Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05677/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05677-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1319 Clean Water Act

---

[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 1

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

Daniel Cooper (Bar No. 153576) 

Martin McCarthy (Bar No. 194915) 

LAWYERS FOR CLEAN WATER, INC. 

1004-A O’Reilly Avenue 

San Francisco, California 94129 

Telephone: (415) 440-6520 

Facsimile: (415) 440-4155 

Email: daniel@lawyersforcleanwater.com 

Christopher Sproul (Bar No. 126398) 

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCATES 

5135 Anza Street 

San Francisco, California 94121 

Telephone: (415) 533-3376 

Facsimile: (415) 358-5695 

Email: csproul@enviroadvocates.com 

Jason Flanders (Bar No. 238007) 

SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER 

785 Market Street, Suite 850 

San Francisco, California 94103 

Telephone: (415) 856-0444 

Facsimile: (415) 856-0443 

Email: jason@baykeeper.org 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER, a California 

non-profit corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

CITY OF SAN CARLOS, a California municipal 

corporation, 

 Defendant. 

 Civil Case No.: CV 09-05677 SBA 

 

 CONSENT DECREE 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 1 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 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

CONSENT DECREE

 The following Consent Decree is entered into by and between Plaintiff San Francisco Baykeeper 

(“Plaintiff” or “Baykeeper”), and defendant City of San Carlos (“City” or “Defendant”). The entities entering 

into this Consent Decree are each referred to herein as “Party” and collectively as “Parties.” 

 WHEREAS, Baykeeper is a non-profit public benefit corporation dedicated to, among other 

things, the protection and enhancement of the water quality of the San Francisco Bay; 

WHEREAS, the City is a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of 

California; 

WHEREAS, the City owns and/or operates a sanitary sewer collection system that collects, 

treats, and discharges wastewater generated by residential, commercial, and industrial sources; 

 WHEREAS, the City is one of twenty cities and towns in San Mateo County that have joined 

together to form the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (“STOPP”). 

STOPP’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit, Waste Discharge 

Requirements for City/County Association Of Governments Of San Mateo County, et al., San Francisco 

Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. 99-058, NPDES Permit No. CAS0029921, reissued as 

Order No. 99-059, and subsequently amended by Order Nos. R2-2003-0023, R2-2004-0060, R2-2004-

0062, and R2-2007-0027 (“MS4 Permit”), regulates discharges into and out of the City’s municipal 

separate storm sewer system; 

 WHEREAS, on September 28, 2009, Baykeeper issued to Defendant a 60-day Notice of 

Violation and Intent to File Suit (“Notice Letter”) under section 505(a) of the Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act (“Clean Water Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a). Baykeeper also served a copy of the Notice Letter 

on, the Administrator and the Regional Administrator for Region IX of the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (“EPA”), the Executive Director of the California State Water Resources Control Board 

(“State Board”), and the Executive Officer of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control 

Board (“Regional Board”). The Notice Letter alleged that Defendant violated and continues to violate the 

Clean Water Act for discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States without NPDES permit 

coverage, and discharges of pollutants in violation of the MS4 Permit; 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 2 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 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

 WHEREAS, on December 2, 2009, Plaintiff filed its complaint in the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of California (“District Court”) against Defendant, Case No. CV 09-05677 

SBA (hereinafter “Complaint”); 

 WHEREAS, on September 28, 2009, Plaintiff sent Defendant a letter notifying the Defendant of 

Plaintiff’s intent to seek a peremptory writ of mandate ordering the Defendant to comply with California 

Water Code §§ 13000 et seq. (the “Porter-Cologne Act”), the Statewide Waste Discharge Requirements for 

Sanitary Sewer Systems, State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-0003-DWQ and 

Monitoring and Reporting Programs No. 2006-0003 DWQ, as amended by Order No. 2008-0002- 

EXEC (“SSO WDR”), the San Mateo County Ordinance, and the San Carlos Municipal Code; 

 WHEREAS, Defendant denies Baykeeper’s allegations that it has violated the Clean Water Act 

and/or any of the permits as alleged in the Complaint, denies that it failed to perform its duties under the 

Clean Water Act, the Porter-Cologne Act, the SSO WDR, the San Mateo County Ordinance, or the San 

Carlos Municipal Code as alleged in the Complaint, and denies it has liability to Baykeeper or other 

citizen groups; 

 WHEREAS, the Parties, through their authorized representatives and without either adjudication 

of the Complaint’s claims or admission by Defendant of any alleged violation or other wrongdoing, have 

chosen to resolve this action through settlement and avoid the costs and uncertainties of further 

litigation; 

WHEREAS, all actions taken by Defendants pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be made in 

compliance with all applicable federal, state and local rules and regulations; 

WHEREAS, for purposes of settlement, the Parties waive all objections that they may have to 

the Court's jurisdiction to enter and retain jurisdiction over this Consent Decree. 

 NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND 

ORDERED AND DECREED BY THE COURT AS FOLLOWS: 

I. GENERAL OBJECTIVES

1. The objectives of this Consent Decree are: 

a. To ensure that Defendant uses, implements, and improves ways, means, and 

methods to prevent sanitary sewer overflows; 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 3 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 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

b. To ensure that the City uses, implements, and improves ways, means, and 

methods to prevent violations of, or comply with, applicable permits, laws, and regulations as related to 

sanitary sewer overflows. 

II. DEFINITIONS

2. Unless otherwise expressly defined herein, terms used in this Consent Decree that are defined 

in the Clean Water Act or in regulations, or in rules promulgated under the Clean Water Act, have the 

meaning assigned to them in the applicable statutes, regulations, or rules. Whenever terms listed below 

are used in this Consent Decree, the following definitions apply: 

a. “Consent Decree” means this Consent Decree, the District Court’s Stipulated Order 

of Dismissal, and any Exhibits or documents incorporated by reference into this Consent Decree. 

b. “SSA” means Sewer Condition Assessment by closed-circuit television or 

alternative inspection technology as referenced in the May 2009 EPA Report on the Condition 

Assessment of Wastewater Collection Systems-State of Technology Report, provided that any 

alternative inspection technology employed performs at a level superior or equal to closed-circuit 

television for all purposes. 

c. “San Carlos Collection System” means the sewer pipes and lines, manholes or 

maintenance holes, pump stations, and all appurtenances thereto under ownership and responsibility of 

the City that are used to convey wastewater generated by residential, commercial, and industrial sources 

to the South Bayside System Authority facilities, ending at the inlet to the South Bayside System 

Authority Waste Water Treatment Plant (“WWTP”) pump station on Monte Vista Drive near the San 

Carlos Airport. For purposes of this Consent Decree, the San Carlos Collection System does not include 

the Devonshire County Sanitation District, the Scenic Heights County Sanitation District, the Emerald 

Lake Heights Sewer Maintenance District or the Harbor Industrial Sewer Maintenance District, Private 

Laterals or other privately owned or operated infrastructure that may connect to the San Carlos 

Collection System. 

d. “CCTV” means closed-circuit television. 

e. “CIP” means the City’s sanitary sewer system capital improvement program. 

f. “City” or “the City” means the City of San Carlos, California. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 4 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 5

