The NAM applauded the Fourth Circuit's 10/10/01 ruling in this case giving public and private permit holders under the Clean Water Act a margin of protection for discharges that would be reasonably contemplated in their permits. The Court held that there is a "protective shield" within which limited deviations in the properties of the permitted discharges are allowed, as long as the permit holder complies with the terms of the permit and the challenged discharges are within the "reasonable contemplation" of the permitting authority at the time the permit was granted.The NAM had filed an industry amicus brief with the Fourth Circuit in April on behalf of the defendants in the case. Plaintiffs sued when it was learned that a county-run wastewater treatment facility was discharging warm water into a local stream, even though its environmental permit did not expressly allow for heated discharges.
NAM general counsel Jan Amundson said, "Although this ruling would suggest that future permit applicants need to be diligent and comprehensive with specific language during the application process, it should also send a signal to those contemplating nit-picking nuisance suits. The courts may be losing their patience for them."