IN THE SL3PREME COURT OF 01110

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OFFAIRFIELD COUh1`I'Y, OHIO,

v,

Appellant,

CASE NO, 2013-1085

On..A.ppeal fromthe I'ranklin County Courtof Appeals, Tenth Appellate DistriGt

SCOTT J. NALLY, DIRECTOR OF Court of Appeals Case No. 11-AI'-508ENVIKON1v1ENTA.L PROTL;CTION FOR ERAC Case No. 235929'I'I-IE STA"I'E OF OHIO,

Appzllee,

MERIT BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE O1110 MUNICIPAL LEAGUE (OMI1) AND

COIJNTY SANITAR^.' .E.+NGINF.laRS ASSOCIATION OF fJI:IIO (CSEAO) INSUPPORT OF FAIRFIELD CO"C;NTY BOARD OF Cf3MMISSIOiNERS

STEPHEN N. HA.UCzIIEY (0010459)Counsel ofRecordFROS'F BROWN TODD LLC301 E. Fourth Str.eetCincimiati, OH 45202Telephone (513) 651-6127Facsimile: (513) 651-6981shaugile.q@fb tlaw, comSTEI'HEN J. SMI'I'H (0001344)FttOST BROWN TODD LLC10 W. Broad StreetColumbus, Oh.io 43215Telephone: (614) 464-1211Facsi7nile: (614) 464-1737ssnlith@fbtiaw.comJOF-TN GO`l HERMAN (0000504)OHIO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE175 S. Third Street, #510Colurxibus, Ohio 43215-7100Telephone: (614) 221-4349Facsimile: (614) 221-4390jgoth<.t-man @colLiznbus.t-r.con-iCo2.rnsel fai^ Ohio Municipal League andCounty ;Sanitary Engineers Associcrtion O,f 'C1hio

, < _ ..:sS

STEI'HEiwi P. SAMUELS (0007979)Counsel ofRecordJOSEPH M. REIDY (0030346)FROST BROWN TODD LLCOne Columbus, Suite 230010 West Broad StreetColumbus, Ohio 43215=3484(614) 464-1211(614) 464-1737 (facsimile)ssainuels@tbtIaw.com3rezdy@Ibtlaw.comCounsel for Appellatzt Board Of C'omrrzis:sionet:sfbtr Fairfield Countv; Ohio

ivTIC-IAEL DeWINE (00091 81)A'IT()].3.NFY G1:NERAL OF OHIOERIC I . :Viti KPHY (0083284)State SolicitorCounsel qf RecorclSA.MUjEI, C. PETERSON (00831432)Deputy SolicitorL. SCOTT HELKOWSKI (0068622)ALANA R. SHOCKEY (0085234)Assistant Attorneys GeneralOhio Attorney General's Office30 East Broad Street; 17th FloorColtzmbus, Ohio 432] 5eric.murphy@ohioattoriieygeneral.gov

,oliioattorneygeneral. govSamuel.peterson@la,wronce.helkowski@ohioattomeygencral.govalana.sholekey@ohioattorneygeneral.govCounsel,for°Appel.l.ee Scott NaliyDirector of 'Envirorarnental Protection

L INDA S. WOGGOn (0059082)Exeeutive Vice PresidentOHIO CHAN.II3E^ OF C(3MMERCE230 East Tovvn StreetColumbus, Ohio 43215Iwoggon0gohiochamber.c:ornCounsel for Ainicus Ohio C.lzanr_her o,f'Cotnnaerce

ii

JESSICA E, D.F,YIONT1; (0072414)Counael vf RecordAIVI3IZEW O. ETI'EI2 (0085013)SQUIRE SANDERS LLP2000 Huntington Center41. South High Street.Colu.m.btis. Oliio 43215JOHN D, LA7ZAIZETTI (0080780).SQIIIRi^ SANDFRS LLP4900 Key Tower127 Public SquareClevelarrd, Ohio 44114j essiea: demonte@squiresanders.ecrnaiidrew.ettei (-a)sq-ttiresanders.cornjohii.lazzaretii@squiresanders.comCourisel for A7nicats Association of'C31iioMetropolitan PG'ustervatei' Agencies

iii

^. TABLE OF CONTENTSPage

1. TABLE t3FC'ONTENTS..... . .. .., . _ .. ... . ....... ........... ..............iv

II, TABLE OF AUTI-IORITIES .,... ,............>... . . ............. ....< . . .... ..... .... ...;.. ............... ,,. ........vi

TII. STATEMENT OF ISSUE FOR REVIEW... ................. .....................:.: ...... ..... ..:.,......1.