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

g. “Day” means a calendar day. In computing any period of time under this Consent 

Decree, where the last day of such period is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal or State Holiday, the period 

runs until the close of business on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal or State 

Holiday. 

h. “Design Storm” means a 10-year return period rainstorm with a duration of 24 hours 

as measured by a properly calibrated and monitored rain gage, or such rain gages, within San Carlos or, 

if no such gage is available, at the San Francisco International Airport. The engineering design criteria 

to be used by the City for a 10-year 24-hour storm shall take into account short duration intense rainfall 

periods by reference to USDA Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds guidance TR-55 (June 1986) and 

use of the synthetic rainfall distribution curve (Figure B-1 SCS 24-Hour Rainfall Distribution) found in 

Appendix B of TR-55. The City shall use the distribution curve for a Type IA storm as referenced on 

Figure B-1 of Appendix B of TR-55 based on local rainfall quantities for the San Carlos area in San 

Mateo County, California. 

i. “FOG” means fats, oil, and grease. 

j. “Infiltration” means groundwater, rainwater, or other surface water that may enter 

the San Carlos Collection System through the pipe, joints, or cracks. 

k. “Inflow” means wastewater or water that may enter the San Carlos Collection 

System through unpermitted connections, drains, or manholes. 

l. “I/I” means infiltration and inflow. 

m. “Lower Lateral” means the lateral line connecting a home or business to the City’s 

sewer main extending from the sewer main to the City’s clean out or to the back of the public right-ofway, whichever is applicable to the lateral connection. Lower Laterals are generally connected to upper 

laterals. 

n. “MS4 Permit” means the Waste Discharge Requirements for City/County 

Association Of Governments Of San Mateo County, et al., San Francisco Regional Water Quality 

Control Board Order No. 99-058, NPDES Permit No. CAS0029921, reissued as Order No. 99-059, and 

subsequently amended by Order Nos. R2-2003-0023, R2-2004-0060, R2-2004-0062, and R2-2007-

0027. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 5 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 6

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

o. “NPDES” means National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. 

p. “Private Lateral” means the private sanitary sewer lateral or line connecting a home 

or other structure to the Lower Lateral, generally extending from the outside of the foundation of the 

structure to the public right-of-way or the City’s cleanout, whichever is applicable 

q. “Sanitary Sewer Overflow”, “overflow”, or “SSO” has the same meaning as those terms 

are defined in Section A.1 of the SSO WDR”, or any amendment thereto, and which currently means: “any 

overflow, spill, release, discharge or diversion of untreated or partially treated wastewater from a 

sanitary sewer system. SSOs include: (i) Overflows or releases of untreated or partially treated 

wastewater that reach waters of the United States; (ii) Overflows or releases of untreated or partially 

treated wastewater that do not reach waters of the United States; and (iii) Wastewater backups into 

buildings and on private property that are caused by blockages or flow conditions within the publicly 

owned portion of a sanitary sewer system.” For purposes of this definition, “waters of the United States” 

has the meaning as set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 122.2. 

r. “Sewer line segment” means any section of publicly owned sewer line or pipe 

located between: (1) two manholes/maintenance holes; (2) a pump station and a manhole/maintenance 

hole; (3) a pump station or a manhole/maintenance hole and a headworks structure; or (4) a sewer line or 

pipe otherwise identifiable as a discrete section. 

s. “SSMP” means the Sewer System Management Program implemented by the City 

for the San Carlos Collection System to monitor the condition, maintenance, and repair of the San 

Carlos Collection System. 

t. “Year” shall mean calendar year, unless otherwise specified. 

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. Plaintiff alleges the following jurisdictional allegations: 

a. This District Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claims asserted 

by Plaintiff pursuant to section 505(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)(1), 28 U.S.C. 

§§ 1331 and 2201 (an action for declaratory and injunctive relief arising under the Constitution and laws 

of the United States), and 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), which provides supplemental jurisdiction for claims 

based on state law, including, but not limited to, California Code of Civil Procedure section 1085, the 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 6 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 7

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

California Water Code sections 13000 et seq., (the Porter-Cologne Act), San Mateo County Ordinance, 

title 4 sections 100.010 et seq (“San Mateo Ordinance), and the City of San Carlos Municipal Code, title 

13 sections 14.010 et seq. (“Municipal Code”); 

b. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to sections 309(b) and 505(c) of 

the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1319(b), 1365(c), and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c); 

c. The Complaint filed herein states claims for which relief can be granted against 

Defendant pursuant to section 505 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365; 

d. Plaintiffs have standing to bring this action; 

e. The District Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for purposes of 

interpreting, modifying or enforcing the terms of this Consent Decree, or as long thereafter as is 

necessary for the District Court to resolve any motion to enforce this Consent Decree.

IV. EFFECT OF CONSENT DECREE

4. Plaintiff does not, by its consent to this Consent Decree, warrant or aver in any manner that 

the Defendant’s compliance with this Consent Decree will constitute or result in compliance with any 

Federal or State law or regulation. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to affect or limit 

in any way the obligation of the Defendant to comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws 

and regulations governing any activity required by this Consent Decree. 

5. Nothing in the Consent Decree, including but not limited to the proposed actions and 

payments made pursuant to the Consent Decree, shall be used as evidence or be construed as a finding, 

adjudication, or acknowledgement of any fact, law, issue of law, or liability, nor shall it be construed as 

an admission of violation of any law, issue of law, rule, regulation, permit, or administrative order by 

Defendant. 

V. APPLICABILITY

6. The provisions of this Consent Decree apply to and bind the Parties, including any successors 

or assigns. The Parties certify that their undersigned representatives are fully authorized to enter into 

this Consent Decree, to execute it on behalf of the Parties, and to legally bind the Parties to its terms. 

7. The Parties agree to be bound by this Consent Decree and not to contest its validity in any 

subsequent proceeding to implement or enforce its terms. By entering into this Consent Decree, the 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 7 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 8

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

Defendant does not admit liability for any purpose as to any allegation or matter arising out of the 

Notice Letter and/or Complaint. 

8. No change in ownership or corporate or other legal status of the Defendant or any transfer of 

the Defendant’s assets or liabilities shall in any way alter the responsibilities of the Defendant or any of 

its successors or assigns thereof, under this Consent Decree. In any action to enforce this Consent 

Decree, the Defendant shall not raise as a defense the failure by any of its agents, servants, contractors, 

employees, and successors or assigns to take actions necessary to comply with this Consent Decree. 

Defendant is not precluded from raising as a defense that a particular spill in the San Carlos Collection 

System was caused by an upstream sewage collection system (“Satellite System”) connected to the San 

Carlos Collection System. To assert this defense for a particular spill, Defendant shall have the burden 

to demonstrate that: (1) Defendant has initiated and is diligently prosecuting enforcement of its service 

contract with the Satellite System to address the cause the spill; and (2) that the Satellite System directly 

caused the spill in question. 

VI. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERMINATION DATE

9. The term “Effective Date,” as used in this Consent Decree, shall mean the last date for the 

United States Department of Justice to comment on the [proposed] Consent Decree, i.e., the 45th day 

following the United States Department of Justice’s receipt of the [proposed] Consent Decree and 

Stipulated Dismissal or, the date on which the Federal Agencies provide notice that no further review is 

required and the District Court enters the final Consent Decree, whichever occurs earlier. 

