US · guidance
Justice Manual § 5-12.523
Coordination with State Programs
Most states have environmental enforcement programs which overlap, in whole or in part, with federal programs. United States Attorneys should familiarize themselves with state environmental enforcement laws and state enforcement officials. Frequently, an unauthorized activity constitutes a violation of both federal and state law. United States Attorneys should remain advised of pending state environmental enforcement actions. If it appears that all federal interests in the case will be vindicated in the state court proceeding, action in federal court may be an unnecessary duplication of effort.
On the other hand, if federal interests will not be protected completely in state court, federal proceedings may be warranted. Where legal action in federal court appears warranted, the United States Attorney should continue to consult and, as appropriate, coordinate with relevant state authorities. Many federal environmental statutes employ cooperative federalism, under which states and tribes share responsibilities with the United States as co-regulators. Some of the statutes identified in JM 5-12.100, e.g., 33 U.S.C. § 1319(b) and 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b), specifically require that notice of any federal civil action be given immediately to appropriate state officials. At least one statute, 33 U.S.C. § 1319(e), requires that a state be made a party to any enforcement action against one of its municipalities.
History
[updated April 2018]
Provenance
- Source
- justice.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-20
- Edition
- jm-2026-09-20
- Content hash
427b2ffc5bc0d27aea6edea94d147c64c015210cbf55409dd62c61e0dc5e303e
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.