TV. 5TA1'EMENT OF INTEREST OIr AMCCU.S CURIAE ...... ...........,.., ........,.............::;..:1

V. STATUTORY/REGULATORY FiZAMEWORK ..: ......... ..:.>..... .,..<.,.. ...........•. . ....,.......3

VI. STATEMEN7' OF FAC'I'S ....... ..... .. ...... ... .. .. .... . ..... . ,4

VII, ARGUNIENT. .... ......... ........ . . ... .. . .. .... .... ..............., .......... . . . . . . .. .....4

A. The Big Walrrut Creek Watershed TMDL Establishes A New Standard for WaterQuality for Phosphorus and Tlaerefore Must Undergo Ru.lema:kizig Pursuant to theRequirements of R.C. 6111,041 .......... . ........... .....,.... ..... ... . ... .............

B. Recluiring Ohio EPA to Comply with Ohio's Statutory Rulemaking Procedures

Provides Special Protectiozis for Ohio's Counties aiid Mtinicipalities ............. ........:...7

C. If TivIDLs are not Required to Be Promulgated Uiicter Ohio Law, Ohio EPA will IlaveVirtually Un.fettered Discretion to Establish Vv'aterbody-Specific Standards Across theState, Further Straining the Resources of Ohio's Local Governments ............................ 9

VIII. CONCLUSION .. .... ............ .. ...:......... ... .... <...... . .........:..:.........:: ...... ><.. ........ ,.,............... 9

IX. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE........ .. • ............. ........ ...., .... .... 10

IV

Ilf. TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.page

CASI;S

7.3oarcl of Commissioners nf Fait;field County, Ohio v. Director° of Envir onnaental .PT°oicctirn,2013-sJhio-2106 ¶ 1 (10`hApp> Dist. 2013) ., . .., .. ...... ..... ..... ....5

Citizens Committee to Pr°ese.rve Lake Logan v: Yb`illia;ns, EBR No. 75-40, 1977 WL 10269 (May27, 1977) over•rzclecl on other grounds, Citizens Committee to Preserve Lake Logan v. Willitrna,s;10 App. No. 77AP-755, 1978 WL 216923 (June 22, 1978) ... ... ....:::: ...............:,. ....:.:.: ......:::;6

Oxford Mining Company, LLC v. Director of Environnzental Protection, ERAC No. 12-256581,2013 WL 5314482 (Septen-iber 18, 2013). ...................... ..... . . 6,7

STt?►.T IITES

R:C: 6111:041 .............. .... ..... .......... .. ....... .. ... ............................................... 4,6

R:C.6111.01 ... ........... .... ..... ......................... ............. .............. .....,...5

R.C. 127.18 .... ................ ..... ..... ... .. .. .. . .. . 7,8

R.,C. 1 l 9.03 ...... ........... ...... $

R.C. 121.39 .............. ...... ............. ...................8

RULES

Ohio AcIn2. Code Chapter 3745-1 ........... .... .... . . ........ . . .... ......... . . . . . . .... ...... ....:5

Oliio Adm. Code 3745-1-07, Table 7-11...... . . .. . . .. ........... . .... ... . ...... . .. . .. .. . .. .... ..5

Ohio Adm. Code 3745-1-04 . ...,.. . .... , . ... .......... .... ..... < . ............ . .. .. . 5

OTI I F R.A. (7THOkU'.C I ES

`"what is Non-Point Source Pollution"(available at iit.tp:I/water,e:pa.govlpolwaste/npsr`whatis,cfm}'.. . ..3

"Ohio's Nonpoizit Source Progran,i"(available crt http://Epa.ohio,gov/dsw/np5/iizdex.aspx). ..: ............ . ..... . ... . ..... . ........... . ....... . ..........3

Joint Exhibit 13 ("Total iVlaxinluin Daily Loads for the Big Walnut Creek Watershed") ......... 5

v

111. ST ATENIENT OF THE ISSUEFORRE1TIEW.

The issue presented for review in the case .Sub juclice is narrowly confined to whezher

the Big Walnut Creek watershed TMDL must be prorrialgated as a rule under Ohio law before

Fairfield Coun-ty and the other affected stakeholders in the watershed can be subjected to new,

binding, and potentially very expensive, pollutant litnits.

