Hudson River Fishermen's Association v. City of New York

No. 91-7241 (2d Cir. June 20, 1991)

The court holds that the district court properly found that New York City violated § 301 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) by discharging chlorine and alum floc without a permit into a branch reservoir of one of the City's main water supply systems. The court concludes that the City's injection of chlorine and alum into water that flows into the West Branch reservoir constitutes the addition of pollutants to a navigable waterway and requires a permit.

[The district court's decision is published at 21 ELR 20467.]

Counsel for Plaintiff
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Natural Resources Defense Council
40 W. 20th St., New York NY 10011
(212) 727-2700

Counsel for Defendants
Robin Levine, Ross Friedman
New York City Law Department
100 Church St., New York NY 10007
(212) 374-3174

[21 ELR 21227]

Meskill, Kearse & McLaughlin,JJ.:

This is an appeal from a judgment entered on January 29, 1991 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Brieant, C.J. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the appellees and declared that the appellants' challenged conduct constituted a violation of the Clean Air Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from said district court and was argued by counsel.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

We agree with the district court that the City of New York's injection of chlorine and alum into the water that is pumped from the Hudson River to the West Branch reservoir constitutes the addition of pollutants to a navigable waterway and that a SPDES permit is therefore required. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court substantially for the reasons stated by Chief Judge Brieant in his comprehensive Memorandum and Decision. See Hudson River Fishermen's Ass'n v. City of New York, 751 F. Supp. 1088 [21 ELR 20467] (S.D.N.Y. 1990).