40 C.F.R. § 123.30

Judicial review of approval or denial of permits

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

All States that administer or seek to administer a program under this part shall provide an opportunity for judicial review in State Court of the final approval or denial of permits by the State that is sufficient to provide for, encourage, and assist public participation in the permitting process. A State will meet this standard if State law allows an opportunity for judicial review that is the same as that available to obtain judicial review in federal court of a federally-issued NPDES permit (see § 509 of the Clean Water Act). A State will not meet this standard if it narrowly restricts the class of persons who may challenge the approval or denial of permits (for example, if only the permittee can obtain judicial review, if persons must demonstrate injury to a pecuniary interest in order to obtain judicial review, or if persons must have a property interest in close proximity to a discharge or surface waters in order to obtain judicial review.) This requirement does not apply to Indian Tribes.

[61 FR 20980, May 8, 1996]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Akiak Native Community v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Akiak Native Community v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2010) ca9 · cites it 10× “) 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 . [2] Akiak and the EPA disagree over the meaning of this regulation.”

Philip Morris USA v. CHESAOEAJE BAY (2007) va · cites it 2× “40 C.F.R. § 123.30 (emphasis added). Code § 62.”

Alliance v. Com., Dept. of Environ. Quality (2005) va “§ 1369 (b)(1)(F) (2000); 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 (2005). Therefore, we hold that Code § 62.”

Families Against Corporate Takeover v. Mitchell (2000) kan · cites it 4× “Effective June 7, 1996, 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 directed states administering the NPDES program to provide citizens an opportunity for judicial review of approval or denial of NPDES permits.”

Food and Water Watch v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2013) dcd “See 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 . In addition, the citizen-suit provision of the CWA allows "any citizen" to "commence a civil action on his own behalf against any person [including the United States and other government agency] .”

Psa v. Port of Tacoma (2024) ca9 “Indeed, parties seeking review of state decisions about permits are guaranteed judicial review in state courts “that is the same as that available to obtain judicial review in federal court of a federally-issued NPDES permit.”

Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Ass'n v. Horinko (2003) dcd “” 40 C.F.R § 123.30. See Potter v. ASARCO Inc.”

Rose Acre Farms, Inc. v. North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources (2015) nced “”); 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 (“All States that administer or seek to administer a program under this part shall provide an opportunity for judicial review in State Court of the final approval or denial of permits by the State____”).”

S. Cal. Alliance of Publicly Owned Treatment Works v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency (2018) caed “40 C.F.R. § 123.30 (judicial review of permits issued by the state is limited to state court); Cal.”

Clean Water Action Council v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2014) wisctapp · cites it 2× “63 actually runs afoul of 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 by narrowly restricting the class of persons who may obtain review of WPDES permitting decisions.”

Riverkeeper, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2004) ca2 “§ 1369 (b)(1)(F) (providing for judicial review of EPA permit decisions); 40 C.F.R. § 123.30 (requiring states to provide for judicial review of their permit decisions).”

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Max Midstream, LLC v. San Antonio Bay Estuarine Waterkeeper, Texas Campaig (2025) texapp · cites it 2× “In light of addition, 40 CFR §123.30 also provides that the opportunity for this statement and recent State court holdings on the role of the judicial review is sufficient if it allows the same opportunity for ju- 40 TexReg 9654 December 25, 2015 Texas Register dicial review of…”

Show all 15 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.