However, in a broader sense, th.e question is whether OI1io EPA. can use its TMDL

atithority to establislY binding vvatershed-based, or even waterbody-specific, standards of water

quality across the State of Ohio without first affording the protections associated with

rulenialeing, when the san-ze Agency i.s obligated by statute to afford those protections when it

establishes standards of water quality for the State as a v,lhctle, Because there is no

meanizlgful dirferetrce between standards of water quality imposcd in this or any other TMDL

developed by Ohio EPA and statewide standards of water cltxality developed by the saiiie

Ageiicy, the answer is tlzatr Ohio EPA must follow Ohio's requirenients for rulemaking when

developing the Big Wa]riut Creek watershed TMDL and all other TMDI.s.

IV. STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF THE OML, AND CSEAO.

`I'he Ohio iVlunicipal League (OML) is a non-proiit Ohio corporation composed of a

membership of rnore than 700 Ohio cities and viklages, Its webpage is

http:!/w\vw.omlohio.orgl. As stated in its by-laws, the purpose of the OMI., is the

improvement of municipal government and administration, and the promotion of the general

weli'are of the cities and villages of this State, by appropriate means, including, but not limited

to, maintaining a central bu.reau of information and research for cities and villages; promoting

confereTZces of municipal officials and short cottrses for, the discussion and study of municipal

problems and techniques involved in their solution; publishizlg and circulating an official

magazine and; periodic butletin.s and reports on issues affecting imnicipal governments; and

fr,rmulathig ar.d supporting sound tiiunicipal policies. Consistent with these principles, the

OIvXL engages from time to time in the filing of briefs and other legal memoranda in Ohio':s

courtsto support important issues affecting Ohio's cities and villages.

The County Sanitary Engin.eers Association of Ohio (CSEAO) is an affiliate

association of the Couzity Commissioners' Association of Ohio, a z-ion-protit corporation; The

C'SEAO's webpage is http:/Iwww.cseao.orgl. I`he CSEAO's membership consists of saiaitary

engineers, utilities directors, superintendents, and other management staff responsible for fhe

delivery of wastewater, stormwater, and drinking water seivzces to all of Ohio's 88 counties.

CSEAO's primary goal is to raise the technical and non-teclznical. standards of these services

rendered to the general public by establishing a central point for reference and group

d"rsc;ussion of mutual problems affecting all of Ohio's counties. Consistent with tl-iese

principles, the CSEAO engages fronl time to time in the tiling of briefs and other legal

rriem.oranda :in Ohio's courts to support important issues affecting the delivery of these

services in Ohio's 88 counties.

"I'he menabers of the OML and CSEAO provide valuable public services thM protect

public health and the environment, a.nd do so ever more often on budgets that are tiinded

almost exclusively bv the citizens and businesses in their respective communities. As such,

their operating/improvement budgets are constrained by thenumber of citizens and businesses

tl3at utilize these sef_vices, what rates those citizens and businesses cari afford, and tivhat rate

increases etected public o-ffrcials are able to approve. Rulin,gs that potentially impact the

already-st:rained fixiancial resources of owners of POTWs across Ohio are vitally important to

tl-ie members of these organizations.

