United States v. Metropolitan District Commission
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
23 ERC (BNA) 1350 (1985)

- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a permit under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) (defendant) limiting the amount of pollution the MDC could discharge from two islands in the Boston Harbor. The EPA found that the MDC had violated the permit by failing to construct treatment and sludge-management facilities as required and issued an administrative order that included a schedule under which the MDC was required to be compliant. Later, the EPA issued another order stating that the MDC had violated the permit by exceeding its sludge and pollution limits and by failing to come into compliance with the previously issued schedule. In another administrative order, the EPA created an interim schedule for the MDC while it began planning for the required construction, but the EPA specifically stated that compliance with this schedule did not excuse the MDC’s violations of the permit. Notably, while the permit had an expiration date, under the law, the permit was enforceable until modified or replaced with the issuance of a new permit. NPDES set out very specific procedures that must take place before a permit could be modified or replaced. None of the procedures for the modification or replacement of an NPDES permit were followed. The United States (plaintiff), on behalf of the EPA, filed suit against the MDC for violations of the permit and moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Mazzone, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.