Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals

Plaintiffs' fouth amended complaint alleged that, in addition to dumping hazardous substances into the Columbia River, Teck also emitted hazardous substances into the air, in violation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9607(a)(3). The Ninth Circuit issued Center for Community Action & Environmental Justice v. BNSF Railway Co., which held that emitting diesel particulate matter into the air and allowing it to be “transported by wind and air currents onto the land and water” did not constitute “disposal” of waste within the meaning of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. The court held that the owner-operator of the smelter can not be held liable for cleanup costs and natural resource damages under CERCLA. The court concluded that, while plaintiffs present an arguably plausible construction of “deposit” and “disposal,” Carson Harbor Vill Ltd. v. Unocal Corp., compels the court to hold otherwise, and while Center for Community Action does not totally foreclose plaintiffs’ interpretation of CERCLA, its textual analysis of 42 U.S.C. 6903(3) is persuasive. Accordingly, the court reversed the district court's orders denying Teck’s motion to strike and/or dismiss and motion for reconsideration, and remanded for the processing of plaintiffs’ remaining claims. View "Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals" on Justia Law