People v. Electronic Plating Co.

In June 1992, someone alleging to be a former employee of the Electronic Plating Company (defendant) notified the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (district) that Electronic Plating had rigged its pipes to bypass its own discharge pretreatment system. On September 26, 1992, district agent James Waclawik conducted an inspection of the Electronic Plating plant. Waclawik found a suspicious discharge at manhole station 1-A, which Electronic Plating had designated for use by inspectors. An Electronic Plating supervisor told Waclawik that an employee had left a valve open. Waclawik returned to the Electronic Plating plant in October, telling Electronic Plating staff that he needed to service the sampling equipment at station 1-A. Waclawik also planned to install a surreptitious probe 24 feet down the sewer line, beyond station 1-A, near the point at which Electronic Plating’s system connected with the public sewer system. Waclawik did not notify Electronic Plating that this probe would be installed or obtain permission to install the probe. Samples taken from the surreptitious probe contained discharge that appeared to violate the local waste-control ordinance. Waclawik and other district employees gathered more samples over the next two weeks and, per instructions from a district manager, did not notify Electronic Plating of the investigation. In November 1992, a warrant was issued to search Electronic Plating based on Waclawik’s findings. Electronic Plating and two Electronic Plating officials were prosecuted on multiple counts of introducing contaminants into a sewage system. At trial, Electronic Plating moved to suppress the district’s evidence, arguing that Electronic Plating had an expectation of privacy in its wastewater, such that the district should have obtained a warrant to search the sewer pipes. The trial judge granted the motion to suppress.