In Northern Illinois Gas Company v. City of Evanston,1 the Northern District of Illinois held that alleged natural gas leaks from distribution pipelines are not "solid or hazardous waste" subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA").2 The ruling is important because it confirms that owners and operators of natural gas pipelines cannot be held liable under RCRA for purported violations or endangerments posed by alleged natural gas leaks. Mayer Brown represented Northern Illinois Gas Company.
The dispute arose after methane gas was detected in and around a public park. The park was built atop a former landfill that was owned and operated by the City of Evanston. The City, however, alleged that the methane came from natural gas distribution lines. The City filed a citizen suit against two utility companies under RCRA, which allows suits "against any person ... who has contributed or who is contributing to the past or present handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous waste which may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to health or the environment."3 RCRA defines "hazardous waste" as a subset of "solid waste," and defines "solid waste" as "any garbage, refuse, sludge ... and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material."
The court held that "uncontained" gases—like alleged natural gas leaks—are not "solid waste." Initially, the court held that RCRA's "solid waste" definition is ambiguous. The court found that while the "most natural reading" of "solid waste" would exclude alleged natural gas leaks, the definition does cover other non-solid materials and is apparently non-exhaustive. The court then turned to the US Environmental Protection Agency for guidance.
EPA had concluded in at least two rulemakings and several other instances that uncontained gases do not fall within RCRA's definition of solid waste. The court held that EPA's interpretation is entitled to deference under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), because it "is a reasonable interpretation of Section 6903(27) and is consistent with the most natural reading of that provision." The court also found EPA's interpretation persuasive even if it were not binding.
The court's ruling is significant, particularly in light of the high-profile and ongoing natural gas leak in Porter Ranch, California, and EPA's and the Department of the Interior's increased efforts to regulate methane emissions (under other laws). Had the Illinois district court reached a contrary result, owners and operators of natural gas pipelines could have been exposed to substantial RCRA liability and citizen suits in connection with alleged natural gas leaks.
Footnotes
1 2016 WL 521002 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 10, 2016).
2 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.
3 42 U.S.C. § 6972(a)(1)(B) (emphasis added).
Visit us at mayerbrown.com
Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.
© Copyright 2016. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.
This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.
