NEDEN BİRLEŞİK DEVLETLER TEMİZ SU YASASI VATANDAŞ DAVALARI HÜKMÜNÜN UYGULANABİLİRLİĞİ GÜNÜMÜZDE DAHA ZORLUDUR?
Birleşik Devletler’de su kalitesini düzenleyen iki temel yasadan biri olan Temiz Su Yasası, yüzey sularının bütünlüğünü korumak adına, teknik araçlar ve finansal yardım sağlayarak, ulusal kirlilik kontrol standartları için kapsamlı bir çerçeve oluşturur. Yasa, federal ve eyalet hükümetlerine Yasa’nın gerekliliklerini ve standartlarını öncelikli uygulama yetkisi verirken, vatandaşlar yanlızca hükümet otoritelerini tamamlayıcı olarak hareket etme yetkisine sahiptir. Fakat, hükümet uygulama araçları yeterli ve verimli bir koruma sağlamadığı için, Yasa kapsamındaki vatandaş davaları ülkenin sularının korunması açısından önemli bir uygulama aracı haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışma, vatandaşların veya çevre kuruluşlarının Temiz Su Yasası vatandaş davaları hükmüne dayanarak açtıkları davalarda karşılaştıkları zorlukları inceleyerek, ilgili hükmün uygulanabilirliğinin günümüzde daha zor olduğunu savunur.
WHY UNITED STATES CLEAN WATER ACT CITIZEN SUIT PROVISION IS MORE DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT TODAY?
As a one of the two major statutes governing water quality in the UnitedStates, the Clean Water Act, establishes a comprehensive framework for nationalpollution control standards by providing technical tools and financial assistance inorder to protect the integrity of surface waters. The Act itself authorizes the federalgovernment and the state governments to primarily enforce the Act’s requirementsand standards while citizens only act as a supplement to the governmental authority.However, due to the lack of sufficient and efficient governmental enforcementactivities, citizen suits under the Act have become an important enforcement tools toensure the protection of the nation’s waters. This study analyzes the challenges thatcitizens or environmental organizations have faced while taking actions under thecitizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act and argues that this provision is moredifficult to litigate today.
___
- Abate, Randall S.: “Massachusetts v. EPA and the Future of Environmental
Standing in Climate Change Litigation and Beyond,” Wm. & Mary Envtl.
L. & Pol’y Rev., Vol.33, 2009, P. 123.
- Alpert, Peter A.: “Citizen Suits Under the Clean Air Act: Universal Standing for
the Uninjured Private Attorney General?,” B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev.,Vol.
16, 1988, P. 286.
- Appel, Peter A.: “The Diligent Prosecution Bar to Citizen Suits: The Search for
Adequate Representation,” Widener L. Rev., Vol.10, 2004, P. 94.
- Atıl, Özge: “Adopting the Citizen Suit Provision of the United States Clean
Water Act As a Tool for Water Pollution Enforcement in Turkey,” J.
TRANSNAT’L L. & POL’Y., Vol. 26, 2016-2017, P. 83.
- Atıl, Özge: “Vital Protection for Waters: Citizen Suit Provision of the United
States Clean Water Act,” Law & Justice Review, Vol.15, 2017, P. 133.
- Atterbury, Tony L.: “Pollution, Pollution Everywhere, but Not a Plaintiff
Found to Be Standing: The Fourth Circuit Judicially Repeals the Citizen
Suit Provision of the Clean Water Act,” Washburn L.J., Vol.39, 2000, P.
559.
- Attwood, Jason: “ARTICLE III - Standing - Article III Standing is Available To
Citizen Group Seeking to Enforce Provisions Of The Clean Water Act
Through Citizen Suit Provision - Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw
Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000),” Seton Hall
Const. L.J., Vol.11, 2000-2001, P. 79.
- Barnum, Cassandra: “Injury in Fact, Then and Now (and Never Again):
Summers v. Earth Island Institute and the Need for Change in
Environmental Standing Law,” Mo. Envtl. L. & Pol’y Rev., Vol.17, 2010,
P. 4.
- Battle, Jackson B. & Lipeless, Maxine I.: Water Pollution, Anderson Publishing
Co., 3rd ed., 1998, P. 4.
- Benson, Reed D.: “Clean Water Act Citizen Suits After Gwaltney: Applying
Mootness Principles in Private Enforcement Actions,” J. Land Use &
Envtl. L., Vol.4, 1988, P. 156-64.
- Benzoni, Francisco: “Environmental Standing: Who Determines the Value of
Other Life,” Duke Envtl. L. & Pol’y F., Vol.18, 2008, P. 348.
