ELR Citation: ELR 20990
No(s). 84-1785-MA (D. Mass. Oct 26, 1984)

In a Federal Water Pollution Control Act citizen suit, the court holds that plaintiffs gave adequate notice and have standing, and that the suit may address past violations. The court first holds that the notice to defendants was adequate even though it was served on the company's president and plant supervisor and not on the company's registered agent. The court next holds that plaintiffs' allegations that some of their members live near and are affected by the polluted river are sufficiently specific to give them standing. Turning to merits of the claims, the court notes that the complaint alleges permit violations at both of the company's outfalls. Even though one of the outfalls is now covered by a general permit, the latest discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) show it still to be in violation. Also, the court holds that plaintiffs may seek relief for past violations at the other outfall. The statute, its legislative history, and the case law are in accord with this holding. The court grants summary judgment to plaintiffs on the company's liability for violations recorded in the company's DMRs and uncontested by the company, and orders the company to give plaintiffs copies of all DMRs filed in the next year.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
James Thornton
Natural Resources Defense Council
122 E. 42nd St., New York NY 10017
(212) 949-0049

Peter Koff
Koff & Lawson
33 Mt. Vernon St., Boston MA 02108
(617) 742-4646

Counsel for Defendants
Neil Minahan
J.D. Raytheon Co.
141 Spring St., Lexington MA 02173
(617) 862-6600

Donald Angelhart
Gadsby & Hannah
One Post Office Square, Boston MA 02109
(617) 357-8700