The members of these two organizatioiTs operate hundreds of small, mediuni and large

POTWs in Ohio, spending millions of dollars atanually to produce a higla quality effluent that

has enabled dramatic improvements to occur in both chernical and biological water quality in

rivers and streanxs across the State of Ohio. Two factors drive tiie interests of amicus curiae

in the outcame of this ai?laea(, First, both U.S. EPA. and Ohio EPA agree that noil-point

sources, such as agricultural and stormwater runoff, and urbanization of watersheds, not point

sources such as POTWs, are by far the most significant rezna;itiing sources of pollutants

e7ltering rivers and streazns.' Second, requiring Ohio's POTWs to furYher reduce pollutant

loadings is rapidly reac;hiu;, if not already crossing, the point of dinainishitag returns,

requiring exponentially inereasirzt; investinents of capital and annua:l O&1V1 to remove ever

smaller guantities of pollutant loadings, stretching the lirraits of affordability for miiiim:hl

improveinents in water quality. Because Ohio EPA lias indicated tha4 it has developed so far,

and itrtends to develop in the future, TMDLs in nuinber that will virtually blanket the State of

Ohio,l the outcome of this case will: determine what protections OML and CSEAO's:members

will be provided as Ohio EPA stretches their shrinking revenues even further as the TMDL

program moves forward.

V. S'I'A'I'UTORY/RE GULA:TC9RY Fl_2A.1'vIEW(3WC.

OML and CSEAO agree with the statutory azld regulatory framework set fortb in the

Merit Brief filed by 1:•airfield County, and therefore izicorporate it hereiil by reference. By way

of supplementation thereof with reievant statutory authority, R.C. 6111.041 provides in pertinent

I See e:g. "What is Non-Point Source Pollution,"' available at

http:/!water,epa.gov/polwaste/nps/whatis.cfni, and "Ohio's Nonpoint Source Program," uvailubie

at http://epa.ohio.gov%ds^^/nps/index.aspx (each last accessed on December 30, 2013).See "Ollio Total Maximum Daily Load Prograni Progress," available at

http;//www.epa.ohio.gov/Potals/35/tn-idi/TMDL_status ay2013.pdf (last accessed oit

Deceznbcr 30; 20 13 ). A^I

3

part as folltiws;

1,6111.041 Stdndards Of, WaterQuAlit

in fi.u-therance of sections 6111.01 to 6111.08 of the Revised Code, the director c!f

envirnianaetzttil protection shall adopt staarclarals of water clgdality to be rt,pplicable

to tOZewaters of tlae state. .S'tich stanlarcls slsall be adopted pursuant to a schedu:le

established, and from time to time a.mended; by the director, to apply to the

various waters of the state, in accordance avitit Clrapter II9of tlte Reviserl Code.

Such stanrlarcls shall be adopted in accordance with sectiorz 303 of the "Federai.

Water Pollution Control Aet" and. shall be clesignerl to improve aaxzl rraailztain tlie

qasality of such waters for the purpose of protectiaag the public healtli arirl

wectre, and to enuble tlae present and planned use of such waters for public

water secpplies, iirtlustrital and rzgricultctral needs, propagation of faslr; aquatic

life, anrt wildlife, aParl recreldtion(alpurposes,

R.C. 6111.041 (emphasis added). For the reasons set forth below, OML and CSEAO believe

that this statute is aii additional authority that controls the outcome of this appeal.

VI. STATEMENT OF FACTS.

QML and CSEAO agree with the statenten:t of facts set forth in the iMerit Brief filed by

Fairtield County, and th-crefore incorporate it herein by refereiice.

VII. ARGUMENT.

O1V1I^^ and CSTA() agree With tlie arguments set forth in the N.lerit Brief filed by Fairfield

Couilty, and therefore incorporate them herein by referenee. They provide the Court with the

fe>llowing additional arguments to sLippoi-t the position of Fairfield County.

A. The Big Walnut Creek Watershed TMDL Establishes A New Standard for

Water Qua.lgty for Phosphorus and '1'herefore Must Undergo Rulereiakffatl;

Pursgiaaat to the Requirements of R.C. 6111.041.

'I'he following facts are u-ndisputed.;

The TMDL at issue in this case isizpgses numeric standards of water quality for

phosphorus on Blacklick Creek and other waterbodies in the Big Walnut Creek watershed. See

4

,loint l:xhibit ("J.E.") 13 (TMDL) at pp. 24, 52-53 (establishing as a"target value" a maximum

phosphorus coneenti•ation of 0.11 mg/I for all waterbodies in the watershed).

2. The numeric "target values" for phosphorus established in the TMDL caine from

ai1 Ohio EPA technical gui.c(ance document that was not promulgated as a rule under Ohio law.

