The Energy Net |
Pacific
Gas and Electric to Pay $14 Million to Settle Clean Water Act Violations
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ENR TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1997 (202) 514-2008 TDD (202) 514-1888 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC TO PAY $14 MILLION TO SETTLE CLEAN WATER ACT VIOLATIONS WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A team of California and federal environmental law enforcement officials today announced the settlement of one of the largest environmental cases in California history. Under the terms of an agreement filed today, Pacific Gas and Electric will pay more than $14 million to settle allegations it violated state and federal clean water laws at its Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant by submitting incomplete and misleading data on the amount of sea life drawn into its water cooling system. The Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is located on California's central coast near San Luis Obisbo. "State and federal environmental officials must be able to rely on the accuracy of the information submitted under our environmental laws so they can protect public health and the environment", said Lois Schiffer, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division. "The message here is clear: if you mislead agencies responsible for protecting our environment, you will pay a heavy price." "Ultimately, this case demonstrates the importance of strong, innovative, and flexible state/federal enforcement program. This settlement guarantees that resources will be spent on protecting and improving the environment, rather than on protracted litigation", said Steven A. Herman, EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. The agreement lodged today in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, settles allegations that the company omitted sampling data on the amount of sea life killed by the 2.5 billion gallon per day cooling water intake system at PG&E's Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. The state and federal complaints, filed along with the settlement agreement, allege that in a series of reports, PG&E omitted data and information which would have allowed the state's Central Coast Regional Water Quality Board to know how much damage the plant's operations are causing to water quality and sea life. The complaints specifically allege that PG&E provided misleading information to environmental regulators that measuring the amount of small fish and other organisms at the outflow of the cooling system was an accurate way to measure the amount of sea life drawn into the system at the intake port. To support this conclusion, evidence indicates PG&E omitted more than half of the actual test results which showed up to a 90 percent reduction in sea life as it passes through the cooling system. Such measurements and reports are required by permits issued under the state and federal Clean Water Act to ensure that companies like PG&E use the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts of their operations. Court documents detail how for several years, PG&E continued to submit misleading and inaccurate follow-up reports to state environmental regulators and how important data was removed from early drafts of reports. Allegedly, in late 1991, individuals from PG&E and its consultants discovered that the data showing heavy losses of sea life had never been reported to state or federal agencies. These omissions were reported to a PG&E vice president in March of 1992, but it was not until July of 1994 that PG&E finally turned over the data to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board--some of it dating back to June of 1985. More than $6 million of the settlement payment will be used to fund two important environmental enhancement projects: $3.7 million for estuary protection and enhancement measures in the Morro Bay area and $2.5 million for the state's Mussel Watch Program which currently monitors water quality by studying changes in mussel populations throughout the state. California and the United States support the use of creative settlements as a means to gain environmental improvement from violators. ### 97-220
|
Additional
Resources |
|