42 U.S.C. § 300h

Regulations for State programs

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Publication of proposed regulations; promulgation; amendments; public hearings; administrative consultations(1) The Administrator shall publish proposed regulations for State underground injection control programs within 180 days after December 16, 1974. Within 180 days after publication of such proposed regulations, he shall promulgate such regulations with such modifications as he deems appropriate. Any regulation under this subsection may be amended from time to time.(2) Any regulation under this section shall be proposed and promulgated in accordance with section 553 of title 5 (relating to rulemaking), except that the Administrator shall provide opportunity for public hearing prior to promulgation of such regulations. In proposing and promulgating regulations under this section the Administrator shall consult with the Secretary, the National Drinking Water Advisory Council, and other appropriate Federal entities and with interested State entities.(b) Minimum requirements; restrictions(1) Regulations under subsection (a) for State underground injection programs shall contain minimum requirements for effective programs to prevent underground injection which endangers drinking water sources within the meaning of subsection (d)(2). Such regulations shall require that a State program, in order to be approved under section 300h–1 of this title—(A) shall prohibit, effective on the date on which the applicable underground injection control program takes effect, any underground injection in such State which is not authorized by a permit issued by the State (except that the regulations may permit a State to authorize underground injection by rule);(B) shall require (i) in the case of a program which provides for authorization of underground injection by permit, that the applicant for the permit to inject must satisfy the State that the underground injection will not endanger drinking water sources, and (ii) in the case of a program which provides for such an authorization by rule, that no rule may be promulgated which authorizes any underground injection which endangers drinking water sources;(C) shall include inspection, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements; and(D) shall apply (i) as prescribed by section 300j–6(b) 11 See References in Text note below. of this title, to underground injections by Federal agencies, and (ii) to underground injections by any other person whether or not occurring on property owned or leased by the United States.(2) Regulations of the Administrator under this section for State underground injection control programs may not prescribe requirements which interfere with or impede—(A) the underground injection of brine or other fluids which are brought to the surface in connection with oil or natural gas production or natural gas storage operations, or(B) any underground injection for the secondary or tertiary recovery of oil or natural gas,unless such requirements are essential to assure that underground sources of drinking water will not be endangered by such injection.(3)(A) The regulations of the Administrator under this section shall permit or provide for consideration of varying geologic, hydrological, or historical conditions in different States and in different areas within a State.(B)(i) In prescribing regulations under this section the Administrator shall, to the extent feasible, avoid promulgation of requirements which would unnecessarily disrupt State underground injection control programs which are in effect and being enforced in a substantial number of States.(ii) For the purpose of this subparagraph, a regulation prescribed by the Administrator under this section shall be deemed to disrupt a State underground injection control program only if it would be infeasible to comply with both such regulation and the State underground injection control program.(iii) For the purpose of this subparagraph, a regulation prescribed by the Administrator under this section shall be deemed unnecessary only if, without such regulation, underground sources of drinking water will not be endangered by an underground injection.(C) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter or affect the duty to assure that underground sources of drinking water will not be endangered by any underground injection.(c) Temporary permits; notice and hearing(1) The Administrator may, upon application of the Governor of a State which authorizes underground injection by means of permits, authorize such State to issue (without regard to subsection (b)(1)(B)(i)) temporary permits for underground injection which may be effective until the, expiration of four years after December 16, 1974, if—(A) the Administrator finds that the State has demonstrated that it is unable and could not reasonably have been able to process all permit applications within the time available;(B) the Administrator determines the adverse effect on the environment of such temporary permits is not unwarranted;(C) such temporary permits will be issued only with respect to injection wells in operation on the date on which such State’s permit program approved under this part first takes effect and for which there was inadequate time to process its permit application; and(D) the Administrator determines the temporary permits require the use of adequate safeguards established by rules adopted by him.(2) The Administrator may, upon application of the Governor of a State which authorizes underground injection by means of permits, authorize such State to issue (without regard to subsection (b)(1)(B)(i)), but after reasonable notice and hearing, one or more temporary permits each of which is applicable to a particular injection well and to the underground injection of a particular fluid and which may be effective until the expiration of four years after December 16, 1974, if the State finds, on the record of such hearing—(A) that technology (or other means) to permit safe injection of the fluid in accordance with the applicable underground injection control program is not generally available (taking costs into consideration);(B) that injection of the fluid would be less harmful to health than the use of other available means of disposing of waste or producing the desired product; and(C) that available technology or other means have been employed (and will be employed) to reduce the volume and toxicity of the fluid and to minimize the potentially adverse effect of the injection on the public health.(d) “Underground injection” defined; underground injection endangerment of drinking water sourcesFor purposes of this part:(1)Underground injection.—The term “underground injection”—(A) means the subsurface emplacement of fluids by well injection; and(B) excludes—(i) the underground injection of natural gas for purposes of storage; and(ii) the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities.(2) Underground injection endangers drinking water sources if such injection may result in the presence in underground water which supplies or can reasonably be expected to supply any public water system of any contaminant, and if the presence of such contaminant may result in such system’s not complying with any national primary drinking water regulation or may otherwise adversely affect the health of persons.(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIV, § 1421, as added Pub. L. 93–523, § 2(a), Dec. 16, 1974, 88 Stat. 1674; amended Pub. L. 95–190, § 6(b), Nov. 16, 1977, 91 Stat. 1396; Pub. L. 96–502, §§ 3, 4(c), Dec. 5, 1980, 94 Stat. 2738; Pub. L. 99–339, title II, § 201(a), June 19, 1986, 100 Stat. 653; Pub. L. 104–182, title V, § 501(b)(1), Aug. 6, 1996, 110 Stat. 1691; Pub. L. 109–58, title III, § 322, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 694.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 300j–6(b) of this title, referred to in subsec. (b)(1)(D), was repealed, and a new section 300j–6(b) relating to administrative penalty orders was added, by Pub. L. 104–182, title I, § 129(a), Aug. 6, 1996, 110 Stat. 1660.