10. This Consent Decree will automatically terminate seven (7) years from the Effective Date 

(“Termination Date”) unless Baykeeper has invoked the Dispute Resolution Procedure set forth in Section 

XIX or the Parties have agreed to an early termination of this Consent Decree and the District Court has 

authorized the modification of the Termination Date. 

11. The obligations set forth in this Consent Decree take effect as of the date of execution by all 

Parties unless otherwise noted in this Consent Decree. 

VII. SSO AND SPILL REDUCTION PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

12. SSO Reduction Goals. It is the goal of this Consent Decree to reduce the City’s Collection 

System SSOs to zero (0) over time. To approach the goal of zero (0) SSOs, the City shall reduce its 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 8 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 9

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

SSOs and Lower Lateral spills as follows: 

a. San Carlos Collection System SSO Reduction Performance Goals. 

Calendar Year

Maximum 

Number of SSOs Per 

100 Miles of Sewer 

Line/Year

2010 46 

2011 41 

2012 32 

2013 23 

2014 14 

2015 7 

2016 5 

2017 2 

b. Lower Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals. 

The City’s goal is to reduce the annual number of Lower Lateral spills. The Lower Lateral SSO 

Reduction Standards are as follows: 

Calendar Year 

Maximum Number 

of Lower Lateral 

Spills 

2010 18 

2011 16 

2012 13 

2013 10 

2014 7 

2015 4 

2016 3 

2017 2 

 

13. For purposes of determining compliance with the San Carlos Collection System SSO 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 9 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 10

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

Reduction Performance Goals and Lower Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals, SSOs and spills 

caused by storm events exceeding the Design Storm shall not be counted. 

14. For purposes of determining compliance with the San Carlos Collection System SSO 

Reduction Performance Goals and Lower Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals, the Parties assume 

the City currently has approximately 106 miles of main sewer line in the San Carlos Collection System. 

15. Failure to meet the San Carlos Collection System SSO Reduction Performance Goals shall be 

a violation of this Consent Decree to be resolved by the Dispute Resolution procedure in Section XIX 

below. 

16. Failure to meet the Lower Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals shall be a violation of 

this Consent Decree to be resolved by the Dispute Resolution procedure in Section XIX below. 

17. In order to reach the above SSO standards, the City shall implement the programs described 

below. 

18. Compliance or non-compliance with the SSO Reduction Performance Goals and Lower 

Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals shall be documented by the City in each year’s Annual 

Report required under Section XVI of this Consent Decree. 

VIII. SSO INVESTIGATION, RESPONSE AND REPORTING

19. The terms, conditions, obligations, and requirements of the City’s current Sanitary Sewer 

Overflow Response Plan (“SORP”) are incorporated into this Consent Decree, and are enforceable 

pursuant to this Consent Decree. 

20. The City recognizes that proper identification of the cause of SSOs is essential to prevent 

future SSOs. 

21. Within one-hundred twenty (120) days of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree the City 

shall prepare a standard operating procedure (“SSO Cause Determination SOP”) aimed at the proper and 

consistent determination of the cause of each SSO. The City shall provide a copy of the SSO Cause 

Determination SOP to Baykeeper for review and comment within seven (7) days of its finalization. 

Within thirty (30) days after providing the SSO Cause Determination SOP to Baykeeper, the City shall 

train all of its personnel who respond to SSOs regarding how to use the SSO Cause Determination SOP. 

Baykeeper shall provide the City, in writing, with all recommended revisions to the SSO Cause 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 10 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 11

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

Determination SOP within thirty (30) days after receiving the SSO Cause Determination SOP from the 

City. Upon receipt of Baykeeper’s comments, the City shall consider each of Baykeeper’s recommended 

revisions and indicate within thirty (30) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s comments whether the City 

accepts each such recommendation for revision, and if not, provide a detailed explanation as to why 

Baykeeper’s comments are being rejected. Baykeeper may seek dispute resolution pursuant to 

Section XIX of this Consent Decree regarding disputes over the SSO Cause Determination SOP. In any 

such dispute resolution process, the City shall demonstrate that the elements or actions set forth in the 

SSO Cause Determination SOP are designed to ensure causes of the SSOs can be readily and accurately 

determined. To the extent the Parties do not dispute specific original provisions of the SSO Cause 

Determination SOP or specific recommended revisions, the City shall implement all undisputed 

provisions or revisions within thirty (30) days of receiving Baykeeper’s comments on the SSO Cause 

Determination SOP. After the Parties have reached agreement on the SSO Cause Determination SOP, 

or after the dispute resolution process resolves any dispute concerning the SSO Cause Determination 

SOP, the City shall begin implementation of the SSO Cause Determination SOP as an enforceable 

requirement of this Consent Decree within sixty (60) days of agreement or upon the schedule set forth 

therein. 

22. Within one-hundred eighty (180) days of reaching agreement with Baykeeper regarding the 

SSO Cause Determination SOP, the City shall complete training of all City personnel that respond to 

SSOs in the methods and practices used to identify the root causes of SSOs, including capacity related 

SSOs, and shall certify to Baykeeper that the training has been completed. All new employees who may 

respond to SSOs shall be trained in the methods and practices used to identify the root causes of SSO 

within sixty (60) days of commencing employment or transfer to duties that include SSO response and 

the City shall maintain records of such training. 

23. The cause of any SSO shall be reported to the State Board’s California Integrated Water 

Quality System (“CIWQS”) and entered into and maintained in the City’s Computerized Maintenance 

Management System (CMMS) database. The information in the CMMS database shall be used in 

evaluating the City’s programs. The City shall include in its Annual Report required under Section XVI 

of this Consent Decree a summary of SSO causes as determined by analysis of its CMMS database. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 11 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 12

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

24. In the first two Annual Reports required by Section XVI of this Consent Decree, the City 

shall provide to Baykeeper a compilation of individual SSO reports for each spill it reported to the State 

Board. The City may discontinue providing Baykeeper with compilations of individual spill reports 

after the first two Annual Reports required under Section XVI of this Consent Decree are provided, 

unless Baykeeper requests in writing that the City continue to provide such compilations. 

25. In the Annual Report required under Section XVI of this Consent Decree, the City shall 

provide Baykeeper with a summary of any changes to the total quantity of sewer line that will affect the 

calculation of the San Carlos Collection System SSO Reduction Performance Goals and Lower Lateral 

SSO Reduction Performance Goals. 

IX. SSO REDUCTION ACTION PLAN

26. If any Annual Report required under Section XVI of this Consent Decree provided by the 

City to Baykeeper documents compliance with the then-applicable SSO Reduction Performance Goals, 

the City shall have no obligation to prepare a SSO Reduction Action Plan as set forth herein. However, 

if an Annual SSO Summary Report documents SSOs in excess of the SSO Reduction Performance 

Goals of this Consent Decree, the City shall submit to Baykeeper by June 1st of that same year a SSO 

Reduction Action Plan that specifies the actions taken in the prior calendar year pursuant to the Consent 

Decree and additional measures to be taken during the pending calendar year and thereafter, which are 

designed to achieve compliance with the SSO Reduction Performance Goals set forth in this Consent 

Decree. The SSO Reduction Action Plan shall include a proposed schedule for implementation of all 

actions proposed. 

