1

The Clean Air Act Case of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837

Reyte On Publishing

http://WritersBlock-Aid.com
 2

Background

As far back as 1989, it has been reported that dozens of accidents have occurred in Contra Costa

California. However the problems started way before this. These industrial spills and accidents

identified Contra Costa as a hazardous place for residents to live. It was declared a highly toxic

location with over 35 actual incidents. This location in Richmond, CA was cited as being number

eleven of the most toxic places across the U.S. The number one company that had abused the

environment by dumping chemicals was Chevron Oil Company. Chevron had industrial and

chemical plants located in parts of California. The amount of chemicals and corrosive materials

allowed to sit on the land is appalling. There were over 10 million pounds of toxic waste sitting

on the land near populated areas. These were released into the local resident’s water and

environment endangering the lives of the people and the wildlife. The number of reported

incidents due to fires, leaks, explosions and the like grew to unrealistic proportions. The toxic

gases released contaminated the air to the point that it was harmful to breathe. Many of the

people in the area had to be treated for major illnesses and ailments. There were such lethal

contaminants being discharged that deaths could easily have been the result if no action was

taken immediately (Sherman, 2009).

Problem

Chevron had realized that the chemicals were improperly stored and causing a hazardous

situation in 1993. However they claimed the storage that was currently being put in place was

adequate and complied with the Clean Air Act (Supreme Court Case: Justia & Oyez, 2009). This

case of environmental abuse affected the primarily African American community. The company

was negligent and continued to increase the risk to the people living in the area that were of low
 3
income. Many of the residents were experiencing serious illnesses that affected. The people

banded together and filed a class action suit in order to save their communities and their lives.

Chevron prepared to defend them by claiming they were complying with the Clean Air Act by

storing the chemicals away from San Francisco, which had ordinances against such

contaminants.

Participants:

Toxic Coalition of West County

There were nearly 1,000 people that decided to stand against the environmental abuse of

Chevron. They make up the WCTC or Toxic Coalition of West County. The Director Henry,

Clark, has organized this group and led them in the fight since 1986. This is a local member

organization that is a part of the larger nationwide organization recognized as the National Toxic

Campaign.

Demographics

Richmond, Ca. is a small community of people of primarily minorities near San Francisco. 44%

of the residents of area live in poverty and Richmond has one of the lowest incomes in the state

of California. It is believed that Chevron picked this location for its plant fully aware of the

constituent’s economic situation. Across the bridge from Richmond is the community of Marin

County which is a community of upper middle to wealthy residents (Counterpunch, 1998).

 4
Community of a Better Environment

This organization supports Community organizations by providing environmental data of a

technical nature to help them build a case. This group is in the California Bay area near San

Francisco. They have provided WCTC with the scientific data about Chevron and several

industrial facilities in the area (Sherman, 2009).

Environment Law and Justice

There were several organizations that provided legal services to the Richmond community. They

were the Golden Gate University School of Law, the Rural Legal Assistant Organization of

California, and the Community Environmental Clinic of Law. Each of these groups were

instrumental in giving legal advice, direction, and pro bono services to help the Richmond

residents with their case against Chevron.

Chevron Oil

Considered among the most well known and largest oil refineries worldwide Chevron has its

base plant located in Richmond, Ca. The plants operate near the low-income community of

Richmond, Ca., where the residents are primarily African American and other minority groups.

The corporation has been unrelenting in its operations and storing of toxic materials near this

community for many years (Sherman, 2009). The company earns billions each year from its
 5
operations, yet has put very little effort into cleaning up its environmental agenda or

investigating the effect of its plants on the local community. Though they engage in advertising

to promote environmental concerns, there have been no serious attempts to act on behalf of the

residents of Richmond. Instead it continues to spend millions in advertising that has little effect

on improving the lives of residents.

Strategies

The WCTC used several different approaches to win the case against Chevron. Following are the

tactics used by the WCTC.

1. Resolve the difference between the two parties

At its first meeting the WCTC met with the Chevron plant manager, Mike Hannan, whose

first strategy was to sit down at the table with Chevron. The residents wanted to come to an

agreement with Chevron on how to settle the problems that the plant was causing to the

environmental pollution and health problems. The hope was to come to some type of

resolution allowing both parties to share their thoughts and determine the best course of

action to settle the case.

The WCTC requested that Chevron consider the process resulting in zero emissions based on the

information they gathered from the Community for a Better Environment organization. The

members of WCTC were in agreement with Chevron in their policy of burning clean fuels in

cooperation with health and safety standards. The area of issue was around the faulty storage

practices that had resulted in several environmental abuses (Sherman, 2009). The problems with

storage were due to ineffective storage containers that leaked as well as defective pumps and old

parts. Several explosions had transpired that put the residents in harms way. Gas emissions were
 6
being released into the air causing harmful conditions resulting in air pollutants that had

hospitalized many members of the community.

The WCTC sought relief for the negligence on the part of Chevron, with which the plant

manager and the company refused to comply.

2. The next strategy of the WCTC was to contact the public officials

When Chevron would not respond to the issues of the WCTC. They decided to contact the

Planning Commission of the state of California. They presented the scientific information that

had been gathered to support their claims against Chevron. It is possible that the Commission

would cancel the land permit for environmental health and safety violations. The WCTC sited

the violation and presented it to the Planning Commission along with the scientific evidence.

Based on the Planning Commission’s code, a plant has to pay 10% of the financing to rectify a

violation of the Clean Fuels code. This amount has to be paid to the WCTC. For The Richmond

residents, the payment would amount to more than $50 million (Sherman, 2009).

This strategy was effective and the Planning Commission sided with the WCTC. The $50 million

was awarded to the community development and the existing permit was cancelled until

payment. Chevron had to comply; they could not afford to shut down their facilities and were

forced to pay the fines.

3. The strategy that ensured WCTC’s success was to align themselves with evidence and

organizations that were able to assist them in proving their case

It was vital to have the scientific data and the legal representation for the community of

Richmond. This environmental battle would not have been as successful without the alliances

with the Community of a Better Environment and the University Environmental Law and Justice
 7
legal team. The barriers of burden of proof and legal representation were removed thereby

allowing the WCTC to present a solid case against Chevron a powerful Oil Company and win.
 8
References

Counterpunch. (1998). Disasters as Normalcy: Chevron’s Big Bang. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from

http://www.counterpunch.org/chevron.html

Oyez & Justia. (2009). U.S. Supreme Court Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Vs. NRDC. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from

http://supreme.justia.com/us/467/837/case.html

Sherman, S. (2009). Environmental Justice Case: West County Toxic Coalition and the Chevron Refinery. Retrieved

September 28, 2009 from http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/sherman.html