Amendments

2005—Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 109–58 inserted heading and amended text of par. (1) generally. Prior to amendment, par. (1) read as follows: “The term ‘underground injection’ means the subsurface emplacement of fluids by well injection. Such term does not include the underground injection of natural gas for purposes of storage.”

1996—Subsec. (b)(3)(B)(i). Pub. L. 104–182 substituted “number of States” for “number or States”.

1986—Subsec. (b)(2)(A). Pub. L. 99–339 inserted “or natural gas storage operations” after “production”.

1980—Subsec. (b)(1)(A). Pub. L. 96–502, § 4(c), substituted “effective on the date on which the applicable underground injection control program takes effect” for “effective three years after December 16, 1974”.

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 96–502, § 3, inserted provision that such term does not include the underground injection of natural gas for purposes of storage.

1977—Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 95–190 added par. (3).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 41 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: Legal Env't Assistance Found., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 276 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Legal Env't Assistance Found., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 276 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2001). · cites it 12× “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h to 300h-8. This program requires EPA to promulgate regulations that set forth minimum requirements for state UIC programs.”

Phillips Petroleum Co., Phillips Oil Co. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 803 F.2d 545 (10th Cir. 1986). · cites it 15× “Section 1421, 42 U.S.C. § 300h. 3 No injec *548 tion is to be allowed that may endanger “drinking water sources.”

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dep't of Conservation, 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 729 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). · cites it 8× “) All such programs "shall prohibit ... any underground injection in such State which is not authorized by a permit," and "shall require" permit applicants to show "that the underground injection will not endanger drinking water sources.”

Miami-Dade Cnty. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 529 F.3d 1049 (11th Cir. 2008). · cites it 6× “1 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h to 300h-8. Under the SDWA, the EPA promulgates regulations setting parameters for state UIC programs.”

Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 824 F.2d 1258 (1st Cir. 1987). · cites it 19× “DO EPA’S REGULATIONS VIOLATE THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT? Part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300h (1982) (“SDWA”), indicates that the EPA has a duty to assure that underground sources of drinking water will not be endangered by any underground injection.”

Legal Env't Assistance Found., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 118 F.3d 1467 (11th Cir. 1997). · cites it 8× “IRCH, Circuit Judge: The issue in this petition for review is whether the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is legally required to regulate hydraulic fracturing, a production enhancement technique used by the oil and gas industry, under the underground…”

EQT Prod. Co. v. Wender, 191 F. Supp. 3d 583 (N.D.W. Va. 2016). · cites it 5× “In turn, section 1421, 42 U.S.C. § 300h, identifies the minimum requirements proposed state UIC regulatory programs must meet in order for a state to be granted primary enforcement authority (referred to as “primacy”) over Class II well regulation.”

United States v. King, 660 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 5× “” “Underground Injection Control Programs” are state-administered programs under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act that prevent harmful injections into drinking water aquifers. The counts were based on four discharges of water into deep wells without a permit from the State of…”

HRI, Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 198 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir. 2000). · cites it 5× “See 42 U.S.C. § 300h. 42 U.S.C. § 300h-l provides for state primary enforcement of UIC programs (“primacy”) upon a showing by that state that its program meets the requirements of the SDWA.”

United States v. Overholt, 307 F.3d 1231 (10th Cir. 2002). · cites it 2× “§ 371 on a charge that they entered into a conspiracy with five objects: (1) improperly disposing of petroleum-impacted wastewater, in violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h, et seq.; (2) transporting hazardous wastes without a manifest, in violation…”

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 608 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2010). · cites it 6× “See 42 U.S.C. § 300h; 40 C.F.R. § 144.1 (e). Exercising these statutory authorities granted to it, EPA some time ago set standards for state UIC programs and approved NMED's application to serve as the primary UIC permitting authority in the State of New Mexico, except with…”

State of Wyoming v. Zinke, 871 F.3d 1133 (10th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “594 (2005) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(1)(B)(ii)). This amendment to the SDWA came after a ruling of the Eleventh Circuit, which held that the EPA had authority to regulate fracking under the statute as then written.”