27. Baykeeper shall provide the City, in writing, with all recommended revisions to the SSO 

Reduction Action Plan within thirty (30) days of receipt of the document. The City shall consider each 

of Baykeeper’s recommended revisions and indicate within thirty (30) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s 

comments whether the City accepts each such recommendation for revision, and if not provide a detailed 

explanation as to why Baykeeper’s comments are being rejected. Baykeeper may seek dispute resolution 

pursuant to Section XIX of this Consent Decree regarding disputes over the SSO Reduction Action Plan. 

In such Dispute Resolution processes, to the extent the Parties do not dispute original provisions or 

recommended revisions, the City shall implement all undisputed provisions or revisions. After the 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 12 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 13

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

Parties have reached agreement on the SSO Reduction Action Plan or after Dispute Resolution resolves 

any dispute concerning the SSO Reduction Action Plan, the City shall begin implementation of the SSO 

Reduction Action Plan as an enforceable requirement of this Consent Decree within forty-five (45) days 

of agreement on the SSO Reduction Action Plan, or upon the schedule set forth therein. 

28. The City shall address in the SSO Reduction Action Plan the various elements of such a plan 

that it believes will be necessary to achieve future compliance with the SSO Reduction Performance 

Goals, which may include any or all elements in its SSMP Program. 

29. If additional funding is necessary to implement the SSO Reduction Action Plan, the City 

shall seek such funding as soon as is practical. If the City seeks financing, but is unsuccessful, the City 

shall disclose in the SSO Reduction Action Plan the extent of its efforts to obtain financing. 

X. CAPACITY ASSURANCE

30. By March 31, 2011, the City shall have completed sufficient flow monitoring of the San 

Carlos Collection System to support hydraulic modeling. The monitoring shall be sufficient to calibrate 

and validate hydraulic modeling of the San Carlos Collection System. 

31. Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan. By August 1, 2010, The City shall submit a Hydraulic 

Modeling Work Plan for the San Carlos Collection System. The hydraulic modeling shall be sufficient 

to identify all necessary capacity improvements to convey peak wet weather flows to the South Bayside 

System Authority WWTP without SSOs caused by insufficient capacity in the San Carlos Collection 

System. The Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan shall contain a schedule for hydraulic modeling and all 

supporting efforts such as smoke testing, dye testing and other measures necessary to identify sources of 

I/I. 

32. Capacity Assurance Report. By March 31, 2012, the City shall provide a Capacity 

Assurance Report to Baykeeper identifying all necessary capacity improvements to convey peak wet 

weather flows to the South Bayside System Authority WWTP without SSOs caused by insufficient 

capacity. The Capacity Assurance Report shall include a schedule for construction of all necessary 

capacity improvements identified in the Capacity Assurance Report based on Design Storm criteria. 

The schedule for construction of capacity improvements shall be as expeditious as is practicable and the 

City shall complete construction of such improvements within five (5) years from the date of the final 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 13 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 14

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

Capacity Assurance Report. In no event shall the completion of the construction of the improvements 

identified in the Capacity Assurance Report extend beyond the Termination Date. 

33. Inflow and Infiltration (I/I). I/I identified within the San Carlos Collection System by the 

hydraulic modeling, smoke testing, dye testing, and condition assessment programs set forth herein, 

shall be identified and addressed in the Capacity Assurance Report. Major sources of I/I shall be 

removed as expeditiously as practicable. The Capacity Assurance Report shall include capacity 

improvements for the San Carlos Collection System designed to eliminate capacity-related SSOs during 

the rain events of less than the Design Storm. 

34. Final Compliance Report. The City shall provide to Baykeeper a Final Compliance Report 

for Baykeeper’s review and comment. The Final Compliance Report shall be submitted to Baykeeper a 

minimum of one (1) year prior to the Termination Date and the Final Compliance Report shall provide 

the status of all of the construction and other related activities required in the Capacity Assurance 

Report. The report shall provide sufficient information and detail to reasonably demonstrate that the 

City has undertaken and will have completed sufficient activities to fully comply with the capacity 

related SSOs for rain events less than the Design Storm by the Termination Date. This Final 

Compliance Report shall be subject to review, comment and referral to the Dispute Resolution 

Procedures as set forth in Section XIX of this Consent Decree. If the City determines that a fee increase 

is required to fund capacity improvement projects designed to eliminate capacity-related SSOs, the City 

may request a one time, one-year extension to implement the fee increase and obtain the revenue stream. 

If the City requests the one-year extension, the City shall have the burden to demonstrate that 

elimination of capacity related SSOs cannot be accomplished on the schedule set forth in this Consent 

Decree without the fee increase. This extension request shall be subject to the dispute resolution 

procedures set forth in Section XIX of this Consent Decree. 

35. Review of Submittals. Baykeeper shall have the right to review the Hydraulic Modeling 

Work Plan and provide comments thereon. Baykeeper shall provide the City, in writing, with all 

recommended revisions to the Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan within twenty (20) days of receipt of the 

document. The City shall consider each of Baykeeper’s recommended revisions and indicate within 

twenty (20) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s comments whether the City accepts each such 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 14 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 15

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

recommendation for revision and if not provide a detailed explanation as to why Baykeeper’s comments 

are being rejected. The City shall implement, within twenty (20) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s 

comments, all elements in the Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan agreed to by Baykeeper and the City. 

Baykeeper may seek dispute resolution pursuant to Section XIX of this Consent Decree regarding 

disputes over the Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan. 

36. Baykeeper shall also provide the City, in writing, with all recommended revisions to the 

Capacity Assurance Report within thirty (30) days of receipt of the document. The City shall consider 

each of Baykeeper’s recommended revisions and indicate within thirty (30) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s 

comments whether the City accepts each such recommendation for revision and if not provide a detailed 

explanation as to why Baykeeper’s comments are being rejected. Baykeeper may seek dispute resolution 

pursuant to Section XIX of this Consent Decree regarding disputes over the Capacity Assurance Report. 

37. Neither Party shall invoke Dispute Resolution until both Parties have made good faith efforts 

to resolve any professional differences with regard to the Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan and the 

Capacity Assurance Report. 

XI. SEWER CONDITION ASSESSMENT/REHABILITATION/REPLACEMENT

38. Within three (3) years of the Effective Date of the Consent Decree, the City shall complete a 

sewer system assessment (“SSA”) inspection and condition assessment of all main sewer line segments in 

the San Carlos Collection System that are fifteen (15) inches and smaller in diameter and are greater 

than 10 years old. The City shall inspect and assess no less than thirty (30) miles of sewer in each of the 

first two (2) years of this Consent Decree. 

39. Within one-hundred and twenty (120) days of the Effective Date of the Consent Decree, the 

City shall propose to Baykeeper a work plan for CCTV inspections. The defects shall be coded and 

weighted using the Sanitary Sewer Assessment Defect Codes, which are attached hereto as Appendix A. 

