Carr v. Alta Verde
• Facts
Plaintiffs Nick Carr and William H. George sought civil penalties and injunctive relief for violations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Acts, commonly known as Clean Water Act against Alta Verde Industries. Alta Verde is a cattle feedlot with 20,000 to 30,000 head of cattle and 230.9 acres of land. Waste from the feedlot drains into a wastewater disposal system of six holding ponds. Then the water is used to irrigate and fertilize three fields. A series of heavy rain exceeded the capacity of the holding ponds. Wastewater discharged into tributary of Rosita Creek. Under the National Pollutant Discharge System (NPDES), it is unlawful for any person to discharge pollutant without obtaining a permit and complying
…show more content…
The plaintiffs sought civil penalties in the amount of $600,000 and injunctions order Alta Verde to cease all discharges except in compliance with Clean Water Act. Also need to provide certain reports for one year and provide notice within 24 hours of any discharge. The court said that there was no standing. The plaintiffs argued 1) that the district court erred in holding Alta Verde was exempt from the NPDES permit requirement and 2) that the district court erred in holding that Carr and George did not have a standing to sue. Alta Verde argues that it doesn’t meet the definition of point …show more content…
1) NEPA and regulation issues by the Council on Environmental Quality require the Forest Service to prepare an EIS that analyzes the combined effects of the proposed road and the timber sales that the road would make. 2) The decision to build the road is inconsistent with the National Forest Management Act because the cost of road will exceed the value of timber it will access. 3) The road is likely to affect the Rocky Mountain Gray Wolf that are endangered species and the Forest Services failed to follow the procedure by the Endangered Species Act. The Forest Services argues that the environmental effects of the road and timbers sales will be analyzed and considered in the EA’s and/or EIS’s that it will prepare on the individual timber sales. They also argue that the sales are too uncertain and too far in the future for their impacts to be analyzed along with the