Icd. at p. 23-24 (showing soitrce of the values as the Ohio EPA technical report "Association

BetNeeTi Nutrients, 1-icrvitat, and the Aquatic Biota in Ohio Rivers and Str-earns'° (Ohio EPA,

1999)); 13ocrr-cl of ' Commissioners of Fairfield County, Ohio v. Dit-ector of Environmerital

Pi•otection, 2013-Ohio-2106 j; 1, TTI 57, 76 (10"' App. Dist. 2013) (uncontested statement that tlie

technical report was tiever promulgated as a rule).

3, Ohio EPA has riot yet promulgated a numeric standard of water quality for

phosphorus for any waters of the. State of Ohio. See Ohio Adm. Code Cliapter 3745-1.3 See also

J.E. 13 (TMDL) at p. 23 ("...Qhio EPA does not citrrently have statewiae numeric criteria for

phosphoriis, . .:").

4. 'The waterbodies in the Big Walnut Creek watershed constitutes "waters of the

State of Ohio," See R.C. 6111.01(I4).

5. The nuineric phosphorus "target values" established in the TMDL are standards

of water quality for the waterbodies in the Big Walzzut Creek watershed TivIDL.

R,C. 6111.04I provides in pertinent part as follows:

In. furtherance of sections 6111.01 to 6111.08 oI'the Revised Code;, the director of

etivixozifnetptal pro•gecti®ct shall ceclopt starrclctt'ds of water qceality to be applicable

to tlte i-vaters of the staPe. Such standards slacall be adopted pursuant to a schedule

established, and from time to time amended, by the director, to apply to tlae

3 UTicfer Ohio Adinin. Code 3745-1-07, Table 7-11, Ohio EPA has promulgated a narrativestandard for phosphorus, stating that it shall be limited to the extent necessary to preventnuisance growths of algae; weeds, and slimes that result in a violation of narrative water qualitycriteria set forth in Section 3745-1-04(E), or cause taste or odor problems for public water

supplies.

5

various wcttei-s of the state, in accordance witli Cltrapter 119 of the Revised

Caate. >SucPi staaarlat-tls shall be adopted in. accordanee with section 303 of the

"Federal Water Pollution Control Aet" and shall be tlesigned to impf•ove ratrcl

anaidatain the quality of such waters for the preipcase of protectiaag the publichealth aaad wel,}`care, atict to enable the present arcil planzzeil use nf'such wrrtersfor public water stapplies, inrlristriccl aiicl agricultural needs, propagation offish,

ira,ucrtic life, ciiacl wildlafe; and recreational ptgtposes.

R,C. 6111.041 (emphasis aclded)< This statute states in clear and unecluivocal terms that Ohio

EPA must follow the rulemaking requirenients under R.C. Chapter 119 wlien adopting standards

of water quality for any waters of the State ofOhio. Even if th€. Court were to hold that the

phosphorus loading allocations, i.E., tize: "pollution diet," set fortli in the Big Walziut Creek

tivtlte.rsheti I'IVIDL does laot constitute "standards of water quality," the maximum allowable

pilospborus concentration (0. 11 rngll) established in the i'MDL for all waterbodies in the Big

Walnut Creek watershed clearly constitutes a"standard of water quality" for "waters of the State

of Ohio." Therefore, at a miriirnurti, Ohio EPA could not lawfuily impo:se a phosphorus

pollution diet for I'air-field County and other phosphorus sources in the watershecl derived fritxn

the 0.11 n1gf1 standarcl until that standard was first promulgated as a: rute u.nder R.C. Chapter 119.