40. Inspections shall be accomplished using SSA. The work products shall include an inspection 

database, prioritized repair projects, and prioritized rehabilitation/ replacement projects. The annual 

inspection quantity will include the sum of the lengths of all of the gravity sewers where inspection was 

completed. Segments failing to pass the SSA device or camera shall not be included in the annual 

inspection quantity. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 15 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 16

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

41. The City shall correct defects that may cause an SSO within an appropriate timeframe. 

Based on the Sanitary Sewer Assessment Defect Code scores derived during SSA inspections, the City’s 

timeframes for actions to correct observed defects in the sewer segments are shown on the table 

Timeframe for Actions to Correct Observed Defects set out below. 

Timeframe for Actions to Correct Observed Defect

Defect 

Weight 

Condition Condition Description Remedy 

8 – 9 Failure 

Imminent 

Structural defects that may 

lead to complete failure 

and blockage of the pipe at 

any time 

Repair completed immediately 

(within 30 days) 

6 – 7 Severe Severe structural defects 

of deformed pipe, holes in 

pipe, broken pipes, and 

large joint offsets 

Repair completed within 1 year or 

for non-structural defects, re-assess 

condition within 1 year if it is 

determined that periodic 

maintenance can keep the pipe in 

working order 

4 – 5 Major Structural defects such as 

multiple fractures, 

medium joint offsets and 

major sags, and pipes with 

large number of cracks 

Repair completed within 5 years, 

SSA and assess condition within 2 

years 

2 – 3 Moderate Structural defects such as 

fractures, cracks, small 

and medium joint offsets, 

and sags 

Inspect with SSA and assess 

condition every 5 years 

0 – 1 Minor Structural defects such as 

slight sags, cracks, and 

small joint offsets 

Inspect with SSA and assess 

condition every 10 years 

42. The schedule proposed in paragraph 40 above shall be prioritized to first inspect sewers in 

areas with known SSO problems and sewers with known or suspected structural deficiencies 

XII. IMPLEMENTATION OF FATS, OILS AND GREASE PROGRAM

43. The City shall continue to contract its FOG Control Program to South Bayside System 

Authority (“SBSA”) as outlined in the “Proposal to Conduct a FOG Program for the City of San Carlos” 

dated June 26, 2009. Under this program, the City contracts FOG inspections and education to SBSA. 

44. The City shall continue its own residential outreach program to reduce FOG from residential 

sources consistent with its SSMP. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 16 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 17

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

45. The City shall commence a program for enforcement of violations of the Municipal Code 

relating to FOG discharges, including community outreach and education. The City agrees to modify its 

Municipal Code to include provisions for fines for each violation of not less than One Thousand Dollars 

($1,000.00) for a first offense, and not less than Five Thousand ($5,000.00) for a second and/or 

subsequent offense. The Municipal Code may include provision for an initial six (6) month grace period 

for all customers commencing from the date of adoption of such fines, and may further provide for a 

warning prior to prosecution for residential customers who do not willfully violate the Municipal Code. 

46. The City shall report to Baykeeper the number of violations of the Municipal Code relating 

to FOG discharges and the amount of money collected as fines by the City each year in the Annual 

Report required under Section XVI of this Consent Decree. 

XIII. SEWER CLEANING, HOT SPOTS, AND LATERAL PROGRAMS

47. Routine Cleaning. The City shall clean all of its gravity sanitary sewer segments fifteen (15) 

inches in diameter or smaller in the San Carlos Collection System at least once every five (5) years. 

Lower Laterals shall be cleaned and inspected after each SSO caused by a blockage in the Lower 

Lateral. 

48. Focused Cleaning Program. The City shall expand and improve its Focused Cleaning 

Program to include main line sewer segments having repeat and frequent blockages caused by Roots, 

Debris, and Pipe Condition, in addition to those main line segments included in the City’s Focused 

Cleaning Program due to FOG. 

49. Within one-hundred twenty (120) days from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree, the 

City shall develop and submit to Baykeeper for comments a Focused Cleaning Work Plan (“FCWP”). The 

FCWP shall include a listing of all lines requiring focused cleaning and the cleaning frequency for each 

identified line. The FCWP shall include the rationale relied upon to select the main sewer segments 

included in the FCWP and to determine cleaning frequencies. Cleaning frequencies for the Focused 

Cleaning Program shall include: one (1) month, two (2) month, three (3) month, six (6) month, twelve 

(12) month, and twenty-four (24) month cycles as needed. The FCWP shall incorporate the methodology 

set forth below in Figure 1 (“Preventive Maintenance Scheduling Flow Chart”) in paragraph 50 below. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 17 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 18

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

50.

Figure 1 - Preventive Maintenance Scheduling Flow Chart. 

51. Baykeeper shall review and provide the City with comments on the FCWP within thirty (30) 

days of submittal. The City shall consider each of Baykeeper’s recommended revisions and indicate 

within thirty (30) days of receipt of Baykeeper’s comments whether the City accepts each such 

recommendation for revision and if not provide a detailed explanation as to why Baykeeper’s comments 

are being rejected. Baykeeper may seek dispute resolution pursuant to Section XIX of this Consent 

Decree regarding disputes over the FCWP. 

52. The Parties shall attempt to resolve any disputes regarding the FCWP in good faith. Neither 

Party shall invoke dispute resolution until good faith efforts to resolve disputes have been completed. 

The City shall immediately implement all portions of the Focused Cleaning Program not in dispute and 

shall implement all portions of the Final FCWP not previously implemented immediately upon 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 18 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 19

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

resolution of disputes. 

53. The Focused Cleaning Program shall be maintained in the City’s CMMS database. 

54. The City shall collect all observations made by its trained sewer cleaning crews in 

accordance with the SSO Cause Determination SOP (Section VIII of this Consent Decree) regarding the 

extent and nature of materials removed during the cleaning process. The observations shall be recorded 

in the City’s CMMS database. The City shall maintain or change the frequency of its focused cleaning 

for a sewer line segment based on the Sewer Cleaning Results Matrix set forth below in accordance with 

the section labeled “Action.” 

Sewer Cleaning Results Matrix 

Clear Light Moderate Heavy 

Debris No observable 

debris 

Minor amount of 

debris 

1 pass 

Moderate amounts 

of debris 

 2-3 passes 

Significant amounts of 

debris 

More than 4 passes 

Operator concern for 

future stoppage 

Grease No observable 

grease 

Minor amounts of 

grease 

15 minutes or less 

to clean 

1 pass 

Small “chunks” 

No “logs” 

15-30 minutes to 

clean 

 2-3 passes 

Big “chunks” or “logs” 

More than 4 passes 

Operator concern for 

future stoppage 

Roots No observable 

roots 

Minor amounts of 

roots 

1 pass 

Thin stringy roots 

No “clumps” 

2-3 passes 

Thick roots 

Large “clumps” 

More than 4 passes 

Operator concern for 

future stoppage 

Debris: 

Structural 

pipe 

fragments 

soil, rock, 

etc. 

