Narrative Opinion Summary
This case concerns a legal dispute involving the Penobscot Nation, Passamaquoddy Tribe, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the State of Maine, focusing on the regulatory authority over water discharges under the Clean Water Act and the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Acts (Settlement Acts). Maine sought and received EPA approval for discharge permitting, excluding Indian territories, while the EPA retained jurisdiction over tribal facilities deemed internal matters. The Settlement Acts grant Maine broad authority over tribal lands, subjecting them to state law except for certain internal affairs. The EPA's interpretation of its authority prompted consolidated judicial review petitions, with tribes asserting tribal sovereignty over pollution regulation, while Maine upheld its statutory authority. The court found that Maine can regulate non-tribal discharges into tribal waters, affirming the EPA's order for non-Indian sites but vacating it for Indian-owned sites, instructing amendment. The court deferred ruling on the EPA's permit review authority and emphasized that state law applies unless explicitly exempted, maintaining Maine's regulatory power over environmental discharges. Each party bears its costs, and the case underscores the complex interplay of state, federal, and tribal laws in environmental regulation.
Legal Issues Addressed
Clean Water Act Permitting Authoritysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The EPA approved Maine's program for discharge permitting outside disputed Indian territory and retained authority over certain tribal facilities.
Reasoning: In January 2001, the EPA approved Maine's program for areas outside disputed Indian territory but did not finalize decisions regarding jurisdiction and applicability of state law in Indian country related to the NPDES program.
Federal and State Regulatory Overlapsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Federal laws granting tribes special rights do not supersede Maine's environmental regulations, as clarified by the Settlement Acts.
Reasoning: The Senate Report clarifies that federal laws granting special rights to tribes do not supersede Maine's civil, criminal, or regulatory laws, including environmental regulations.
Internal Tribal Matters Exemptionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The exemption for 'internal tribal matters' does not extend to environmental discharges into navigable waters, which remain under state regulation.
Reasoning: The statute provides examples of internal affairs but does not limit the exemption solely to them. Previous court decisions have established that while certain tribal matters are exempt, Maine retains authority over environmental regulations.
Judicial Review and EPA Authoritysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The EPA retains authority to review state permits but has not objected to any, making jurisdiction over EPA actions premature.
Reasoning: Jurisdiction to review EPA actions hinges on permit issuance or denial, and since the EPA has not objected to any state permits, the trust issue is deemed premature.
Settlement Acts and State Jurisdictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Settlement Acts grant Maine authority over tribal lands, subjecting them to state law except in limited circumstances involving internal tribal matters.
Reasoning: The Settlement Acts extinguished the tribes' claims to large areas of land and expanded Maine's regulatory authority over the southern tribes, making them subject to state law except in limited circumstances.
Standing in Legal Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The standing of intervenors is complex and influenced by conflicting case law, necessitating careful legal analysis.
Reasoning: The standing issue is complex, influenced by conflicting case law and multiple standing concepts.