Requiring that Ohio EPA follow tlae requiremeirts for ruleznakizlg under R.C. Chapter 119

would be consistent with previous holdings. of ERAC that have not permitted the Agency to

apply in permits standards of water quality fi•oxn reports or guidance that Iiad not iu7dergone the

procedures for rulern;aking, See e.g. Citizens Corranzittee to Preserve Lake Logan v. ffrilliwns,,

EBR No, 75-40, 1977 WL, 102b9 *18 (1VIay 27, 1977) overruled on other grvurids, Citizens

C:ornnzittee to Preserve Lake Logan v. yl'illiarns, 10 App. No. 77AP-755, 1978 WL 216923 (June

_2, .1978) (striking ammonia discharge limits from a permit because they were derived from

guidelijres that were not adopted as rules in accordance with R. C. Chapter 119); Oxford Mining

Contl?any; LLC v, Director af Eni;ironmentcl Protection, ERAC No. 12-256581, 2013 WL

6

5314482 **36-^ *37 (September 18, 2013) (striking down. water quality certification lirziits

derived from a"I'rimary Headwater Habitat" field rizariual that had not been prornulgated under

R.C. Chapter 119);

B. Requiring Ohio EPA to Comply with Ohio's Statutory RulemakingProcedures Provides Special Protections for Ohio's Coaanties and

Municipalities.

Formal rulemaking in the context of enviroilmental regulation affords a number of

irnportant safe:guards for local governr:ients; the purpose of which are to ensure that CJllio EPA

aird the General As:sembl), are fully aware of the fiscal and technical consequences of proposed.

rulc;making on Ohio's finaricially-strapped con2rrzunities.

For example, as part of the rulemaking process, Ohio EPA in.ust develop a Rule Summary

and Fiscal A:nalysis ("RSFA"). R.C: 127.1$. An RSFA requires Ohio EPA to suznmarize the

costs aild benefits of all proposed rules. The General Assenlbly added the RSFA recluiretnent

with a particular concern for the effect of rules on local governnzezats, requiring "zn; the RSFA that

Okzzo EPA determine "[i]f the rule has a fiscal effect on school districts, counties, townships, or

:muiiicipal corporatioras..,." R.C.. 127.18(B)(8)-(10). And if a,proposeci rule is determined to

fiscally eflcct; school'. districts or local governments, Ohio EPA is subject to three specific

additional. recluiremeiits:

1, The Agency must deterrnine "an estimate in dollars of the cost of complialicewith

the rule." R.C. 127.18(B)(8).

2. If the rule derives fro.tn a federal requirement (as a TiVIDI, clearly does), the

AgeJZCv must provide a"clear explanation that tlie proposed state rule does not exceed the scope

and izltent of the [federal] requirement." R.C. 127:18(13)(q): And if the rule exceeds the

ininirnum necessary federal requirement(s), the Agetiey must provide a "a justification of the

7

excess cost, and an estimate of the costs, including those costs for local gc>vernYnents, exceeding

the federal requirement." Iel;

3. The Agency must develop a"cornlarehe. nsive cost estimate" for the new rule that

iztcludes "the procedure and method of calculating the costs of compliarYce and identifies major

cost categories including personnel costs, new equipment or other capital costs, operating costs,

and inclirect central service costs related to the rule." R.C. 127.18(13)(10),

Irnpor'tantly, the RSFA must also "includa a written explanation of the agency's and the

affected local goverriment's ability to pay f'or: the new requirements and a statement of any

impact tho rule will have on economic deuelopment." Id. Ohio EPA must also submit the RSFA

to JCARR, the Secretary of State, and the Legislative Service Commission for their review and

consideration. R.C. 127.18(C)-(E); 1 19, Q3 (13);

As part of formal rulemaking, Ohio EPA must also complete an Environmental

A.menclment?Adoption Form. R.C. 121.39. This requ.irement applies specifically to rules

concerning environr.nental protection. R.C. 121,39(A). It requires Ohio EPA to take several

steps prior to adopting a rule or an amendrnerit proposed to a rule dealing with envirUnmerztal

protection or coxttaining a component dealing vaitli eiwironn,ienta:l protection, including

consulting with organizations that represent political subdivisions affected by the proposed rule

or aniendment, R.C. 121,39(l))(1):

These steps may appear perfunctory but they are not. They provide atl important and

necessary dialogue between Ohio EPA and local governments in the rulemaking process, and

they force Ohio EPA to carefully consider and docurnent potential irnpacts of proposed rules on

Ohio's local governments, Specifically in the context of developinent of TM,DLs, they would

help the General Assembly and Secretary of State to understand the significant costs and

8

technical feasibility issues associated with publicly owned wastewater treatment plants having to

corn.pl'zance with stritzgent TIVII)L-laased discharge staridards:

C. [f TMDLs are trot Required to Be Promulgated Under Ohio Law, O9iio EPA

will Have Virtually Unfettered Discretion to Establish Waterbody-Sg3ecirle

Standards Across the State, Further Straining the Resources of Ohio's LocalGovernments.