No observable 

materials 

Specify material (if 

possible) 

Minor amounts of 

material 

Specify material 

Moderate amounts 

of material per line 

segment 

Specify material 

Significant amounts of 

material per line 

segment 

Operator concern for 

future stoppage 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 19 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 20

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

Action Decrease 

frequency to next 

lower frequency 

after 3 consecutive 

results (e.g. 6 

months to 12 

months) 

Continue current 

maintenance 

frequency 

Increase current 

maintenance 

frequency to next 

higher frequency 

(e.g. 6 months to 3 

months) 

Increase current 

maintenance frequency 

to next higher 

frequency (e.g. 6 

months to 3 months) 

55. Changes in cleaning frequency based upon cleaning results shall be as follows: 

a. No reduction in cleaning frequency shall be made in a sewer line segment with a 

previous history of SSOs without the approval of an appropriate maintenance 

supervisor or superintendent; 

b. three (3) consecutive results of “clear” will cause the cleaning frequency to be reduced to 

the next lower cleaning frequency; 

c. results of “medium” or “heavy” will cause the cleaning frequency to be increased to the 

next highest frequency. 

d. lines on a 12 month or 24 month cleaning cycle may be taken off the FCWP if there 

have been no SSOs on the line since the initial cleaning and the lines are found to be 

“clear” or “light” on the second cleaning. 

56. At a minimum, main line segments shall be added to the Focused Cleaning Program based on 

the findings from any SSA Condition Assessment using the Operation and Maintenance Codes Table set 

forth in Appendix A – Sanitary Sewer Assessment Codes. 

57. Sewer Cleaning Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program: The City shall institute and 

maintain a quality assurance/quality control (“QA/QC”) program adequate to ensure proper and complete 

cleaning of sewers. The QA/QC program shall consist of spot checking the cleaning quality in a 

minimum of two percent (2%) by sewer segment of the cleaned sewers on a monthly basis using SSA to 

ensure adequate cleaning. If the cleaning is found to be inadequate, the sewer segment will be recleaned within thirty (30) days. If more than ten percent (10%) of the spot checked segments require recleaning in any given month, spot checking of the system shall be increased to five percent (5%). 

Where spot checking of the system has increased to five percent (5%) pursuant to this section, such spot 

checking will not be reduced to two percent (2%) until three consecutive months show two percent (2%) 

or less of the pipes inspected required re-cleaning. If a required inspection frequency increase is 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 20 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 21

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

identified with a single crew, the increased inspection schedule will only apply to that crew. 

58. If scheduled or hot spot cleaning of a segment or area cannot be properly accomplished due 

to pipe condition or access limitations, the condition of the segment shall be considered failing and shall 

be repaired within one-hundred and twenty (120) days. If scheduled or hot spot cleaning cannot be 

properly accomplished due to access limitations, an action plan to gain access to the segment shall be 

developed within one-hundred and twenty (120) days and shall be implemented via repair within one (1) 

year. 

59. The City shall identify the sewer lines cleaned and the results of its QA/QC program each 

year in the Annual Report required by Section XVI of this Consent Decree. 

XIV. PRIVATE LATERALS

60. Within one-hundred and (180) days of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree, the City 

shall propose and recommend to the City Council the adoption of amendments to the Municipal Code to: 

a. Require inspection of private laterals as a condition to sale of a property; 

b. Require inspection of private laterals as a condition to obtaining a building permit if the 

value of the construction either exceeds $75,000, or where any repair or replacement is 

being made to the sanitary sewer system; 

c. Require inspection where more than twenty-five percent of the square footage of the 

structure is being remodeled; 

d. Set standards for evaluating the condition of private laterals subject to the provisions in 

subsections (a)-(b) above. 

e. Require any defects in the private lateral that causes the private lateral to fail the 

inspection be repaired or replaced within ninety (90) days. Defects causing a private 

lateral to fail the inspection shall include but not be limited to the following: pipe 

failure; open joints; and/or openings in the pipe, which allow root intrusion. 

f. Require the private lateral owner, within one-hundred and twenty (120) days of 

notification by the City, to remove roots from their laterals that are growing into Lower 

Laterals as determined by the City and make all necessary repairs to the private lateral 

necessary to prevent a reoccurrence of roots intrusion that reaches the lower lateral. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 21 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 22

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

XV. CHEMICAL ROOT CONTROL PROGRAM 

61. The City shall continue to implement its Chemical Root Control Program to supplement 

focused cleaning and routine cleaning to assure compliance with the San Carlos Collection System SSO 

Reduction Performance Goals and Lower Lateral SSO Reduction Performance Goals in Section VII of 

this Consent Decree. The City shall annually evaluate the effectiveness of the Chemical Root Control 

Program and present its findings in the Annual Reports required under Section XVI of this Consent 

Decree. Should the City in any year determine that the Chemical Root Control Program is ineffective, 

the City may submit a request for terminating the program to Baykeeper that includes the basis for such 

termination. Upon Baykeeper’s written approval, the program shall be terminated. 

XVI. ANNUAL REPORT

62. Commencing March 1, 2011 and each year that this Consent Decree remains in effect, the 

City shall submit an Annual Report to Baykeeper. The Annual Report shall: 

a. Include the specific annual reporting requirements as set forth in Sections VII, VIII, 

XII, XIII, and XV of this Consent Decree. 

b. Provide details relevant to the City’s implementation of, and compliance with, this Final 

Consent Decree during the preceding year, including any program modifications during 

the prior calendar year or delays. 

c. Assess the City’s progress towards meeting the requirements of the Consent Decree. 

XVII. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION PROJECT AND FEES AND COSTS 

63. Environmental Mitigation Project. To remediate perceived environmental harms resulting 

from the allegations in the Complaint, Defendant shall pay to the Rose Foundation for Communities and 

the Environment the total sum of Two-Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) (the “Mitigation Payment”) 

to be used to fund environmental project activities that will benefit the San Francisco Bay or its 

tributaries. Payment shall be made in two equal installments of $100,000.00, with the first installment 

of $100,000.00 due on or before June 30, 2010, and the second installment of $100,000.00 due on or 

before July 31, 2010. These payments shall be made to: 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 22 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 23

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 Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment 

6008 College Avenue, Suite 10 

Oakland, California 94618 

Attention: Tim Little 

64. Litigation Fees and Costs. To help defray Baykeeper’s attorneys, consultant, and expert fees 

and costs, and any other costs incurred as a result of investigating, filing this action, and negotiating a 

settlement, Defendant shall pay Plaintiff the sum of Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars ($95,000) which 

shall include all attorneys’ fees and costs for all services performed by and on behalf of Baykeeper by its 

attorneys and consultants up to and through the Effective Date of this Consent Decree. The payment 

shall be made within twenty-one (21) days of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree. The payment 

shall be made in the form of a check payable to Lawyers for Clean Water Attorney Client Trust Account

and addressed to: 1004 O’Reilly Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94129, sent overnight delivery, and shall 

constitute full payment for all costs of litigation incurred by Baykeeper that have or could have been 

claimed in connection with or arising out of Baykeeper’s lawsuit, up to and including the Effective Date. 

65. Compliance Monitoring. Defendants agree to compensate Plaintiff for time to be spent by 

legal staff and/or technical consultants reviewing compliance reports and any other documents, or 

participating in any meet and confer process under this Consent Decree. To this end, the Defendant 

shall pay Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($55,000) within twenty-one (21) days of the Effective Date of 

this Consent Decree. Payment shall be made payable to Lawyers for Clean Water Attorney Client Trust 

Account and addressed to 1004 O’Reilly Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94129, sent overnight delivery. 

