LUCAS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; CITY OF TOLEDO, OHIO; ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER, LAKE ERIE WATERKEEPER; WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE, INC.; FOOD & WATER WATCH, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; LEE M. ZELDIN, in his official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency; ANNE VOGEL, in her official capacity as Region 5 Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MAUMEE COALITION II ASSOCIATION (25-3609), OHIO PORK COUNCIL, et al. (25-3662) - Articles

All Content

LUCAS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; CITY OF TOLEDO, OHIO; ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER, LAKE ERIE WATERKEEPER; WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE, INC.; FOOD & WATER WATCH, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; LEE M. ZELDIN, in his official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency; ANNE VOGEL, in her official capacity as Region 5 Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MAUMEE COALITION II ASSOCIATION (25-3609), OHIO PORK COUNCIL, et al. (25-3662)

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Mar 11, 2026

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Stephen P. Samuels, Stephen N. Haughey, Christina Wieg, FROST BROWN TODD LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant Maumee Coalition in 25-3609.

Attorneys 2: Daniel W. Wolff, David Y. Chung, CROWELL & MORING LLP, Washington, D.C., for Agricultural Association Appellants in 25-3662.

Attorneys 3: Fritz Byers, FRITZ BYERS, Toledo, Ohio, Dale R. Emch, Tammy G. Lavalette, CITY OF TOLEDO, Howard A. Learner, Robert Michaels, Kathleen Garvey, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & POLICY CENTER, Chicago, Illinois, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Attorneys 4: Nathan A. Hunter, HUNTER & HUNTER LLC, Columbus, Ohio, Tarah Heinzen, Emily Miller, FOOD & WATER WATCH, Washington, D.C., Kelly Hunter Foster, WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE, INC., New York, New York, for Intervenor Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Judge(s): MOORE, GIBBONS, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Toledo

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. The Maumee River winds its way through Northwestern Ohio, passing through farmland and, eventually, Toledo, before emptying into Lake Erie. In recent years, high levels of phosphorus in the Maumee and connected waterways have led to harmful algal blooms in Lake Erie during the summer and fall. In 2023, following earlier litigation and in accordance with the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (“Ohio EPA”) proposed a Total Maximum Daily Load (“TMDL”) for phosphorus in the Maumee and connected waterways, which the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“U.S. EPA”) approved. Plaintiffs, believing the approved TMDL insufficient to address their concerns, sued U.S. EPA under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), claiming that the approval was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law. The merits of the Maumee TMDL and Plaintiffs’ APA challenge are not before us today. The Appellants in these cases are an assortment of agricultural industry groups (“Associations”) and the Maumee Coalition II Association (“Coalition”), each of which supports upholding the TMDL and seeks to intervene as defendants alongside U.S. EPA and Ohio EPA.1 The district court denied their motions to intervene, finding that neither had met the criteria for intervention of right, and that the relevant factors weighed against permissive intervention. We affirm the district court’s denial of the Coalition’s motion to intervene. But because the district court erred in denying the Associations’ motion to intervene of right, we reverse in part and remand for further proceedings on the merits.

Attachments: