PRESS RELEASE

February 14, 2004

Contact:

Terry Swier, President Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation

231-972-8856

Jim Olson, Attorney for Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation

231-499-8831 cell or 231-882-7789

Olson, Bzdok & Howard

231-946-0044

Big Rapids, MI, February 13, 2004 – Mecosta County Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Root agreed with Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and plaintiffs R.J. and Barbara Doyle and Jeff and Shelly Sapp and rejected Nestle Waters (Ice Mountain) motion for new trial in his written decision released to the parties this morning, Friday, February 13, 2004. In his previous 67-page ruling, he ordered the shut down of the pumps at the Sanctuary well field because the private diversion and sale of water diminished stream flow and lake levels and was illegal under Michigan water law. Nestle alleged in its request for a new trial that there were some errors in Judge Root's opinion. Judge Root, in yet another careful and well reasoned decision on the scientific facts involving the direct connection of the groundwater and the lakes and streams, found Nestle's assigned mistakes as without merit or completely immaterial to the basic facts supporting his earlier decision. If Nestle appeals, the appellate Court will also affirm the correctness and soundness of Judge Root's decision and understand the importance of his decision for Michigan's security and future.

"MCWC is very encouraged with the Judge Root’s decision in this precedent setting case when he ruled on no re-opening of the evidence. This again reaffirms once and for all ‘Who’s Water is It’. The water that is used in Michigan, belongs in Michigan," said Terry Swier, president of MCWC.

"Even by Nestlé's own motion for new trial, it found only ten mistakes out of 67-pages, which, given the immensity of the record and complexity of scientific fact, was an A plus," Jim Olson of Olson, Bzdok & Howard, attorney for Michigan Citizens, said. "The Judge's ruling is not surprising. Most of the errors complained of by Nestle were picayune or didn't mean a whit of difference in terms of the Judge's earlier findings regarding the proofs and Michigan's water law," Olson added.

A copy of the Court's decision denying Nestlé's motion for new trial has been posted on Olson, Bzdok & Howard's website at www.envlaw.com.

####