Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Kernen Construction Co. et al

Filing 95

ORDER OF REFERENCE TO CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL REQUESTING SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSITION 65 CLAIM re 66 MOTION for Summary Judgment and/or Partial Summary Judgment filed by Bedrock Investments LLC, Kernen Construction Co., Kurt Kernen, Scott Farley. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 5/17/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10

CALIFORNIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO
TOXICS,
Plaintiff,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

vs.
12
13

KERNEN CONSTRUCTION CO., ET AL.,

CASE NO. 16-cv-04007-YGR
ORDER OF REFERENCE TO CALIFORNIA
ATTORNEY GENERAL REQUESTING
SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSITION 65 CLAIM
Re: Dkt. No. 66

Defendants.
14
15

TO ALL PARTIES AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA:

16

Plaintiff Californians for Alternatives to Toxics brings this action against defendant

17

companies located in Humboldt County claiming violations of the federal Clean Water Act and

18

California’s Proposition 65. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment with regard

19

only to the Proposition 65 claim. (Dkt. Nos. 66, 73.) On May 16, 2017, the Court held oral

20

arguments on both motions. Given the statewide issues of concern, the Court provides notice of

21

these proceedings and an opportunity for the Attorney General to comment. Neither party objects.

22

Thus:

23

In connection with defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 66), the parties

24

dispute whether defendants’ compliance with a permit issued by the State Water Resources

25

Control Board satisfies the requirements of California Health & Safety Code section 25249.9,

26

which provides an exemption to the prohibition on discharges contained in section 25249.5. The

27

Court finds that input from the Attorney General on such issues would be beneficial with respect

28

to its adjudication of the same.

1

Accordingly, the Court REFERS this matter to the Attorney General for his perspective on

2

the issues set forth in defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Within thirty (30) days of this

3

Order, the Court requests that the Attorney General either file (i) a brief setting forth the Attorney

4

General’s position on such issues or (ii) a notice indicating that the Attorney General declines to

5

do so. The Clerk shall cause a copy of this Order to be served upon the Attorney General for the

6

State of California.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Dated: May 17, 2017
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2