Show all 41 citing cases →

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(a) — 3 cases

EQT Prod. Co. v. Wender, 191 F. Supp. 3d 583 (N.D.W. Va. 2016). “In turn, section 1421, 42 U.S.C. § 300h, identifies the minimum requirements proposed state UIC regulatory programs must meet in order for a state to be granted primary enforcement authority (referred to as “primacy”) over Class II well regulation.”

United States v. Overholt, 307 F.3d 1231 (10th Cir. 2002). “§ 371 on a charge that they entered into a conspiracy with five objects: (1) improperly disposing of petroleum-impacted wastewater, in violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h, et seq.; (2) transporting hazardous wastes without a manifest, in violation…”

W. Nebraska Resources Council v. Env't Prot. Agency, 793 F.2d 194 (8th Cir. 1986).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(a)(2) — 1 case

Phillips Petroleum Co., Phillips Oil Co. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 803 F.2d 545 (10th Cir. 1986). “Section 1421, 42 U.S.C. § 300h. 3 No injec *548 tion is to be allowed that may endanger “drinking water sources.”

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(a)(l) — 2 cases

Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 824 F.2d 1258 (1st Cir. 1987). “DO EPA’S REGULATIONS VIOLATE THE SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT? Part C of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300h (1982) (“SDWA”), indicates that the EPA has a duty to assure that underground sources of drinking water will not be endangered by any underground injection.”

United States v. Daniel Lewis, 435 F. App'x 486 (6th Cir. 2011).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b) — 3 cases

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 608 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2010). “See 42 U.S.C. § 300h; 40 C.F.R. § 144.1 (e). Exercising these statutory authorities granted to it, EPA some time ago set standards for state UIC programs and approved NMED's application to serve as the primary UIC permitting authority in the State of New Mexico, except with…”

LeBlanc v. Env't Prot. Agency, 310 F. App'x 770 (6th Cir. 2009).

W. Nebraska Resources Council v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 943 F.2d 867 (8th Cir. 1991).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(1) — 3 cases

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 562 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2009).

Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 907 F.2d 1146 (D.C. Cir. 1990).

Leaf v. Epa (11th Cir. 1997).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(1)(C) — 1 case

Leaf v. Epa (11th Cir. 1997).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(2) — 5 cases

Legal Env't Assistance Found., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 276 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 2001). “See 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h to 300h-8. This program requires EPA to promulgate regulations that set forth minimum requirements for state UIC programs.”

Legal Env't Assistance Found., Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 118 F.3d 1467 (11th Cir. 1997). “IRCH, Circuit Judge: The issue in this petition for review is whether the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is legally required to regulate hydraulic fracturing, a production enhancement technique used by the oil and gas industry, under the underground…”

Leaf v. Epa (11th Cir. 1997).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(2)(B) — 1 case

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(3)(A) — 2 cases

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(3)(B) — 1 case

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(3)(C) — 4 cases

Nuclear Energy Inst., Inc. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 373 F.3d 1251 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

Nuc Engy Inst Inc v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 2004).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l) — 4 cases

Miami-Dade Cnty. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 529 F.3d 1049 (11th Cir. 2008). “1 42 U.S.C. §§ 300h to 300h-8. Under the SDWA, the EPA promulgates regulations setting parameters for state UIC programs.”

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 562 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2009).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l)(A) — 3 cases

United States v. King, 660 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2011). “” “Underground Injection Control Programs” are state-administered programs under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act that prevent harmful injections into drinking water aquifers. The counts were based on four discharges of water into deep wells without a permit from the State of…”

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l)(B) — 1 case

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l)(B)(i) — 1 case

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l)(C) — 3 cases

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(b)(l)(D) — 3 cases

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(1) — 2 cases

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 562 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2009).

Leaf v. Epa (11th Cir. 1997).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(1)(A) — 2 cases

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. USEPA, 608 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2009).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(1)(B)(ii) — 2 cases

State of Wyoming v. Zinke, 871 F.3d 1133 (10th Cir. 2017). “594 (2005) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(1)(B)(ii)). This amendment to the SDWA came after a ruling of the Eleventh Circuit, which held that the EPA had authority to regulate fracking under the statute as then written.”

Wyoming v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 136 F. Supp. 3d 1317 (D. Wyo. 2015).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(2) — 6 cases

W. Nebraska Resources Council v. Env't Prot. Agency, 793 F.2d 194 (8th Cir. 1986).

Lozar v. Birds Eye Foods, Inc., 678 F. Supp. 2d 589 (W.D. Mich. 2009).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(l) — 6 cases

Hydro Resources, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 562 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2009).

Arco Oil & Gas Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 14 F.3d 1431 (10th Cir. 1993).

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(l)(A) — 1 case

— 42 U.S.C. § 300h(d)(l)(B)(ii) — 1 case

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.