## Facts

- EPA promulgated a federal underground injection control (UIC) program for the Osage Indian Mineral Reserve in Oklahoma under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
- The Reserve is held in trust by the United States for the Osage Tribe, and oil and gas development there relied substantially on underground injection wells.
- Phillips Petroleum Company and Phillips Oil Company operated injection wells on the Reserve and became subject to the UIC requirements, including a mechanical integrity standard intended to prevent leaks and protect underground sources of drinking water.
- Phillips petitioned for judicial review, arguing that EPA lacked SDWA authority to regulate injection on Indian lands, that EPA unlawfully refused to extend the notice-and-comment period by 30 days, and that the mechanical integrity requirement was unlawful.
- EPA argued that the petition was filed in the wrong appellate forum and that review was exclusive to the D.C. Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether the Tenth Circuit had jurisdiction to review a UIC program regulation limited to the Osage Indian Mineral Reserve, or whether review lay exclusively in the D.C. Circuit.
2. Whether the SDWA authorizes EPA to promulgate and implement a UIC program directly for Indian lands when a state lacks jurisdiction or primacy.
3. Whether EPA violated the Administrative Procedure Act by declining to extend the informal rulemaking comment period by 30 days.
4. Whether the regulation’s mechanical integrity requirement for injection wells was within EPA’s statutory authority and not arbitrary or capricious.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit held it had jurisdiction because the challenged regulation was site-specific and regionally focused, not a nationally applicable SDWA regulation reserved to the D.C. Circuit.
- The court held the SDWA authorizes EPA to regulate underground injection on Indian lands, including by implementing a federal UIC program for the Osage Indian Mineral Reserve.
- The court rejected the APA challenge, concluding EPA provided adequate notice and opportunity to comment and acted within its discretion in denying an extension.
- The court upheld the mechanical integrity requirement as a valid component of a UIC program reasonably related to preventing endangerment of underground drinking water sources.
- The petition for review was denied, and the Osage UIC regulation was upheld in full.

## Legal Principles

- SDWA Part C permits EPA to implement UIC programs as a federal program where state primacy is absent; Indian lands are not excluded from SDWA drinking-water protection.
- Site-specific or region-specific SDWA regulations may be reviewed in the appropriate regional circuit rather than exclusively in the D.C. Circuit.
- Under arbitrary-and-capricious review, courts generally uphold EPA technical requirements that reasonably further SDWA goals and have a rational basis in the administrative record.
- The APA does not require an agency to extend a comment period beyond the minimum procedures provided absent a showing that the refusal was arbitrary or that it denied a fair opportunity to participate.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit sustained EPA’s authority under the SDWA to establish and enforce a federal UIC program for the Osage Indian Mineral Reserve, found no APA violation in EPA’s management of the comment period, and upheld the mechanical integrity requirements as lawful measures to protect underground sources of drinking water.


Phillips Petroleum Co. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 803 F.2d 545 (10th Cir. 1986)