Idaho Conservation League v. Atlanta Gold Corp.
879 F. Supp. 2d 1148
D. Idaho2012Background
- Plaintiffs sued AGC under the Clean Water Act seeking injunctive relief, declaratory relief, and civil penalties for discharges from the 900 Level Adit into Montezuma Creek.
- The Adit sits alongside Montezuma Creek in the Boise National Forest; the discharges contain elevated arsenic and iron.
- A 2009 EPA-issued NPDES Permit governs effluent limits (10 µg/L arsenic, 1000 µg/L iron) and requires monitoring via DMRs.
- AGC historically treated waters through the Pilot Water Treatment Facility (PWTF) but never met permit limits; multiple proposed permanent treatments were pursued or discussed without full implementation.
- The Forest Service and EPA were involved; AGC later proposed a 2012 Supplemental Plan of Operations to close the Adit and address treatment, with an injunction sought to compel timely compliance.
- Judge granted injunctive relief to require compliance by October 31, 2012 and imposed a minimum $2,000,000 civil penalty, while reserving further penalties.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an injunction is appropriate to secure timely compliance with the NPDES Permit. | Plaintiffs distal seek enforcement due to ongoing violations. | AGC argues injunction would be futile given plans and forest service approvals. | Injunction granted to ensure timely compliance. |
| What civil penalties are appropriate under § 1319(d) for ongoing permit violations. | Plaintiffs seek substantial penalties for daily violations. | AGC argues a lower penalty is warranted. | Impose a $2,000,000 minimum penalty, with potential additional penalties to be determined later. |
| Whether to strike portions of a declarant’s affidavit as improper expert testimony. | Hayes’s statements are admissible summaries of standards. | Some opinions are outside qualifications for causation/science. | Most of the affidavit admitted as expert testimony; some causation assertions stricken. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305 (U.S. 1982) (authorizes injunctive relief to secure compliance with the Act)
- Sierra Club v. Bosworth, 510 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2007) (environmental injury often irreparably harms without monetary relief)
- United States v. Smithfield Foods, Inc., 191 F.3d 516 (4th Cir. 1999) (bottom-up vs top-down penalty approach; applies to civil penalties under CWA)