Does petitioner CCNS have Article III substantive standing to challenge the CWA permit?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Members of petitioner, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (CCNS), live in and have visited the Rio Grande and its riparian areas near, and downgradient from, the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility (RLWTF). They previously used and enjoyed this area for recreation and farming. The RLWTF isa hazardous waste facility, but it has no Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq. (RCRA), hazardous waste permit. In violation of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seg. (CWA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a CWA permit for the RLWTF, and that permit confers exemption from RCRA regulation. The CCNS members are now deterred from visiting the area, and their experience is diminished, by the risks presented by the unlicensed RLWTF. CCNS members would participate in RCRA permitting proceedings, were they conducted. Questions presented are: 1. Does petitioner CCNS have Article III substantive standing to challenge the CWA permit? 2. Does petitioner CCNS have Article III procedural standing to challenge the CWA permit, where EPA’s action violated CWA and blocked the entire RCRA permitting process? ii STATEMENT OF