Environment California's Sujatha Jahagirdar. Below: Residents of Rialto, Calif., demonstrate their concerns regarding the risk of perchlorate contamination of groundwater in the area at a press conference led by Sujatha Jahagirdar. Photo: Environment California

Sujatha Jahagirdar has worked for five years at Environment California Research and Policy Center (Environment California) researching, developing and implementing policy solutions to protect California’s waterways and aquifers from degradation by pollution. Part of her current work centers on an ongoing dispute over perchlorate contamination of groundwater in Rialto, California. When Sujatha’s involvement in that dispute put her directly in the crosshairs of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, an 800-lawyer corporate law firm with a reputation for aggressive litigation tactics, NELC stepped in to help.

What’s the history of perchlorate contamination in Rialto?

Rialto is a city of about 100,000, located beneath the San Bernardino Mountains about an hour east of Los Angeles. In 1997, local officials discovered perchlorate—the major ingredient in rocket fuel—in the aquifer that supplies much of Rialto’s drinking water. According to studies, even very low concentrations of perchlorate in drinking water can lead to attention deficit disorder, learning disabilities, and decreased IQ.

Local, state and federal officials have indicated that they believe several companies, including Goodrich Corporation and Black & Decker, are responsible for much of Rialto’s perchlorate contamination. In July, the State Water Board will hold a hearing to determine whether to issue a cleanup order against these two companies and to determine what requirements such an order would contain. City officials estimate that the order could impose more than $200 million in costs.

How did you become involved in this issue?

For more than two years, Environment California and community partner Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ) have worked to convince the state to issue a strong cleanup order against polluters shown to be responsible for perchlorate contamination in Rialto. We have petitioned the state, issued reports documenting the extent of contamination, and promoted public awareness of the situation. When the California State Water Board scheduled its July hearing, we decided to speak at the hearing as a “designated party,” in order to provide a formal voice in the decision-making process for average, everyday Californians who want to see the pollution in Rialto cleaned up. I was selected to do this.

My role will be to provide policy arguments in support of a strong cleanup order. Such an order would not only be of great benefit to the people of Rialto, but could also establish a model for future drinking water contamination cleanup orders issued by the State Water Board.

How did Gibson Dunn first contact you?

Goodrich has hired one of the country’s largest law firms—Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher—to represent it at the hearing. In March of this year, our Sacramento office was served with a subpoena from Gibson Dunn, issued under the authority of the State Water Board. The CCAEJ received a similar subpoena.

Not being a lawyer, I found the prospect of responding to this subpoena to be fairly daunting. The subpoena commanded me to show up at the firm’s offices in Los Angeles for a deposition, and to be prepared to answer questions there under oath on a wide range of topics, including some that seemed to be just plain irrelevant to the state proceeding, such as who our members are and where we get our funding.

The surprising breadth and detail of the subpoena led me to suspect that the upcoming deposition might be a tactic designed primarily to intimidate Environment California into dropping out of the proceedings. We contacted NELC to see if one of their lawyers could represent me at the deposition.

What was NELC’s role?

First, NELC attorney Joe Mann drafted a set of formal objections to inappropriate questions, such as those regarding Environment California’s funding and membership. He then helped me prepare for the deposition, and alerted me to some of the tactics that unscrupulous lawyers have used to intimidate or confuse witnesses. Throughout the deposition itself, Joe helped keep me focused, objected to improper questions, and generally kept the proceedings from getting out of hand.

What happened at the deposition?

There were seven or eight lawyers waiting for us when we walked into the room, and most of them were working for companies accused of causing the Rialto pollution. The lead attorney at the deposition was from Gibson Dunn. I found this lawyer’s approach demeaning and insulting throughout. At several points, he actually stood up and started shouting at me, eliciting objections from Joe. It felt like he spent most of the seven hours of the deposition trying to browbeat me into saying that I knew nothing about perchlorate and had no business addressing the State Board at the hearing.

When he asked questions about reports on the Rialto situation that I had co-authored, he seemed to imply that I had defamed Goodrich, and that I could be subject to a libel suit. I knew I couldn’t take these threats lightly: Gibson Dunn was recently fined $10 million for maliciously prosecuting a baseless defamation suit against one unfortunate individual who had displeased another of the firm’s clients.

In fact, the Gibson Dunn attorney offered me a quid pro quo deal: after the deposition, he pointedly told me that if Environment California dropped out of the hearing, I’d never see him again.

What have you learned from this experience?

When I was confronted by that room full of lawyers, it was reassuring to have my own attorney at my side. I told the truth, of course, but it was helpful to know where the potential pitfalls were. Had I not had my own lawyer there, I might have lost my temper in a way that could have come back to jeopardize the case later.

This whole ordeal shows why it’s important to have public interest law firms like NELC to combat heavy-handed tactics by moneyed corporate interests. Without NELC’s help, Environment California probably would have dropped out of the proceedings altogether. All of us need to speak out on issues of public concern, and we need to feel free to do so despite attempts to keep us quiet.

Return to Newsletter home>