Barnes & Thornburg Files Amicus Brief for Biosolids Advocates Urging DC Circuit to Affirm Dismissal of EPA PFAS Regs Suit

Barnes & Thornburg filed an amicus brief with the D.C. Circuit on behalf of several biosolids advocates supporting a trade association for local public clean water utilities in a lawsuit brought by a group of farmers.

The amicus brief, accepted by the D.C. Circuit on July 15, 2026, aligns with the position of the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is not required to issue new standards for biosolids management and disposal every two years.

NACWA filed an appellee brief on May 12, 2026, urging the D.C. Circuit to affirm a lower court’s dismissal of the suit from the group of farmers alleging that EPA has violated the Clean Water Act by failing to issue new biosolids regulations incorporating perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS.

A week later, Barnes & Thornburg asked the D.C. Circuit for authorization to file the brief on behalf of the biosolids advocates and included a copy of the brief. The advocates are the Coalition of Recyclers of Residual Organics by Practitioners of Sustainability (CRROPS), Dr. Sally Brown, the California Association of Sanitation Agencies (CASA), the Mid-Atlantic Biosolids Association, the Midwest Biosolids Association, the North East Biosolids & Residuals Association, the Northwest Biosolids Association, the Virginia Biosolids Association and the Water Environment Association of Texas.

The Barnes & Thornburg team includes partners Fredric Andes, Andre Monette and Erika Powers.

The same team also recently filed a separate amicus brief on behalf of the Federal Water Quality Coalition and National Mining Association, urging the Ninth Circuit to grant rehearing en banc in a case brought by the Center for Biological Diversity against the EPA.

In March 2026, a Ninth Circuit panel upheld a lower court’s order vacating the EPA’s recommendations concerning criteria for cadmium levels in fresh water. The panel found the agency violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with either the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service before it issued new recommendations in 2016.

The amicus brief, filed on June 8, 2026, argues that the panel’s decision misconstrues applicable federal regulations and conflicts with several Ninth Circuit decisions, as well as an Eleventh Circuit decision, establishing there was an intervening cause or regulatory approval that disconnected the challenged federal action from the alleged harm.