|
818 F.Supp, 292 Page 5
<br /> 36 ERC 1612,23 Envtl.L.Rep. 21,255
<br /> (Cite as:818 F.Supp.292)
<br /> Norvald L.ULVESTAD,As Trustee for the When decision turns on applicable state law and state's
<br /> Norvald L.Ulvestad Trust,Plaintiff, highest court has not adjudicated issue, district court
<br /> V. must make reasonable determination, based upon
<br /> CHEVRON U.S.A.,INC.,a corporation; and recognized sources such as statutes and published
<br /> DOES 2 through 100 inclusive, opinions, as to result court would reach if faced with
<br /> Defendants. the issue.
<br /> No.SACV 91-296-GLT. 131 HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
<br /> 25.5(3.1)
<br /> United States District Court, 199k25.5(3.1)
<br /> C.D. California. California's Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous
<br /> Substance Account Act specifically requires fractions
<br /> April 6, 1993. of petroleum, not components of fractions to be listed
<br /> as hazardous substances in order to be subject to Act;
<br /> Property owner sued former lessor of property, an oil thus,fact that materials that leaked from gasoline tanks
<br /> company, to recover costs of cleaning up gasoline were alleged to be refined petroleum along with
<br /> which had leaked from gas tanks and had contaminated benzene, toluene, and xylene did not preclude
<br /> soil and ground water. Oil company moved to dismiss application of the petroleum exclusion in the Act.
<br /> cause of action for response costs and declaratory relief West's Ann.Cal.Health & Safety Code §§ 25316,
<br /> under California's Carpenter- Presley-Tanner 25317.
<br /> Hazardous Substance Account Act on ground that
<br /> refined petroleum was excluded from reach of Act. [41 HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
<br /> The District Court, Taylor, J., held that petroleum 25.5(3.1)
<br /> exclusion provision of California's Hazardous 199k25.5(3.1)
<br /> Substance Account Act excluded regulation of refined Purpose of underground tank program was to respond
<br /> petroleum,including gasoline. to shortcomings of California's Hazardous Substance
<br /> Account Act and its inapplicability to refined petroleum
<br /> Motion granted. spills. West's Ann.Cal.Health & Safety Code §§
<br /> 25299, 25299.10, 25310, 25385.6; Solid Waste
<br /> [11 HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTS Disposal Act, §§ 9001 et seq., 9003(h), as amended,
<br /> 25.5(3.1) 42 U.S.C.A. §§6991 et seq.,699lb(h).
<br /> 199k25.5(3.1) *293 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Joel S. Moskowitz,
<br /> Refined petroleum products such as gasoline are Jeffrey D. Dintzer, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff
<br /> excluded from reach of California's Carpenter-Presley- Norvald L. Ulvestad as Trustee for Norvald L.
<br /> Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act; Act Ulvestad Trust.
<br /> excludes from definition of hazardous substances
<br /> petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof Linda Sutton, Michael A. Taitelman, Alschuler,
<br /> which is not otherwise specifically listed or designated Grossman & Pines, Los Angeles, CA, for defendant
<br /> as hazardous substance. West's Ann.Cal.Health & Chevron U.S.A.Inc.
<br /> Safety Code§§25300-25395,25317,25363(e).
<br /> James R. Cutright, Acting Chief Counsel, Joan A.
<br /> [21 FEDERAL COURTS 1:9=390 Markoff, Staff Atty., California Environmental
<br /> 17013090 Protection Agency Dept. of Toxic Substances Control,
<br /> When decision turns on applicable state law and state's Sacramento, CA, for State of Cal., Dept. of Toxic
<br /> highest court has not adjudicated issue, district court Substances Control,for amicus curiae.
<br /> must make reasonable determination, based upon
<br /> recognized sources such as statutes and published ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
<br /> opinions, as to result court would reach if faced with THIRD AND FOURTH CAUSES OF ACTION
<br /> the issue.
<br /> TAYLOR,District Judge.
<br /> 121 FEDERAL COURTS °0391
<br /> 17013091 This case raises the issue,on apparent first impression,
<br /> Copr. ©West 1998 No Claim to Orig.U.S. Govt.Works
<br />
|