Last Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) requires a permit to discharge pollutants that reach “navigable waters” through groundwater, but only if the discharge is the “functional equivalent of a direct discharge” to the navigable water.1 In reaching this decision, the Court took the middle ground. It rejected both the … Continue Reading
In a split decision in which Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, the United States Supreme Court held yesterday in Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) does not bar a plaintiff’s ability to bring state law claims in state court for property damage, such … Continue Reading
On February 14, 2020, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) issued a public notice regarding the release of Draft Supplemental Guidance: Screening and Evaluating Vapor Intrusion (Draft Guidance) that supplements existing vapor intrusion guidance issued in 2011. The Draft Guidance is now available for public … Continue Reading
After years of investigation, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (“Regional Board”) issued a cleanup and abatement order (“CAO”) to San Diego Gas & Electric Company (“SDG&E”) after finding that SDG&E caused or permitted waste to be discharged into the San Diego Bay, and thereby created, or threatened to create, pollution and nuisance … Continue Reading
Stoel Rives Summer Associate Carly Moran co-authored this post. Ground Zero: The Silicon Valley In an attempt to cleanup airborne toxins contaminating a large area of Mountain View, California’s North Bayshore neighborhood, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has presented plans to update their existing cleanup strategy. Specifically, the EPA plans to revamp their cleanup strategy … Continue Reading
On March 8, 2018, California regulators reached a settlement agreement with Home Depot wherein the retail giant agreed to pay $27.84 million for various hazardous waste violations. The State hit Home Depot with penalties for alleged violations identified during inspections occurring between 2013 and 2015, due to improper disposal of certain types of waste, including … Continue Reading
On February 22, 2018, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced that the Department of Justice is opening an environmental justice office within the Environment Section: the Bureau of Environmental Justice (“Bureau”). “The Bureau’s mission will be to protect people and communities that endure a disproportionate share of environmental pollution and public health hazards.” Using existing … Continue Reading
Following closely on the heels of Dollar General’s hazardous waste settlement (about which we reported in our April, 19, 2017 blog post), another discount retailer has been held to account in a big way for its failure to properly manage its waste streams. On April 21, 2017, a San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge ordered … Continue Reading
Here’s another major reminder to retailers to know their waste streams and to make sure they are being managed and handled properly. On Monday, Kern County Superior Court Judge Sidney P. Chapin ordered Dollar General (Dolgen California) and its subsidiary corporations to pay $1.125 million as part of a settlement of a civil/environmental prosecution. The … Continue Reading
In North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Westlands Water District, No. FO67383 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th Dist. July 3, 2014), the Fifth Appellate District upheld the Westland Water District and its related distribution districts’ (Water Districts) conclusion that their approval of the 2012 interim renewal contracts with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) for Central Valley … Continue Reading
In Parker Shattuck Neighbors, et al. v. Berkeley City Council, et. al. (First Appellate District, December 30, 2013) (“Shattuck Neighbors”), the court upheld the City of Berkeley’s approval of a mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) for a residential infill project. The court found no Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) was necessary because the expert opinion upon which … Continue Reading
