Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Environmental Defense Center v. Vintage Production California LLC

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

May 13, 2013


Brian Segee, (State Bar No. 200795) ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER, Santa Barbara, California, Email: Michael Lozeau (State Bar No. 142893) LOZEAU DRURY LLP, Oakland, CA, Email:, Attorneys for Plaintiff.


FERNANDO M. OLGUIN, District Judge.



This Stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiff, the Environmental Defense Center ("EDC"), and Defendant, Vintage Production California LLC ("Vintage") (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties").

On February 23, 2012, EDC served Vintage, Vintage's registered agent, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") Region IX, the Executive Director of the California State Water Resources Control Board ("State Water Board"), and the Executive Officer of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board ("L.A. Regional Board") with a Notice of Intent to file suit ("60-Day Notice") under Sections 505(a)(1) and (f) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ("Clean Water Act"), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(b)(1)(A), alleging violations of the Clean Water Act and the California General Permit No. CAS000001, which is sometimes referred to as the Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Industrial Activities Excluding Construction Activities, as adopted by the State Water Board via Order No. 97-03-DWQ on April 17, 1997 ("Industrial Storm Water Permit"), relating to discharges of stormwater from Vintage's Rincon Grubb oil and gas field, a 4, 236-acre facility (the "Facility") with administrative offices located at 3055 W. Pacific Coast Highway, Ventura, CA 93001.

Subsequently, EDC filed a complaint ("Complaint") against Vintage in the United States District Court, Central District of California, on May 8, 2012 (Civ. Case No. 12-04030 Fmo (Ssx)), captioned Environmental Defense Center v. Vintage Production California LLC, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, civil penalties and attorneys' fees and costs.

Vintage denies any fault, wrongdoing, or liability regarding all claims and alleged violations.

EDC and Vintage agree that settlement of these matters is in the best interest of the Parties and the public, and that entry of this Consent Decree is the most appropriate means of resolving this action.

EDC and Vintage stipulate to the entry of this Consent Decree without trial, adjudication, or admission of any issues of fact or law regarding EDC's claims or allegations set forth in its Complaint and its 60-Day Notice.


THIS MATTER came before the Court upon the foregoing Stipulation of the Parties. Having considered the Stipulation and the promises set forth below, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES as follows:

1. Jurisdiction: This Court has jurisdiction over the Parties and subject matter of this action.

2. Authority to Execute: Each signatory for the Parties certifies for that Party that he or she is authorized to enter into the agreements set forth below.

3. Binding Effect: This Consent Decree applies to and binds the Parties and their successors and assigns.

4. Application: This Consent Decree applies to the operation, oversight, or both by Vintage of its Facility.

5. Settlement and Dismissal: This Consent Decree is a full and complete settlement of any and all claims that have been or could have been asserted based on the facts alleged in the Complaint, and all other claims known and unknown existing as of the date of entry of this Consent Decree, that could be asserted under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, for violations occurring on or before the date of termination of this Consent Decree. EDC releases these claims and they are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Enforcement of this Decree is EDC's exclusive remedy for any violation of the terms contained herein. It is understood and agreed by the Parties that the released claims include all claims of every nature and kind whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, and all rights under section 1542 of the California Civil Code are hereby expressly waived. Section 1542 provides as follows:

A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the Release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.

EDC acknowledges that it may hereafter discover facts different from, or in addition to, those which they now know or believe to be true with respect to the released claims, and the Parties agree that this Decree including, without limitation, the releases contained herein, shall be and remain effective in all ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.