Any compliance monitoring money remaining when this Consent Decree terminates shall be returned to 

the City within sixty (60) days of termination. 

XVIII. COMMITMENTS OF BAYKEEPER

66. Submission of Consent Decree to Federal Agencies. Baykeeper shall submit a copy of this 

Consent Decree to EPA and the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) within three (3) days of the 

Consent Decree’s execution for agency review consistent with 40 C.F.R. § 135.5. The agency review 

period expires forty-five (45) days after receipt by both agencies, as evidenced by the certified return 

receipts, copies of which shall be provided by Baykeeper to Defendant upon request. In the event that 

EPA or DOJ comment negatively on the provisions of this Consent Decree, the Parties agree to meet and 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 23 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 24

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

confer to attempt to resolve the issue(s) raised by EPA or DOJ. 

67. Filing of Consent Decree With the Court. Plaintiffs shall file this Consent Decree with the 

District Court within three (3) days of the Effective Date. Plaintiff is responsible for notifying 

Defendant of the District Court’s entry of the Order dismissing these claims with prejudice. Such 

notification can be satisfied by the District Court’s Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (“CM/ECF”) 

notification to the Parties that the Order was executed and entered by the District Court. 

XIX. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

68. If Defendant claims inability to pay as the basis for its failure to comply with any provision 

of this Consent Decree Defendant shall submit financial documents to Plaintiffs adequate to support 

their claim of inability to pay no later than thirty (30) days from their failure to comply. Plaintiff 

reserves the right to require the submission of additional financial documents in order to analyze 

Defendant’s claim of inability to pay and Defendant agrees to provide said documents. 

69. This District Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purposes of adjudicating 

all disputes among the Parties that may arise under the provisions of this Consent Decree. The District 

Court shall have the power to enforce this Consent Decree with all available legal and equitable 

remedies, including contempt. 

70. Meet and Confer. A Party to this Consent Decree shall invoke the dispute resolution 

procedures of this Section by notifying all other Parties in writing of the matter(s) in dispute and of the 

Party’s proposal to resolve the dispute under this Section. The Parties shall then meet and confer in an 

attempt to resolve the dispute informally over a period of ten (10) calendar days from the date of the 

notice. 

71. If the Parties cannot resolve a dispute by the end of the meet and confer informal 

negotiations, the Party invoking the dispute resolution provision may invoke formal dispute resolution 

by filing a motion before the District Court. The Parties shall jointly apply to the District Court for an 

expedited hearing schedule on the motion. 

72. If Plaintiff invokes any of the provisions of this Section to enforce the terms and conditions 

of this Consent Decree, Plaintiff shall be entitled to recover reasonable fees incurred to enforce the terms 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 24 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 25

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

of this Consent Decree consistent with the provisions of sections 505 and 309 of the Clean Water Act, 

33 U.S.C. §§ 1365, 1319. 

XX. MUTUAL RELEASE OF LIABILITY, COVENANT NOT TO SUE, AND FORCE 

MAJEURE

73. In consideration of the above, upon the Effective Date of this Consent Decree, the Parties 

hereby fully release, except for claims for the Defendant’s failure to comply with this Consent Decree 

and as expressly provided below, each other and their respective successors, assigns, officers, agents, 

employees, and all persons, firms, and corporations having an interest in them, from any and all Clean 

Water Act violations alleged or which could have been alleged based upon the facts alleged in the 

Complaint, up to and including the Termination Date of this Consent Decree. 

74. Nothing in this Consent Decree limits or otherwise affects Plaintiff’s right to address or take 

any position that it deems necessary or appropriate in any formal or informal proceeding before the 

Regional Board, EPA, or any other judicial or administrative body on any other matter relating to 

Defendant. 

75. Neither the Consent Decree nor any payment pursuant to the Consent Decree shall constitute 

or be construed as a finding, adjudication, or acknowledgement of any fact, law, or liability, nor shall it 

be construed as an admission of violation of any law, order, rule, or regulation. Defendant maintains and 

reserves all defenses they may have to any alleged violations that may be raised in the future. 

76. Force Majeure. Defendant shall notify Baykeeper pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, 

when implementation of the requirements set forth in this Consent Decree, within the deadlines set forth 

in those paragraphs, becomes impossible, despite the timely good-faith efforts of Defendant, due to 

circumstances beyond the control of Defendant or its agents, and which could not have been reasonably 

foreseen and prevented by the exercise of due diligence by Defendant. Any delays due to Defendant’s 

failure to make timely and bona fide applications and to exercise diligent efforts to comply with the 

terms in this Consent Decree in normal inclement weather shall not, in any event, be considered to be 

circumstances beyond Defendant’s control. Financial inability shall not, in any event, be considered to 

be circumstances beyond Defendant’s control. 

a. If Defendant claims impossibility, it shall notify Baykeeper in writing within thirty (30) 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 25 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 26

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

days of the date that Defendant first knew of the event or circumstance that caused or 

would cause a violation of this Consent Decree, or the date Defendant should have 

known of the event or circumstance by the exercise of due diligence. The notice shall 

describe the reason for the nonperformance and specifically refer to this Section of this 

Consent Decree. It shall describe the anticipated length of time the delay may persist, 

the cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken or to be taken by Defendant to 

prevent or minimize the delay, the schedule by which the measures will be 

implemented, and the anticipated date of compliance. Defendant shall adopt all 

reasonable measures to avoid and minimize such delays. 

b. The Parties shall meet and confer in good-faith concerning the non-performance and, 

where the Parties concur that performance was or is impossible, despite the timely good 

faith efforts of Defendant, due to circumstances beyond the control of Defendant that 

could not have been reasonably foreseen and prevented by the exercise of due diligence 

by Defendant, new performance deadlines shall be established. 

c. If Baykeeper disagrees with Defendant’s notice, or in the event that the Parties cannot 

timely agree on the terms of new performance deadlines or requirements, either Party 

shall have the right to invoke the Dispute Resolution Procedures pursuant to Section 

XIX of this Consent Decree. In such proceeding, Defendant shall bear the burden of 

proving that any delay in performance of any requirement of this Consent Decree was 

caused or will be caused by force majeure and the extent of any delay attributable to 

such circumstances. 

77. The Dispute Resolution Procedures set forth in Section XIX shall be the exclusive 

mechanism for resolving disputes between the Parties with regard to any aspect of this Consent Decree. 

XXI. STIPULATED PAYMENTS

78. Stipulated Payments for Failure to Comply with Consent Decree. Defendant shall make a 

stipulated payment of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) for each missed deadline and/or failure to comply 

with a requirement included in or contemplated by this Consent Decree, unless the failure to comply is 

from a Force Majeure Event. Payments for missed deadlines shall be made for the restoration and/or 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 26 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 27

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

improvement of the San Francisco Bay watershed, and shall be awarded to the Environmental 

Mitigation Project recipient identified above. Defendant agrees to make the stipulated payment within 

thirty (30) days of a missed deadline and mail via certified mail or overnight delivery. Defendant shall 

provide Plaintiff with a copy of each such payment. 

