Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Texaco Refining And Marketing, Inc.

906 F.2d 934 (3rd Cir. 1990)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D got a permit allowing it to discharge limited quantities of 19 categories of industrial waste from its Delaware City refinery into the Delaware River. The NRDC (D) notified Texaco in March 1988 that they intended to file a citizen suit against the company for 342 permit violations occurring at the Delaware City refinery between January 1983 and October 1987. D filed a motion for partial summary judgment based on several grounds: the court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction over some of the alleged permit violations occurring prior to the filing of the complaint and which were not either ongoing or likely to recur; the claims were moot under the principles of Gwaltney of Smithfield v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc., 484 U.S. 49, 98 L. Ed. 2d 306, 108 S.Ct. 376 (1987); and that the claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. D filed their own motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability based on the reported parameter exceedances in D's DMRs. D sought declaratory and injunctive relief and requested a hearing to determine the appropriate amount of damages. The district court granted the D's motion for summary judgment based on the submitted DMRs. The court enjoined the company, its officers, agents, servants, employees, and those persons in active concert or participation with Texaco, and who receive actual notice of the court's order, from violating terms of the new permit which were either carried over from the old permit or were made stricter in the new version. D appealed.