ELR Citation: ELR 21461
No(s). C 89 2893-FMS (N.D. Cal. Feb 7, 1990)

The court holds that a potentially responsible party (PRP) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act lacks standing to allege that a Navy and Department of the Interior plan to clean up hazardous waste at a naval station violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The PRP claims that the plan to drain a marsh would kill the endangered salt-marsh harvest mice on the property. The court initially notes that it need not decide whether prudential standing is required under the ESA, since plaintiff has failed to meet the constitutional requirements. The court holds that the PRP fails to meet the constitutional requirements for standing because its alleged injury, implementation of a more costly cleanup plan that harms the mouse, is not harm suffered as a result of the defendant's allegedly illegal conduct. The court also holds that the harm to the PRP is not proximately caused by defendant's alleged ESA violation. The court finally holds that the order directing ESA compliance sought by the PRP would not necessarily redress the PRP's alleged injury.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Barry P. Goode, Jane Elizabeth Lovell, Carole S. Ungvarsky
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen
Three Embarcadero Ctr., San Francisco CA 94111
(415) 393-2000

Counsel for Defendant
Richard B. Stewart, Ass't Attorney General
Larry J. Bradfish, Scott A. Schachter, William W. Westerfield
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000