- Berger, Emily A.: “Standing at the Edge of a New Millennium: Ending a
Decade of Erosion of the Citizen Suit Provision of the Clean Water Act,”
Md. L. Rev., Vol.59, 2000, P. 1372.
- Campbell, Jonathan S.: “Has the Citizen Suit Provision of the Clean Water Act
Exceeded its Supplemental Birth?,” Wm. & Mary Envtl. L. & Pol’y Rev.,
Vol.24, 2000, P. 319.
- Cawley, Patrick S.: “The Diminished Need for Citizen Suits to Enforce the
Clean Water Act,” J. Legis. Vol.25, 1999, P. 182.
- Chin, Courtney: “Standing Still: The Implications of Clapper for Environmental
Plaintiffs’ Constitutional Standing,” Colum. J. Envtl. L., Vol.40, 2015, p.
333.
- Dolgetta, John: “Notes and Comments, Friends of The Earth v. Crown Central
Petroleum: The Surrogate Enforcer Must Be Allowed to “Stand Up” For
The Clean Water Act”, Pace Envtl. L. Rev., Vol.25, 1998, P. 710-11; U.S.
Const. art. III, § 2.
- Donovan, Lisa: “Power to the People: The Tenth Circuit and the Rights of
Citizens to Sue for Equitable Relief under Section 309(g)(6)(A) of the
Clean Water Act,” B. C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev., Vol.34, 2007, P. 149.
- Echlverria, John D.: “Standing and Mootness Decisions in the Wake of
Laidlaw,” Widener L. Rev., Vol.10, 2004, P. 191.
- Echeverria, John D. & Zeidler, Jon T.: Barely Standing: The Erosion of Citizen
“Standing” to Sue to Enforce Federal Environmental Law, Envtl. Policy
Project, Georgetown University Law Ctr., 1999, P. 1.
- Frye, Russell S.: Citizens’ Enforcement of the US Clean Water Act, in Water
Pollution Law and Liability (Patricia Thomas ed.), Graham & Trotman &
International Bar Association, 1993, P. 187.
- Garrent, Theodore L.: Overview of the Clean Water Act, in The Clean Water
Act Handbook (Mark A. Ryan eds.), ABA Publishing, 3rd ed. 2011, P.
260.
- Gilles, Myriam E.: “Representational Standing: U.S. ex rel. Stevens and the
Future of Public Law Litigation,” Cal. L. Rev., Vol.89, 2001, P. 323-25.
- Head, III, Thomas R. & Wood, Jeffrey H.: “No Comparison: Barring Citizen
Suits in Dual Enforcement Actions,” Nat. Resources & Env’t., Vol.18,
2004, P. 57.
- Hodas, David R.: “Enforcement of Environmental Law in a Triangular Federal
System: Can Three Not Be a Crowd When Enforcement Authority is
Shared by the United States, the States, and Their Citizens?,” Md. L. Rev.,
Vol.54, 1995, P. 1627.
- Jackson, Jr., Ronald P.: “Recent Development: American Canoe Association v.
Murphy Farms, Inc.: The Fourth Circuit Reaffirms That an Environmental
Organization with Article III Standing to Sue under the Citizen-Suit
Provision of the Clean Water Act Must Satisfy the Requirements of the
Gwaltney Test,” U. Balt. J. Envtl. L., Vol.11, 2004, P. 91.
- Kalen, Sam: “Standing on its Last Legs: Bennett v. Spear and the Past and
Future of Standing in Environmental Cases,” J. Land Use & Envtl. L.,
Vol.13, 1997, P. 9-10.
- Leonard, Arne R.: “When Should an Administrative Enforcement Action
Preclude a Citizen Suit Under the Clean Water Act?,” Nat. Resources J.,
Vol.35, 1995, P. 605.
- Longfellow, Emily: “Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Environmental Services: A
New Look At Environmental Standing,” Environs Envtl. L. & Pol’y J.,
Vol.24, 2001, P. 8; U.S. Const. art. III, § 2.
- Lopez, Alberto B.: “Laidlaw and the Clean Water Act: Standing in the Bermuda
Triangle of Injury in Fact, Environmental Harm, and “Mere” Permit
Exceedances,” U. Cin. L. Rev., Vol.69, 2001, P. 159.
- Masucci, Amanda J.: “Stand By Me: The Fourth Circuit Raises Standing
Requirements in Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Gaston Copper Recycling
Corp. - Just as Long as You Stand, Stand by Me,” Vill. Envtl. L.J., Vol.12,
2001, P. 171.
- May, James R.: “Now More than Ever: Trends in Environmental Citizen
Suits,”Widener L. Rev., Vol.10, 2004, P. 9.
- May, James R.: “The Availability of State Environmental Citizen Suits,” Nat.
Resources & Env’t., Vol.18, 2004, P. 55.
