## Facts

- Ford Motor Company operated an automotive stamping plant in Monroe, Michigan, discharging wastewater into the Raisin River under a state-issued NPDES permit.
- Michigan’s permitting agency proposed modifying Ford’s permit to allow compliance with water-quality standards through low-flow augmentation (adding relatively clean water to increase river flow and dilute pollutants in-stream).
- EPA objected to and vetoed the proposed state modification, asserting that flow augmentation was inconsistent with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and applicable standards.
- Ford petitioned for judicial review, arguing EPA cited no express statutory prohibition and no published regulation or guideline barring flow augmentation, relying instead on unpublished internal memoranda.

## Issues

1. Whether EPA may veto a state-proposed NPDES permit modification based on an unpublished internal policy, absent an express statutory prohibition or published regulation/guideline addressing the compliance method.
2. Whether EPA’s veto exceeded its statutory authority under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act given the Act’s emphasis on published standards and public participation.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit granted Ford’s petition for review and set aside EPA’s veto.
- The court held the veto invalid because it was not based on any published regulation or guideline or any express statutory provision.
- The court rejected EPA’s reliance on internal memoranda as a substitute for publicly promulgated standards when exercising veto authority over a state permit decision.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the requirement that any objection be grounded in valid, published standards or express statutory authority.

## Legal Principles

- EPA’s oversight and veto authority over state-administered NPDES permits must be exercised within the statutory scheme that contemplates publicly articulated standards.
- Agency action imposing substantive constraints through ad hoc reliance on unpublished internal memoranda is improper where Congress provided for development and publication of regulations, guidelines, and public-participation procedures.
- An EPA veto is unlawful when it rests on neither an express statutory prohibition nor a published regulation or guideline applicable to the permit condition at issue.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit invalidated EPA’s veto of Michigan’s proposed NPDES permit modification for Ford because the veto rested on unpublished internal policy rather than an express statutory provision or published regulatory guidance, requiring EPA to base future objections on properly promulgated, publicly available standards.


Ford Motor Co. v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 567 F.2d 661 (6th Cir. 1977)