## Facts

- After the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments, EPA issued industry-wide effluent limitation regulations for the inorganic chemical manufacturing industry.
- The regulations set technology-based limits for existing point sources for 1977 (“best practicable control technology currently available”) and 1983 (“best available technology economically achievable”).
- EPA also issued separate national performance standards for new sources under § 306, without a variance mechanism comparable to variances available to certain existing sources.
- Several chemical manufacturers challenged EPA’s authority to impose categorical limits by regulation rather than through individualized limits in NPDES permits under § 402.
- The district court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, concluding that review lay exclusively in the courts of appeals under § 509(b)(1)(E).
- The court of appeals upheld EPA’s authority to issue categorical limits for existing sources but required EPA to provide a variance procedure for new-source standards.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve EPA’s authority, the proper forum for review, and whether new-source standards must allow variances.

## Issues

1. Whether § 301 authorizes EPA to promulgate industry-wide effluent limitations by regulation for categories and classes of point sources, rather than limiting EPA to case-by-case determinations through the § 402 permit process.
2. Whether § 509(b)(1)(E) places exclusive jurisdiction in the courts of appeals to review EPA’s promulgation of effluent limitation regulations under §§ 301 or 306.
3. Whether EPA must provide a variance procedure for new-source performance standards under § 306 comparable to variance provisions applicable to certain existing sources.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court upheld EPA’s authority to issue categorical effluent limitations by regulation under § 301.
- The Court held that challenges to the promulgation of effluent limitations under §§ 301 or 306 are directly reviewable in the courts of appeals under § 509(b)(1)(E), not in district court.
- The Court rejected the requirement that EPA provide variances for new-source standards, holding that § 306 new-source performance standards need not include a variance mechanism.
- The Court therefore reversed the court of appeals insofar as it required variances for new sources, while sustaining EPA’s regulatory approach.

## Legal Principles

- Section 301’s technology-based effluent limitations applicable to “categories and classes of point sources” contemplate categorical rulemaking, with NPDES permits implementing those limitations for individual dischargers.
- EPA’s general rulemaking authority supports issuing binding, industry-wide effluent limitation regulations to carry out statutory duties.
- Section 509(b)(1)(E) centralizes review of EPA’s promulgation of effluent limitations under §§ 301 and 306 in the courts of appeals.
- New-source performance standards under § 306 operate as uniform, strict requirements; variance mechanisms available for certain existing sources under § 301(c) do not carry over to new sources absent statutory authorization.

## Conclusion

The Court held that EPA may promulgate industry-wide effluent limitation regulations under § 301, that direct review of such promulgations lies exclusively in the courts of appeals under § 509(b)(1)(E), and that § 306 new-source performance standards need not provide variances comparable to those available for certain existing sources.


E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Train, 430 U.S. 112 (1977)