Under R.C: 6111.441, Ohio EPA rnust follow rulein.akiirg procedlires wh:eil adopting

standards of water quality for waters of the State. Ifthat requirement only applies to standards

that are statewide in application, a.nd the Agency is free to develop watershed-specific or

waterbody-specific standards of water quality without following the rufemaking procedures;

nntliing "iould stop Ohio EPA froni dissecting Ohio's rivers an.d streains iilto sets and subsets of

watez•bodies. It covtld then develop mandatory standards of water quality across the entire State

of Ohio using the TMDL process with virtual impunity, thereby potentially rendering the

statutory obligations of R.C. 6111,04111.Q41 a nullity. Whether standards of water quality are

developed ozi a statewidebasis, a regiotial ba5is, or even on a creek-by-creek basis should not

make a difference in tenns of the procedure to be followed.

If this Court does not rule in favor of FairfieId County and reign in, Ohio EPA now in the

context of the Big Walnut Creek watershed TMDL, this risk, and the resulting additional strain

on the local resources of OML and CSEAO's members, are threats that are far too real to be

ignored.

Nrlll. CONCLUSION.

For all of the reasons set forth above and in the i'Vlerit Brieffil4d by Fairfield County, this

Cotzrt sliould reverse the decision below, and declare that the Big Wa.lnut Creek watershed

I.Iv1I3L is null and voi.d and cannot be applied until such time as Ohio EPA undertakes proper

rulemaking procedures.

9

Respectfully submitted,67^^j: -r, L i^^^`^<^3ciz`}^^^

STE H N. HAUGHE'Y (#001

'

0459^Counsel of RecordFROST BROWN TODD LLC301 E. Fourth StreetCincinnati, OH 45202Telephone (513) 651-6127Facsimile: (513) 651-6981shaugheyCfbtlaw.comSTEPHEN J. SMITH (#0001344)FROST BIt:OW-N TODD LLC10 W. Broad StreetColumbus, Ohio 43215Telephone: (614) 464-1211Facsimile: (614) 464-1737ssmith@fbtlaw.comJOFIN GOTHERMAN (40000504)OHIO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE175 S. Third Street, ,#510Columbus, Ohio 43215-7100Telephone: (614) 221-4349Facsimile: (614) 221-4390jgotherman@columbus.rr.comCounsel For Ohio Municipal League AndCounty Sanitar y Engineers Association Of Ohio

IX. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Merit Brief of Amicus Curiae Ohio

Municipal League and County Sanitary Engineers Association of Ohio was sent via regular U.S.

mail this 30'h day of December, 2013, upon the following counsel of record:

MICHAEL DEWINE (0009181)Attorney General of OhioERIC E. MURPHY (0083284)State SolicitorCounsel of RecordSAMUEL C. I'ETERSON (00831432)Deputy SolicitorL. SCOTT HELKOWSKI (0068622)ALAiNA R. SHOCKEY (0085234)

10

Assistant Attorneys GeneralOhio Attorney General's Office30 East Broad Street, 17th FloorColumbus, Ohio 43215Counsel for Appellee Scott NallyDirector of Environmental Protection

LINDA S. WOGGON (0059082)OHIO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE230 East Town StreetColumbus, Ohio43215Counsel for Amicus Ohio CiaambeN of Cominerce

JESSICA E. DEMONTE (0072414)ANDREW O. ETTER (0085013)SQtiateF S^^^ERs LLP2000 Huntington Center41 South High StreetColumbus, Ohio 43215,TOHNT D. LAZZARETTI (0080780)SQUIRE SANDERs LLP4900 Key Tower127 Public SquareCleveland, Ohio 44114Counselfor Amicus Association of Ohio ltletr•opolitan Wastewater Agencies

fy/- ^ ' ri^'`^,.?-.',3,ai^+.. . ^'. .

Steplien N. Haughey

C NLibrary 0727546,06Q9561 3190677v i

11