## Facts

- Republic Steel operated a steel mill in Canton, Ohio, discharging pollutants under the NPDES permitting program administered by Ohio with EPA oversight.
- Federal law required industrial dischargers to meet effluent limits based on “best practicable control technology” (BPT) by July 1, 1977, and required EPA to publish BPT guidelines earlier.
- EPA did not timely promulgate BPT guidelines for the iron and steel category before the July 1, 1977 compliance date.
- Ohio’s environmental agency proposed an NPDES permit for Republic that effectively allowed discharges beyond July 1, 1977 without full BPT-based limits by that date.
- EPA objected to and vetoed the proposed state permit as inconsistent with the federal deadline.
- In an earlier decision involving the same dispute, the Sixth Circuit had held EPA could not insist on the July 1, 1977 deadline given EPA’s delay in issuing BPT guidelines.
- Congress enacted the Clean Water Act of 1977, adding a specific deadline-extension provision authorizing EPA to extend the July 1, 1977 date to no later than April 1, 1979 for qualifying dischargers.
- The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Sixth Circuit for reconsideration in light of the 1977 amendments.

## Issues

1. Whether the July 1, 1977 BPT compliance deadline remained mandatory notwithstanding EPA’s delay in promulgating BPT guidelines.
2. Whether extensions beyond July 1, 1977 could occur only through the statutory extension mechanism in § 309(a)(5)(B).
3. Whether EPA had authority to veto a state-issued NPDES permit that did not require compliance with the federal deadline (absent a qualifying statutory extension).

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit denied Republic’s petition for review and sustained EPA’s objection to the proposed Ohio permit.
- The court rejected its earlier interpretation that EPA’s regulatory delay excused compliance with the statutory deadline.
- The court held Congress reaffirmed the binding nature of the July 1, 1977 deadline and supplied a limited, express mechanism for extensions.
- The court concluded that permits allowing post-deadline discharges without use of the statutory extension provision were inconsistent with federal law and subject to EPA veto.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory Clean Water Act compliance deadlines may remain enforceable even when EPA has delayed issuing implementing guidelines.
- Deadline relief for the July 1, 1977 BPT requirement is limited to the express extension authority in Clean Water Act § 309(a)(5)(B), including its criteria and outside date.
- EPA may object to and prevent issuance of a state NPDES permit that fails to include federally required effluent limits or compliance dates.
- Later-enacted legislation and accompanying congressional statements may be treated as clarifying the meaning Congress attributed to the earlier statute, particularly where Congress expressly rejects a prior judicial interpretation.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that the Clean Water Act’s July 1, 1977 BPT compliance deadline was mandatory despite EPA’s delay in issuing guidelines, that any extension had to proceed only under § 309(a)(5)(B), and that EPA properly vetoed a state NPDES permit that did not enforce the federal deadline absent a qualifying statutory extension.


Republic Steel Corp. v. Costle, 581 F.2d 1228 (6th Cir. 1978)