- McIntosh, Ben: “Standing Alone: The Fight to Get Citizen Suits Under the
Clean Water Act Into the Courts,” Mo. Envtl. L. & Pol’y Rev., Vol.12,
2005, P. 175.
- McQueary Smith, Beverly: “The Viability of Citizens’ Suits Under the Clean
Water Act After Gwaltney of Smithfield v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation,”
Case W. Res., Vol.40, 1990, P. 57-58.
- Nichol, Jr, Gene R.: “Standing for Privilege: The Failure of Injury Analysis,”
8B.U. L. Rev., Vol.82, 2002, P. 304.
- Perrone, Samuel E. P.: “Louisiana Environmental Action Network v. City of
Baton Rougue: The Fifth Circuit Follows the Trend and Finds the Clean
Water Act’s Diligent Prosecution Bar Is a Nonjurisdictional Rule, to the
Benefit of Citizen Suit Plaintiffs,” Tul. L. Rev., Vol.87, 2013, P. 1376.
- Rechtschaffen, Clifford: “Enforcing the Clean Water Act in the Twenty-First
Century: Harnessing the Power of the Public Spotlight,” Ala. L. Rev.,
Vol.55, 2004, P. 781-95.
- Robinson, Gail J.: “Interpreting the Citizen Suit Provision of the Clean Water
Act,” Case W. Res., Vol.37, 1987, P. 516.
- Salzman, James & Thompson, Jr, Barton H.: Environmental Law and Policy,
Foundation Press, 3rd ed., 2010, P. 80.
- Samuels, David G.: “Louisiana Environmental Action Network v City of Baton
Rouge: Fifth Circuit Rules Clean Water Act’s Diligent Prosecution Bar to
Citizen Suits Is Nonjurisdictional,” Tul. Envtl. L.J., Vol.26, 2013, P. 111-
12.
- Samuels, David G.: “Precluding Preclusion: A Proposal for a New Way of
Addressing Citizen Suit Overfiling,” Tul. Envtl. L.J., Vol.26, 2013, P. 268.
- Shepherdson, Melanie: Citizen Suits: in The Clean Water Act Handbook (Mark
A. Ryan eds.), ABA Publishing, 3rd ed., 2011, P. 261.
- Townsend, Leonard O.: “Note: Hey You, Get Off [of] My Cloud: An Analysis
of Citizen Suit Preclusion under the Clean Water Act,” Fordham Envtl.
L.J., Vol.11, 2000, P. 91.
- Werner, Matthew M.: “Mootness and Citizen Suit Civil Penalty Claims Under
the Clean Water Act: A Post-Lujan Reassessment,” Envtl. L., Vol.25,
1995, P. 805.
- Yates, Edward E.: “Federal Water Pollution Laws: A Critical Lack of
Enforcement by the Enforcement Protection Agency,” San Diego L. Rev.,
Vol. 20, 1983, P. 950.
- Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 515-16 (2006).
- Ark. Wildlife Fed’n v. ICI Americas, Inc, 29 F.3d 376, 380 (8th Cir. 1994).
- Baughman v. Bradford Coal Co., 592 F.2d 215, 218-19 (3d Cir. 1970).
- Clarke v. Securities Indus. Ass’n, 479 U.S. 388, 397 (1987).
- Friends of the Earth v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 768 F.2d 57, 63 (2d Cir. 1985).
- Friends of the Earth v. Gaston Copper Recycling Corp., 629 F.3d (4th Cir.
2011).
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000).
- Gwaltney of Smithfield Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc., 484 U.S. 49
(1987) (Gwaltney I).
- Gwaltney of Smithfield Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc., 844 F.2d 170,
171-72 (4th Cir. 1988) (Gwaltney II).
- Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Gwaltney, of Smithfteld, Ltd., 890 F.2d 690,
696-97 (4th Cir. 1989) (Gwaltney III).
- Karr v. Hefner, 475 F.3d 1192, 1197 (10th Cir. 2007).
- La. Envtl. Action Network v. City of Baton Rouge, 677 E3d 737 (5th Cir. 2012).
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992).
- Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S 497 (2007).
- Pub. Interest Research Group v. N.J. Expressway Auth., 822 F. Supp. 174, 178
(D. N.J. 1992).
- Scituate. N. & S. Rivers Watershed Ass’n v. Scituate, 949 F.2d 552, 557 (1st
Cir. 1991).
- Sierra Club v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 834 F.2d 1517, 1525 (9th Cir. 1987).
- Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 732 (1972).
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1998).
- Student Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Inc. v. Fritzsche, Dodge
& Olcott, Inc., 759 F.2d 1131, 1137-39 (3d Cir. 1985).
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009).
- U.S. Parole Comm’n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 397 (1980).