It was a hot June day in 1969 when the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland burst into flames. Fueled by decades of industrial abuse, unfettered discharges of oil and gas, combustible chemicals and toxics, the fire severely damaged overhead railroad trestles and cast a pall over surrounding communities. It was not the first time that the river had caught fire, but with images of the flames and smoke dancing upon the water’s surface appearing in national magazines, the event focused the nation’s attention on the fragile state of our precious natural resources in unprecedented ways.
In the early 1970s, Congress responded to the country’s growing environmental crisis by enacting a series of comprehensive environmental laws designed to protect our water, air and land from increasing degradation. In 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity” of our nation’s waterways.
Each of our nation’s environmental statutes allows federal or state environmental agencies to impose fines – and sometimes even jail time – when polluters violate the law. However, the true artistry behind the United States environmental protection laws rests in the citizen suit provisions of these acts. Congress recognized that no matter how much authority was vested in the federal and local governments to enforce these environmental laws, governmental agencies, for many reasons, might not always be willing to go after industrial polluters. Therefore, congress devised a way for ordinary citizens to take environmental protection into their own hands.
Citizen suit provisions enable local citizens to “step into the shoes” of government prosecutors and drag polluters into court to demand an end to harmful activities, clean up and fines. Under the Clean Water Act Section 505, “any citizen may commence a civil action on his own behalf against any person . . . who is alleged to be in violation of any effluent standard or limitation.” This means that our Waterkeepers, or any other person harmed by violations of our nation’s environmental laws, need not wait for the government to act to put an end to pollution.
Our Waterkeepers take advantage of these citizen suit provisions to protect your waterways and your communities. In the coming issues of Waterkeeper Magazine, we are going to be following one such citizen suit from its early stages to its ultimate resolution. We hope to show the twists and turns that citizen prosecutions can take and, at the same time, provide you with some insight into the work that our Waterkeepers do everyday to make the world a little cleaner for you and your loved ones.
Fishermen in the Oconee River were catching more than fish; shredded plastic was tangling their lines. After trying to fish for several days and continuing to snare plastic the sportsmen became concerned and reported the strange catch to the Altamaha Riverkeeper. Riverkeeper, James Holland, investigated the site and on each visit he repeatedly scooped up pieces of shredded plastic that were bubbling up through the water from an underwater pipe identified as belonging to the SP Newsprint Company. He documented a discharge of brown effluent, paper and what appeared to be fecal matter resulting in an offensive sewage odor and film on the surface of the water.
The investigation lasted from May through August, the Altamaha Riverkeeper alleges that SP Newsprint Co. has and continues to violate the terms of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit as well as the Clean Water Act, the Water Quality Control Act, and accompanying regulations
On August 5, the Altamaha Riverkeeper sent the SP Newsprint Co., SP Recycling Corp. and SP Newsprint Sales a letter providing them with sixty days notice of their intent to sue the company for what James Holland considers violations of the federal Clean Water Act. The notice, informing the company it must stop polluting the Oconee River or face legal action, was sent by the Altamaha Riverkeeper's attorneys at the Georgia Center for Law in the Public Interest.
“I have never seen anything like this coming from a discharge pipe,” Holland said. "There are continuous problems in this area that threaten the health of the river and the people who fish in it. The pollution has to stop."
This is the second report in the last few months of an alleged violation of the Clean Water Act in the same proximity of the Oconee River. In May, following up on citizen reports, the Altamaha Riverkeeper investigated and documented a pipe in the same area and alleged that the city of Dublin was discharging unprocessed sewage and floating solid materials into the river.
Citizen suits against polluters under the Clean Water Act typically begin with the filing of a 60-day letter of intent to sue. This means that plaintiffs, like the Altamaha Riverkeeper, must wait at least 60 days after putting the alleged violator on notice before filing a lawsuit in court. Copies of this letter must be sent to both the alleged violator and the state or federal agency that maintains regulatory oversight over the facility. This notice letter serves several purposes. Primarily, it gives the alleged violator a chance to cease the polluting activity. It also allows a state or federal environmental agency to exercise its prosecutorial power and go after the polluter itself.
against polluters under the Clean Water Act typically begin with the filing of a 60-day letter of intent to sue. This means that plaintiffs, like the Altamaha Riverkeeper, must wait at least 60 days after putting the alleged violator on notice before filing a lawsuit in court. Copies of this letter must be sent to both the alleged violator and the state or federal agency that maintains regulatory oversight over the facility. This notice letter serves several purposes. Primarily, it gives the alleged violator a chance to cease the polluting activity. It also allows a state or federal environmental agency to exercise its prosecutorial power and go after the polluter itself.
is a grassroots organization dedicated to the protection, defense and restoration of Georgia’s biggest river–the Altamaha–including its tributaries the Ocmulgee, the Oconee and the Ohoopee. James Holland, a retired waterman, is the Riverkeeper and founder.
Responses to 60-day notices are varied. The intent to sue letter may signal the beginning of negotiations between the Waterkeeper and the alleged polluter. The alleged violator may simply ignore the notice letter and continue to pollute. Or federal or state agencies may step in and commence their own actions against the alleged discharger. When that happens, the Waterkeeper is precluded from filing suit because the government is deemed to be “diligently prosecuting” the offender. We’ll be back in the winter 2005 issue with the next installment of this story.
|