Waste Management Holdings v. Gilmore

• Decision Date: 02 February 2000
• Docket Number: No. Civ.A. 3:99CV425.,Civ.A. 3:99CV425.
• Citation: 87 F.Supp.2d 536
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
• Parties: WASTE MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. James S. GILMORE, acting in his official capacity as the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, et al., Defendants.

Page 536

87 F.Supp.2d 536

WASTE MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. James S. GILMORE, acting in his official capacity as the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, et al., Defendants.

No. Civ.A. 3:99CV425.

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division.

February 2, 2000.

Robert Lawrence Bronston, Mayer, Brown & Platt, Washington, DC, Kenneth S. Geller, Evan M. Tager, Mayer, Brown & Platt, Washington, DC, for Waste Management Holdings, Inc., plaintiff.

Shawn Alan Copeland, Hunton & Williams, Richmond, VA, John Early Holloway, Hunton & Williams, Norfolk, VA, for Hale Intermodal Marine Company, plaintiff.

Anthony F. Troy, Mays & Valentine, Richmond, VA, James S. Crockett, Jr., Mays & Valentine, Richmond, VA, for Weanack Land Limited Partners, plaintiff.

B. Randolph Boyd, Randolph, Boyd, Cherry & Vaughn, Richmond, VA, for Charles City County, plaintiff.

Shawn Alan Copeland, Hunton & Williams, Richmond, VA, David Alan Rudlin, Hunton & Williams, Richmond, VA, Timothy George Hayes, Hunton & Williams, Richmond, VA, Meade Addison Spotts, Spotts, Smith, Fain, Buis, PC., Richmond, VA, Jason S. Thomas, Hunton & Williams, Raleigh, NC, for Brunswick Waste Management Facility, L.L.C., consolidated plaintiff.

Deborah Love Feild, Office Of The Attorney General, Richmond, VA, Ellen Firsching Brown, Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, Stewart Todd Leeth, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, William Eugene Thro, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA, for James S. Gilmore, III, in his official capacity as Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, John Paul Woodley, Jr., in his official capacity as Secretary of Natural Resources, Dennis Treacy, Jr., in his official capacity as Director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, defendants.

Glen Besa, Richmond, VA, for Glen Besa, movant pro se.

David Sanburg Bailey, Beaverdam, VA, for Campaign Virginia, movant.

Clayton Lewis Walton, Williams, Mullen, Clark & Dobbins, Richmond, VA, Barbara Joan Gaden, Barbara J. Gaden, LLC, Richmond, VA, Stewart Todd Leeth, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, for John H. Hager, Honorable, Emily Couric, Senator, Margaret Whipple, Senator, Bruce Jamerson, Mark A. Miner, Lila Young, movants.

Meade Addison Spotts, Spotts, Smith, Fain, Buis, PC, Richmond, VA, Hugh McCoy Fain, III, Spotts, Smith, Fain & Buis, P.C., Richmond, VA, for The National Solid Wastes Management Association, amicus.

Meade Addison Spotts, Hugh McCoy Fain, III, Spotts, Smith, Fain & Buis, P.C., Richmond, VA, John H. Turner, BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc., Houston, TX, for BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc., amicus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SPENCER, District Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment brought by Defendants JAMES S. GILMORE, ET AL (herein collectively "Virginia") and a Motion for Summary Judgment brought by Plaintiffs WASTE MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS, ET AL (herein collectively "Plaintiffs"). For the reasons stated below.

1. Virginia's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED.

2. Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

I. Background

This case arises from the enactment of several state statutes that purport to curtail the importation of municipal solid waste (herein "MSW") into Virginia. These statutes have been challenged by five plaintiffs (herein collectively "Plaintiffs"): (1) Waste Management Holdings, Inc. (herein "Waste Management"), whose affiliates operate several large landfills in Virginia that accept substantial quantities of out-of-state MSW; (2) Weanack Land Limited Partners (herein "Weanack"), which owns a transfer facility on the James River where containerized shipments of MSW are offloaded from barges and onto tractor trailers; (3) Hale Intermodal Marine Company (herein "Hale"), a barging company that transports, among other things, containerized MSW; (4) Charles City County, which owns property that it leases to Waste Management for use as a landfill; and (5) Brunswick Waste Management Facility, L.L.C. (herein "Brunswick"), which owns and operates a large landfill in Brunswick County, Virginia. The defendants are James S. Gilmore, III, in his official capacity as Governor of the Commonwealth; John Woodley, in his official capacity as Secretary of Natural Resources; and Dennis Treacy, in his official capacity as Director of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (herein collectively "Virginia.").

Plaintiffs contend that the disputed statutes violate the Commerce, Contracts, Supremacy, and Equal Protection Clauses of the United States Constitution, although only the Commerce and Supremacy Clauses are asserted in these particular motions. Plaintiffs maintain that these statutes were adopted by Virginia in response to reports that major importers and handlers MSW planned to increase the daily amount of MSW flowing into Virginia landfills. Plaintiffs therefore characterize these statutes as blatant, unconstitutional attempts to hinder interstate commerce by placing importers and handlers of out-of-state MSW at an extreme disadvantage in relation to importers and handlers of Virginia-generated MSW. Virginia counters that these statutes were adopted as a legitimate exercise of its police powers, for the protection of public health and to conserve Virginia resources (including landfill space).¹

A. MSW in Virginia

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (herein the "DEQ") reports that as of November 1998, there were 70 active landfills in Virginia that accepted MSW. (Waste Management App. to Reb. Mem. 2 at 23.) Although the parties disagree over how many of those landfills accept MSW from other states, this much is clear: Seven "regional" landfills account for 97% of the out-of-state waste deposited in Virginia. Approximately 61 "local" landfills accept no out-of-state waste at all. The regional landfills, which are privately operated and have substantially greater disposal capacity than their local counterparts, have been sited and constructed over the past decade in order to comply with strict state and federal regulations.² Pursuant to a "host agreement" with the county in which it is located, each regional landfill pays the host county a fee based upon the volume of waste (excluding the host's waste) deposited at that location.³ These agreements also require the regional landfills to perform certain services for their host communities, such as providing free waste disposal and recycling services and/or funding the closing of any local landfills which do not meet state and federal regulations. The construction of these regional landfills has required tens of millions of dollars in private investment, and the landfills face high operation and maintenance costs in addition to the sizable "host fees." To meet their revenue needs and remain economically viable, each regional landfill relies heavily on the disposal of out-of-state MSW. (Wilson Decl. ¶¶ 7-9.) In fact, out-of-state MSW comprises 75% of the MSW accepted at the five regional landfills operated by Waste Management⁴ (DEQ Report at 32) and almost 100% of the waste accepted at Brunswick's regional landfill. (Burrier Aff., Brunswick Exh. 1, ¶ 15.)

Under its host agreements, Waste Management is permitted to dispose of over 2,000 tons of MSW per day at all but one of its regional landfills; prior to the enactment of the disputed statutes. Waste Management expected to exceed that level in 1999. It further expected that three of its five regional landfills would accept substantially more waste in 1999 than they had in 1998. The Charles City County Landfill, for instance, accepted approximately 2,849 tons of MSW per day in 1999, compared to less than 2,000 tons per day in 1998. (Wilson Decl. ¶¶ 11, 13-15.) Likewise. Brunswick accepted approximately 2,400 tons per day in 1998, and accepted more than 2,800 tons per day in 1999. Before the enactment of the disputed statutes, it had expected to reach 5,000 tons per day by the end of the year 2000. (Burrier Aff. ¶¶ 10-11.) By contrast, not one of the sixty-one Virginia landfills that accept only Virginia-generated MSW has ever disposed of more than 2,000 tons per day, and only one or two of those might ever be expected to reach that level in the future. (Wilson Decl. ¶ 13.) Indeed, the DEQ has stated that "[m]ost landfills operated by local governments receive less than 100 tons per day; a few receive closer to 500 tons per day." (Waste Management Reb. Mem. to Mot. for Prelim. Inj.App. 15.)

B. Disposal of MSW Generated by New York City

For several decades, New York City has disposed of its residential MSW at the Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island. In 1997, New York Governor George Pataki and New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani announced that the Fresh Kills Landfill would cease accepting waste in December 2001. The New York City Department of Sanitation (herein "NYDOS") therefore began to negotiate interim disposal contracts in order to phase out its dependency on the Fresh Kills Landfill. (Cekander Decl., Waste Management Exh. 2, ¶¶ 3-4). Waste Management has been awarded two of those contracts, and much of the MSW handled under those two contracts has been deposited at its regional landfills in Virginia. In March 1999, it bid on a third contract, which also contemplates the disposal of New York-generated MSW in Virginia. (Id. ¶¶ 5, 7-8.) More significantly, Waste Management has bid on, and is a primary contender for, a twenty-year contract to dispose of all or part of 12,000 tons of residential waste per day from Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx. NYDOS's Request For Proposal expresses a preference that any waste removed under this contract be transported by barge and/or rail, rather than by truck. Waste Management's response contemplates sending 60% of the New York City residential MSW to Virginia landfills, particularly the Charles City Landfill. It also contemplates that most...