Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00644/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00644-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 28:1442 Petition for Removal

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

State of Arizona, ex rel, Henry R. Darwin, Director, Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

International Boundary and Water 

Commission, United States Section; 

Edward Drusina, in his official capacity 

as Commissioner of the International 

Boundary and Water Commission, United 

States Section, 

Defendants and ThirdParty Plaintiffs, 

v. 

City of Nogales, Arizona, 

Third-Party Defendant. 

No. CV-12-00644-TUC-FRZ

ORDER 

 The nature of this action, procedural history and posture are set forth in detail in 

the Court’s previous Orders ruling on motions for partial summary judgment (Docs. 35 

and 85) and the Reports and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro 

in (Doc. 68), which addressed Plaintiff State of Arizona’s Motion for Partial Summary 

Judgment: Liability for Counts 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, and (Doc. 102), addressing the 

Amended Motion of the City of Nogales for Summary Judgment on Third Party Claim, 

which is presently before this Court for consideration. 

Case 4:12-cv-00644-FRZ-DTF Document 127 Filed 03/23/16 Page 1 of 4
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 The Court granted judgment on the pleadings as to Counts One, Three and Four of 

the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 35) 

 The Court further granted judgment summary judgment on Count Five and 

dismissed Counts Two, Six and Seven as moot. (Doc. 85) 

 This matter has been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for all pretrial 

proceedings and report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and LRCiv 72.1 and LRCiv 72.2, Rules of Practice of the United 

States District Court for the District of Arizona. 

 Magistrate Judge Ferraro issued the present Report and Recommendation (Doc. 

102) now before the Court on December 30, 2015, following briefing and oral argument 

on the Amended Motion of the City of Nogales for Summary Judgment on Third Party 

Claim (Doc. 76), recommending that the motion be granted as to the First Claim, and 

denied as to the Second Claim, which alleges that the City of Nogales is liable if the 

USIBWC is found to be in violation of A.R.S. 49-255.01, the state statutory regulation 

which prohibits the discharge of pollutants unless in conformance with permits issued by 

the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality under state and federal regulations. 

 The Report and Recommendation sets forth the relevant factual background and 

analysis applicable to the third-party claims under provisions of the Clean Water Act, 33 

U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.; the Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“AZPDES”) 

permit program - a federally approved National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(“NPDES”) - administered by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

(ADEQ) and approved under the Equal Protection Agency (“EPA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1342(a). 

 The Report and Recommendation addresses whether the City of Nogales is 

entitled to summary judgment on the two claims for relief raised in the Third-Party 

Complaint under the legal standard requirements under Rule 56, Fed.R. Civ. P., applying 

the relevant legal analysis in determining whether a genuine issue of material fact exists 

in regard to the procedural and provisional requirements of the state and federal 

compliance regulations at issue. 

Case 4:12-cv-00644-FRZ-DTF Document 127 Filed 03/23/16 Page 2 of 4
- 3 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 The parties were advised that, pursuant to Rule 72(b)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., any party 

may serve and file written objections within fourteen days of being served with a copy of 

the Report and Recommendation, and a party may respond to the other party’s objections 

within fourteen days therefrom. 

 Third Party Defendant City of Nogales’ Objection to Part of the Magistrate’s 

Report and Recommendation (Doc. 104) was filed on January 13, 2016, to which 

USIBWC filed a response in opposition (Doc. 109) on February 1, 2016. 

 Upon review and consideration of all matters presented and an independent 

review of the record herein, including the City of Nogales’ objections, the Court finds 

that the findings of the Magistrate Judge on the Amended Motion of the City of Nogales 

for Summary Judgment on the Third Party Claim, as set forth in the Report and 

Recommendation, shall be accepted and adopted as the findings of fact and conclusions 

of law of this Court.

 Based on the forgoing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge (Doc. 102) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and 

conclusions of law by this Court; accordingly 

IT IS ORDERED that the Amended Motion of the City of Nogales for Summary 

Judgment on Third Party Claim ( (Doc. 76) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City of Nogales is entitled to summary 

judgment on the First Claim for Relief alleged in the Third-Party Complaint; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that summary judgment is DENIED as to the 

Second Claim for Relief of the Third-Party Complaint. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case remains referred to Magistrate Judge 

Ferraro for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1) and Local Rules LRCiv 72.1 and LRCiv 72.2 on remaining Counts Eight and 

Nine of the First Amended Complaint and the Second Claim for Relief of the Third-Party 

Complaint. 

Case 4:12-cv-00644-FRZ-DTF Document 127 Filed 03/23/16 Page 3 of 4
- 4 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 All filings shall be designated: CV 12-644 TUC-FRZ (DTF) 

Dated this 22nd day of March, 2016. 

Case 4:12-cv-00644-FRZ-DTF Document 127 Filed 03/23/16 Page 4 of 4