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
Water Contamination
Storm Water Discharge

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Waste Management of California Inc.

Published: Nov. 14, 2009 | Result Date: Jul. 20, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 08CV02179(FCD) Settlement –  $74,000

Court

USDC Eastern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Michael R. Lozeau
(Lozeau Drury LLP)

Michael P. Lynes

Andrew L. Packard
(Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard)

Douglas L. Chermak


Defendant

John Lynn Smith

Joonsik Maing

Julia C. Butler


Facts

A waste disposal, material recovery facility, transfer station, and recycling center facility in Lodi was operated by defendant Waste Management of California Inc. The defendant engaged in the transfer of solid waste for disposal as well as a recycling operation. The facility's drainage system collected storm water and discharged the water into the city of Lodi's storm drain system.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff claimed that the heavy equipment, vehicles and machinery at the facility leaked oil, diesel fuel, anti-freeze, grease, and hydraulic fluids into the storm water and into the drains. Plaintiff claimed that defendant should have prevented these contaminants from polluting the waters. Plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the Clean Water Act by failing to prepare a storm water pollution prevention plan, invest in adequate treatment technologies, failing to implement a monitoring and reporting program, and falsely certifying its compliance with standards in annual reports.

Result

The defendant agreed to pay a total of $74,000: $32,500 in mitigation to the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment, $32,500 to plaintiff for reimbursement of investigation and court fees, and $9,000 to plaintiff for costs incurred in overseeing the implementation of the consent decree. Defendant also agreed to implement new management practices and monitor its discharges.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Sept. 16, 2008.


#87873

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

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