This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Environmental Law
Clean Water Act

Orange County Coastkeeper v. Alloy Die Casting Co.

Published: May 5, 2023 | Result Date: Jan. 18, 2023 | Filing Date: May 27, 2022 |

Case number: 8:22-cv-01072-FWS-JDE Settlement –  $180,000

Judge

Fred W. Slaughter

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Douglas J. Chermak
(Lozeau Drury LLP)

Lauren Chase
(Orange County Coastkeeper)


Defendant

Jad T. Davis
(Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP)

Thomas V. Wynsma
(Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP)


Facts

Orange County Coastkeeper is a non-profit public benefit corporation, dedicated to preserving, protecting, and restoring the environment around California's waters. On May 27, 2022, Coastkeeper filed suit against Alloy Die Casting Co., and others pertaining to certain discharges from its Buena Park location where Alloy operates an aluminum die-casting manufacturing facility.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF’S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant’s operations at that facility resulted in the discharge of pollutants in violation of the Clean Water Act. Those discharges, regulated by permit, required defendant to develop and implement certain storm water pollution prevention and monitoring plans. The permit also required defendant to control the pollutants it discharged using, where it could, best available technologies to prevent or reduce the pollutants. These best management practices were necessary and required through the permit in order to safeguard compliance with the Act.

DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all material contentions and allegations.

Result

The parties agreed to a consent decree that defendant would not only maintain the best management practices it currently had, but also that defendant would develop and implement further best management practices to prevent and/or reduce storm water contamination in its facilities that would align it with compliance with their permit. Actions specified in the decree to warrant compliance, for example, included the sweeping of all paved areas weekly and withing 24 hours prior to forecasted rain of a certain amount with the newly-purchased PowerBoss Atlas Rider Sweeper with Four Stage Dust filtration, and the treatment systems shall be designed to treat, at a minimum, the maximum flow rate of runoff produced by the 85th percentile hourly rainfall intensity, multiplied by a factor of two. Moreover, employees were required to be trained as to the proper methods regarding, and detection and prevention of discharges so that defendant would be in line with best management practices. An action plan was to be submitted along with $5,000. To help defray costs associated with monitoring for compliance, $35,000 was to be paid by defendant, and for remediation, payment of $30,000 to the Pacific Marine Mammal Center to fund environmental activities pertaining to Southern California waters. A total of $100,000 in attorney's fees and costs were also reimbursed.


#140671

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390