Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Dos Repúblicas Coal Partnership v. Maverick County, City of Eagle Pass, Environmental Defense Fund, Walter Herring, Ernesto Ibarra, Gabriel De La Cerda, Mike Hernandez, Boulware and Anson Family, Ltd., and Maverick County Environmental and Public Health Association

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas held that Dos Repúblicas Coal Partnership was properly treated as both the owner and operator of a coal mine for purposes of a Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. The court rejected the court of appeals’ judicially formulated “personal performance” definition of operator and applied the definition in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s rules: the person responsible for the facility’s overall operation. The court reversed and remanded for consideration of the parties’ remaining arguments.

Holdings

1. When an agency rule defines a term, courts must apply the definition supplied by the rule and may not replace it with a judicial paraphrase that adds or subtracts substantive requirements. The definition of operator as the person responsible for the overall operation of a facility does not require personal performance of day-to-day operations.
2. Substantial evidence supported TCEQ's conclusion that Dos Repúblicas was responsible for the mine's overall operation and was therefore the correct permit applicant, even though it contracted out day-to-day operations.
3. The court of appeals had jurisdiction to decide the remaining permit issues, and the district court did not err by addressing them even after ruling on the operator issue. Deciding those issues would not have constituted an advisory opinion.
4. The Supreme Court declined to decide whether the court of appeals was previously obligated under the Administrative Procedure Act or Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1 to reach the remaining issues, but remanded those issues for consideration on remand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the TCEQ rule defining an operator as the person responsible for the overall operation of a facility permits a court to impose a judicially created personal-performance requirement.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported TCEQ's conclusion that Dos Repúblicas was the mine's operator and therefore a proper permit applicant.
3. Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction to decide the parties' remaining objections to the permit after resolving the operator issue.
4. Whether the court of appeals was required to decide the remaining issues under the Texas Administrative Procedure Act or Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded