Practice Areas & Industries: Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

 





Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group
 

Practice/Industry Group Overview

Skilled and effective legal counsel is essential to managing the numerous risks associated with the continually changing and expanding environmental law requirements. Since the 1960s, Sheppard Mullin has provided environmental law related advice to a variety of clients in diverse industries. Our attorneys advise on environmental permitting issues, compliance, impact requirements, hazardous waste disposal requirements under federal and state law and liabilities under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and federal and state Superfund legislation.

We represent clients before administrative and judicial tribunals in all areas of environmental law, with a particular emphasis on soil and groundwater contamination, hazardous waste and air quality issues. We have also assisted clients on environmental matters in federal and state courts and before many federal, state and local agencies including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California State Water Resources Control Board, California Coastal Commission, California Energy Commission, California Public Utilities Commission, California Air Resources Board, local air pollution control districts and regional air quality management districts, regional water quality control boards and other local agencies.

Our attorneys are frequently retained by clients who face administrative or judicial enforcement actions in connection with alleged contamination of industrial sites. We confer with the client and the engineering consultants retained to perform the remedial investigation and feasibility study designed to determine what cleanup, if any, is required. Our attorneys also negotiate with the agencies involved in efforts to avoid court action. If a settlement cannot be reached, litigation over the extent of the cleanup or the amount of penalties may follow. We have also defended judicial actions brought by neighboring residents alleging that they have suffered personal and property injury from contamination.

In addition, the firm advises purchasers and sellers of commercial and industrial property on questions relating to their rights and liabilities regarding potential contamination. We have also counseled clients on permitting matters relating to the construction of energy production and industrial facilities, including co-generation plants, hydroelectric, geothermal and waste to energy projects and hazardous waste treatment facilities. 

Hazardous Waste, Water Quality and Wetlands Regulation

Sometimes potentially expensive enforcement action can be avoided through negotiation with the regulatory agency. In the areas of hazardous waste and water quality, we represent clients in negotiations with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and various Regional Water Quality Control Boards concerning remediation projects. We have also defended clients in connection with enforcement actions brought by such agencies. We also represent clients with respect to National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permitting issues and have negotiated and litigated with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency concerning the development of federal wetland areas.

Environmental Compliance and Due Diligence

Sheppard Mullin's Environmental practice routinely advises business and property owners regarding a variety of environmental compliance issues. We also advise buyers, sellers, lenders and borrowers on the nature and extent of environmental risks associated with various business transactions. This representation includes reviewing environmental reports for completeness and quality and working with environmental consultants to develop remediation plans. In addition, we work with clients to conduct audits to ensure that all business activities comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations. By developing a working knowledge of the client's business and industry and adopting a proactive approach to environmental compliance, we can inform clients of the potential impact of newly adopted regulations.

Land Use and Environmental Protection

The environmental impact of virtually every development project must be evaluated at some level before the project can go forward. In conjunction with our Land Use attorneys, the members of the Environmental practice have counseled clients concerning the preparation, use and adequacy of Environmental Impact Statements under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") and Environmental Impact Reports under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). In addition, we have represented clients in litigation challenging or defending the sufficiency of these statements or reports.

Air Quality

Since the mid-1960s, Sheppard Mullin's Environmental attorneys have represented clients in various proceedings before local Air Quality Management District Boards and in appeals from such proceedings. In addition, we represent clients in air quality permit proceedings and new source review matters, as well as counsel clients regarding new air quality regulations.

Insurance Coverage and Bankruptcy

Providing insurance coverage for environmental exposure is a prudent measure for clients in selected industries. Further, the availability of insurance to pay some or all of a settlement or judgment is often critical to the successful resolution of environmental litigation. Working with our Insurance attorneys, our Environmental attorneys routinely advise clients concerning insurance coverage for environmental claims and risks.

Moreover, environmental claims are often made in the context of bankruptcy proceedings, which present novel litigation challenges in apportioning liability for remediation costs. Working with Sheppard Mullin's Bankruptcy attorneys, we have extensive experience in counseling clients concerning the effect of bankruptcy declarations on potential environmental liability.

Military Base Reuse

Our attorneys assist both public and private clients in working with the Department of Defense ("DoD"), the California Environmental Protection Agency ("Cal/EPA") and the Office of Military Facilities within the Department of Toxic Substances Control ("DTSC") on the cleanup of toxic contamination groups unique to military bases such as aviation fuel, metals, unexploded ordinance ("UXO") and certain industrial solvents. Sheppard Mullin also has close relationships with a highly skilled battery of consultants knowledgeable concerning the unique challenges presented by military base remediatons. Because Sheppard Mullin has been involved in military base reuse endeavors since the emergence of this specialty area of legal practice, we continue to be called upon to represent commercial and residential developers, builders, major landowners and lenders on the most ambitious and sophisticated development proposals today. 

Because the military is required to comply with federal and state hazardous waste laws, they are ultimately responsible for the cleanup. The available military land can also present tremendous opportunity for private sector developers and investors seeking to acquire or reuse the land. Whether Sheppard Mullin attorneys are working with developers, lenders, reuse authorities or other public agencies, the importance of familiarity with governmental jurisdictions and facilitating inter-agency coordination cannot be overstated. We focus on overcoming the obstacles at hand and seeking the approvals and remedies required in order to ensure both the effective cleanup of a given parcel and the desired reuse of that land.

Cogeneration

Cogeneration facilities, which produce both electrical energy and thermal (heat) energy for use in industrial processes, present opportunities for many organizations. Our attorneys assist clients to structure cogeneration and other energy related transactions, as well as negotiate and draft agreements that provide for cogeneration facilities and services. The firm also helps clients resolve the range of legal issues that arise in connection with cogeneration, including land acquisition, environmental compliance and permitting, land use entitlements, zoning and regulatory matters before the California Public Utilities Commission, along with a host of other agencies.

Toxic Mold

Sheppard Mullin advises owners, lenders, property management companies, developers, contractors and insurers regarding disclosure requirements and claims avoidance, as well as with representation in mold related litigation. The legal issues surrounding mold claims can involve multiple areas of the law, including environmental, construction, toxic torts, real estate, insurance coverage and insurance bad faith. Mold claims often arise in construction defect cases, real estate fraud actions, personal injury cases and landlord and tenant actions. 

Because mold disputes can be complex, our attorneys who specialize in this area work to identify the scope of an alleged mold problem and advise clients regarding remediation, insurance, disclosure, personnel and liability issues. Additionally, we vigorously defend or prosecute on behalf of clients involved in mold litigation.

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Sheppard Mullin represents clients in administrative and litigation proceedings under a wide variety of environmental regulations. We have advised on Comprehensive Environmental Response, the Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA") and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 ("RCRA"), as well as analogous state statutes and common law. We represent clients before administrative boards and regulatory agencies, as well as in the prosecution or defense of actions to allocate responsibility for cleanup costs.

Our team has extensive experience in underground storage tank regulation and litigation of actions brought pursuant to California Proposition 65, the Federal Clean Water Act and various state environmental laws and tort doctrines, including actions alleging contamination, product defect and failure to warn regarding methyl tertiary butyl ether ("MTBE"). We are also experienced in defending clients in toxic tort actions involving medical damages resulting from alleged contaminant exposure.

In representing clients faced with potential litigation such as individual suits and class actions, as well as other disputes involving risk of large penalty assessments, our attorneys are often involved in multi-jurisdictional criminal investigations. We have experience defending clients charged with criminal violation of environmental laws and, when necessary, work in conjunction with our criminal defense attorneys to resolve the challenges at hand.


 
 
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

CEQA “Common Sense” Exemption Upheld; Environmental Baseline for Project Following Improvements Pursuant to an Emergency Exemption Clarified
Shadi Mahmoudi,Maria Pracher, March 27, 2015
The Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a CEQA exemption related to the City of San Diego’s approval of a project comprising emergency storm drainage repair and site revegetation. The decision addressed various CEQA issues, including the environmental baseline determination, the...

Sacramento Kings Win Again; Second CEQA Challenge Rejected
Shadi Mahmoudi,Maria Pracher, March 27, 2015
The Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District of California has ruled in favor of the City of Sacramento with regard to a series of challenges brought under CEQA to certification of an EIR and approval of a project to build a new arena in downtown Sacramento. The project involves a...

Corps Issues New Compensatory Mitigation Guidelines for California
Alexander L. Merritt, February 26, 2015
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division, has issued its “Final 2015 Regional Compensatory Mitigation and Monitoring Guidelines.”

California Supreme Court to Review Denial of Homeowner’s Private Beach Access
Joshua Weiss, February 17, 2015
In the case of Lynch v. California Coastal Commission (D064120; Cal.App.4th 658; San Diego Superior Court; 37-2011-00058666-CU-WM-NC), the California Supreme Court has granted a petition for review of the decision by the Fourth Appellate District (Division One) upholding a prior decision in which...

City of Los Angeles Outsources Defense of CEQA/Land Use Lawsuits To Private Law Firms - Developers To Foot The Bill
Jack H. Rubens, February 17, 2015
On December 16, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously authorized the City Attorney to establish a Land Use/CEQA Panel, which will consist of five municipal law firms, to defend the City in CEQA and land use lawsuits that challenge the entitlements for private development projects, and to require...

County of San Diego’s Adopted Climate Action Plan Violates CEQA: Fails to Include Enforceable GHG Reduction Measures
Jeffrey W. Forrest,Jennifer L. Gunsch, February 17, 2015
On October 29, 2014, the Fourth District California Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the trial court’s decision in favor of Sierra Club, agreeing that the County of San Diego’s adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) violated CEQA. First, the court held the County’s adopted CAP...

LA Mayor Proposes Mandatory Earthquake Retrofitting for Commercial and Residential Buildings
Tetlo N. Emmen,Alfred Fraijo, February 17, 2015
Capping a year-long partnership between the City of Los Angeles and Dr. Lucy Jones, a well-known seismologist with the United States Geological Survey, Mayor Eric Garcetti released “Resilience by Design” last week, a plan that includes an ambitious set of proposed seismic regulations....

District Court Strikes Down Regulation of Purely Intrastate Species on Private Land
Alexander L. Merritt, February 06, 2015
In a significant Endangered Species Act case, the Utah District Court has ruled that Congress may not regulate take of the threatened Utah prairie dog, a purely intrastate species, on non-federal land. The court found that the challenged regulation went beyond the scope of the Commerce Clause...

Supreme Court Asked to Allow Immediate Judicial Review of Clean Water Act Jurisdictional Determinations
James Rusk, November 14, 2014
A landfill developer has asked the Supreme Court to review a decision of the Fifth Circuit holding that a jurisdictional determination by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is not final agency action subject to judicial review. The Supreme Court previously held, in its 2012 Sackett opinion, that an...

UPDATE: Comment Period for OPR Rethink of CEQA Guidelines on Transportation Impacts Extended Until November 21, 2014
Tetlo N. Emmen,Alfred Fraijo, October 10, 2014
The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has extended the comment period for its draft of changes to the way that transportation impacts are analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The new deadline for submission of comments is November 21, 2014. OPR is...

Homeowners “Bluffed” Out Of Challenge To Coastal Permit To Rebuild Private Access Stairs
Joshua Weiss, September 25, 2014
The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Appellate District (Division One) has held that homeowners who accepted the benefit of a coastal development permit (“CDP”) for seawall reconstruction to protect their bluff-top homes cannot subsequently challenge the terms upon which the CDP was...

Level of Detail Adequate in High Speed Rail Authority’s Program EIR for Central Valley to Bay Area Rail Corridor
Jennifer Gunsch, September 25, 2014
The appellate court upheld the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s Program EIR for the Central Valley to Bay Area portion of the route, concluding that (1) the Authority properly limited its environmental analysis to a program level when it deferred site-specific analysis of the vertical...

Mechanics Lien Subordination: Illinois Further Limits Construction Lenders’ Ability To Ensure Priority Against Mechanics Liens
Michael J. Roth, September 25, 2014
On July 16, 2014, Illinois enacted Public Act 98-764 (Senate Bill 3023) (“SB 3023”), which amends the Illinois Mechanics Lien Act (770 ILCS 60/ et seq.) (the “Act”) to prohibit subordination of mechanics liens on Illinois construction projects, unless such subordination is...

No CEQA Review Required For Initiative Measures, Whether Adopted By City Council Or Voters
Tiffany Duong, August 18, 2014
The Supreme Court of California has held that CEQA review was not required before the Sonora City Council adopted an initiative measure approving a specific plan for expansion of a Wal-Mart store. The court held that: (1) the Elections Code, which requires at most an abbreviated review, provides...

Collateral Estoppel Bars Copy-Cat Environmental Plaintiff in New Case After Judgment
Deborah M. Rosenthal,Joy Siu, August 04, 2014
The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate to invalidate project approvals for the construction of a large commercial retail center in the City of Rialto (the “City”) to be anchored by a Wal-Mart Supercenter. The court held that: (1)...

Only When a Permit is Required: The Supreme Court Caps the EPA’s Authority to Regulate Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Stationary Sources
Matthew Klinger, July 28, 2014
On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overstepped its authority under the Clean Air Act when it attempted to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources not already subject to a permit controlling emissions of more...

CEQA Class 3 Categorical Exemptions Permitted for AT&T Installations
Amar Naik, June 16, 2014
The First District Court of Appeal held that AT&T’s proposed installation of new utility cabinets in the City of San Francisco fell within CEQA’s Class 3 categorical exemption for the “installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures.” The court...

EIR Air Quality Analysis Insufficient: Lack of Specificity Regarding Human Health Impacts, Mitigation Measure Enforceability, and Evidence Supporting Measures’ Effectiveness in Substantially Reducing Air Quality Impacts Blamed
Jeffrey W. Forrest,Zak Welsh, June 16, 2014
Faced with an appeal of the Superior Court of Fresno’s approval of a controversial Environmental Impact Report, the Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed and found that the challenged EIR violated the California Environmental Quality Act by failing to adequately (1) analyze the health...

Preexisting Management Plan Not a “Mitigation Measure” for Purposes of CEQA Exemption
Micah D. Bobo,James Rusk, April 30, 2014
A preexisting management plan intended to minimize environmental effects of recurring facility operations and events is not a “proposed mitigation measure” for purposes of determining whether an event qualifies for a CEQA categorical exemption, a state Court of Appeal has held. In...