Summary
The Fifth Circuit dismissed a petition for review challenging the EPA's grant of primacy to Louisiana over Class VI underground injection control wells for carbon sequestration. The court held that the environmental organizations lacked Article III standing, finding their alleged injuries—such as diverted resources and speculative future economic or health harms—were not concrete, particularized, or imminent. The decision relies heavily on recent Supreme Court precedent regarding organizational and associational standing.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Deep South Center for Environmental Justice has organizational standing to challenge EPA's grant of primacy.
- Whether Healthy Gulf and Alliance for Affordable Energy have associational standing to challenge EPA's grant of primacy.
- Whether the alleged injuries are concrete, particularized, imminent, and traceable to EPA's action.
Holdings
- All three petitioners lack standing; the petition for review is dismissed.
Key quotations
“Article III requires plaintiffs to show they have (1) suffered an injury in fact, (2) that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct of the defendant, and (3) that is likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.”
“The Court unanimously found that injury insufficient: An organizational plaintiff cannot spend its way into standing simply by expending money to gather information and advocate against the defendant’s action.”
Factual background
The EPA issued a final rule granting the State of Louisiana primacy to regulate Class VI underground injection control wells used for carbon dioxide sequestration. The petitioners—Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, Healthy Gulf, and Alliance for Affordable Energy—asserted that the EPA action would force them to divert resources and cause various speculative injuries, and they sought judicial review under the SDWA.
Procedural history
EPA granted Louisiana primary enforcement authority over Class VI UIC wells. Three environmental organizations filed petitions for review in the Fifth Circuit, alleging lack of standing. The Fifth Circuit considered organizational and associational standing doctrines and dismissed the petitions.