterkeeper Alliance's filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York claims the agency has shirked responsibilities placed on it by updated federal legislation in 1996 to identify and seek to regulate contaminants in the water supply.
As the complaint notes, while approximately 90 drinking water contaminants are presently regulated under national primary drinking water regulation, since the most recent updates to federal law were passed 23 years ago, the agency's mandated processes for reviewing, recommending and updating its list of contaminants to regulate has led to the revision of only one existing regulation. Not one new chemical has come under regulation since 2000, the complaint claims.
The suit says the EPA, since President Donald Trump took office, has actually reversed progress on regulatory efforts.
In May 2018, under its regulatory power, the EPA announced it was initiating steps to evaluate the need for regulations on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The chemicals are used to resist grease, water and oil in such things as nonstick cookware coating, water-repellent clothing, and some cosmetics, according to federal officials. The substance has been linked to polluted tap water in a number of communities, including in Hoosick Falls, New York, according to the complaint.
However, earlier this month, EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler reportedly signed off on a decision not to regulate the chemicals under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
“In contrast to the extensive delays in EPA's regulation of drinking water contaminants, the agency acted expeditiously in deciding not to regulate these highly toxic and widespread contaminants under the Act,” the complaint states.
“At the same time the Trump administration is proposing to weaken the Clean Water Act and is actively allowing toxic chemicals to pollute our drinking water, it also is failing to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act, which stops polluted water from reaching our taps,” Waterkeeper Alliance Executive Director Marc Yaggi said in a statement. “EPA is supposed to protect human health and the environment, but its actions and omissions are threatening one precious resource we all need: clean drinking water.”
The 1996 update to federal law required the EPA to conduct a series of actions every five years to identify unregulated chemicals in the water supply, list new candidates for regulations and determine whether at least five unregulated contaminants should be regulated. Every six years, the agency is supposed to review and revise the national primary drinking water regulations when appropriate.
The suit alleges the EPA has not “timely” complied with its mandate and “has not safeguarded public drinking water as Congress intended.” As such, the complaint seeks to have the court force the agency to complete the review or revise its regulations on a host of contaminants, including chromium.
A spokeswoman for the EPA said the agency does not comment on pending litigation.
The Waterkeeper Alliance is joined in the suit by its affiliates, Waterkeepers Chesapeake and the California Coastkeeper Alliance. The plaintiffs are represented by private attorney Reed Super.
Related:
As Trump Administration Attempts to Roll Back Environmental Regulations, Past Lessons Are Prologue
Judge Hearing New York AG's Lawsuit Against ExxonMobil Agrees to Divest From Energy Co.
Suing the United States for Climate Change Impacts
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250