79. The City agrees to make stipulated payments in the event complete reports covered by this 

Section are not timely submitted. Reports covered by this Section include the following Sections from 

this Consent Decree: the SSO Cause Determination SOP under Section VIII; the SSO Reduction Action 

Plan under Section IX; the Hydraulic Modeling Work Plan, Capacity Assurance Report, and Final 

Compliance Report under Section X; the FOG Control Action Plan under Section XII; and the Annual 

Reports under Section XVI. The City shall have a fourteen (14) day grace period after the due date for 

the reports covered by this Section prior to imposition of stipulated penalties for the first instance of 

delayed reporting. Baykeeper is not obligated to notify the City, however it may do so in order to allow 

the City to promptly address any alleged deficiency after any submission date has been missed. 

80. The City shall pay the following stipulated payments in the event that they file a late or 

incomplete report covered herein after the grace period: 

a. For a report submitted after the grace period, the City shall pay $100 per day until the 

report is filed, up to thirty (30) days for a total amount of $3,000. 

b. For any report more than thirty (30) days late, the City shall pay $5,000. 

c. For any report more than ninety (90) days late, the City shall pay $10,000. 

d. The above penalties are cumulative, as applicable, to a maximum payment of $18,000 

per report. 

81. In the case of a late report, the City shall send Baykeeper the report per Section XXII of this 

Consent Decree. Baykeeper shall notify the City of receipt of the late report and shall include an invoice 

for the amount of the stipulated payment, if any, due and payable. The City shall contact Baykeeper 

within five (5) working days if the City disagrees with Baykeeper’s stipulated payment calculation and 

may meet and confer with Baykeeper or seek Dispute Resolution pursuant to Section XIX of this 

Consent Decree. The City shall pay any stipulated payments due pursuant to this Consent Decree within 

thirty (30) days after receipt of Baykeeper’s invoice itemizing the stipulated payment liability, or thirty 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 27 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 28

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

(30) days after resolution of a dispute if the dispute resolution process has been invoked pursuant to 

Section XIX of this Consent Decree. 

82. All payments of stipulated penalties described in this Consent Decree shall be paid by the 

City to the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and sent via overnight mail to: Rose 

Foundation for Communities and the Environment, 6008 College Avenue, Oakland, CA 94618, 

Attn: Tim Little. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall prevent Baykeeper from waiving any stipulated 

penalties, which might be due under this Section, based on the outcome of the Informal Dispute 

Resolution process, or based on the City’s good faith efforts. 

XXII. NOTICES AND SUBMISSIONS

83. Defendant agrees to provide Plaintiff with all documents or reports required or contemplated 

by this Consent Decree. All documents provided by Defendant shall be directed to the following 

individuals at the addresses specified below unless specifically stated otherwise herein and shall be sent 

by certified or overnight delivery, and by electronic mail. Any change in the individuals or addresses 

designated by any Party must be made in writing to all Parties. 

If to BAYKEEPER: 

Daniel Cooper 

Martin McCarthy 

LAWYERS FOR CLEAN WATER, INC. 

1004 O’Reilly Avenue 

San Francisco, CA 94129 

Telephone: (415) 440-6520 

Email: daniel@lawyersforcleanwater.com 

 martin@lawyersforcleanwater.com 

Jason Flanders 

SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER, INC. 

785 Market Street, Suite 850 

 San Francisco, CA 94103-2023 

Email: jason@baykeeper.org 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 28 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 29

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

If to the CITY: 

Gregory J. Rubens 

AARONSON, DICKERSON, COHN & LANZONE 

939 Laurel Street, Suite D 

San Carlos, CA 94070 

Telephone: (650) 593-3117 ext. 202 

Fax: (650) 637-1401 

Email: grubens@adcl.com 

 

Mark Weiss 

CITY OF SAN CARLOS 

600 Elm Street 

P.O. Box 3009 

San Carlos, CA 94070 

Tel: (650) 802-4228 

Fax: (650) 595-6729 

Email: mweiss@cityofsancarlos.org 

84. Notifications of communications shall be deemed submitted three (3) days after the date that 

they are postmarked and sent by first-class mail or deposited with an overnight mail/delivery service. 

85. Defendant also agrees to make available to Baykeeper any new or existing documents within 

the City’s custody or control that are reasonably necessary to evaluate system performance and/or 

compliance with this Consent Decree within seven (7) days of written request by Baykeeper. 

86. During the life of this Consent Decree, Defendant shall preserve at least one legible copy of 

all records and documents, including computer-stored information, which relate to performance of its 

obligations under this Consent Decree. 

87. Any notice, report, certification, data presentation or other document submitted by Defendant 

to Baykeeper pursuant to this Consent Decree, which discusses, describes, demonstrates, or supports any 

finding or makes any representation concerning compliance or non-compliance with any requirement(s) 

of this Consent Decree, shall contain the following certification, signed and dated by a responsible 

official: 

I certify, under penalty of perjury, that this document and all attachments were 

prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed 

to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information 

submitted and is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and 

complete. 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 29 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 30

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

XXIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS

88. Continuing Jurisdiction. The Parties stipulate that the District Court shall retain jurisdiction 

to enforce the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree and to resolve disputes arising hereunder as 

may be necessary or appropriate for the construction or execution of this Consent Decree up to and 

including the Termination Date in paragraph 10. 

89. Construction. The language in all parts of this Consent Decree shall be construed according 

to its plain and ordinary meaning, except as to those terms defined in Section II above. 

90. Choice of Law. The laws of the United States shall govern this Consent Decree. 

91. Severability. In the event that any provision, paragraph, section, or sentence of this Consent 

Decree is held by a District Court to be unenforceable, the validity of the enforceable provisions shall 

not be adversely affected. 

92. Counterparts. This Consent Decree may be executed in any number of counterparts, all of 

which together shall constitute one original document. Telecopy, scanned copies (i.e., pdf) and/or 

facsimile copies of original signature shall be deemed to be originally executed counterparts of this 

Consent Decree. 

93. Modification of the Consent Decree. This Consent Decree, and any provisions herein, may 

not be changed, waived, discharged, or terminated unless by a written instrument, signed by the Parties. 

94. Full Settlement. This Consent Decree constitutes a full and final settlement of this matter. 

95. Integration Clause. This is an integrated Consent Decree. This Consent Decree is intended 

to be a full and complete statement of the terms of the agreement between the Parties and expressly 

supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements, covenants, representations, and warranties 

(express or implied) concerning the subject matter of this Consent Decree. 

96. Authority. The undersigned representatives for Baykeeper and the City each certify that 

he/she is fully authorized by the Party whom he/she represents to enter into the terms and conditions of 

this Consent Decree. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 30 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 31

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 hereby enter into this Consent Decree. 

 CITY OF SAN CARLOS 

Date: 

By: Mark Weiss, City Manager 

SAN FRANCISCO BAYKEEPER 

Date: 

By: Deb Self, Executive Director 

APPROVED AS TO FORM: For DEFENDANT CITY OF SAN CARLOS: 

AARONSON DICKERSON COHN & LANZONE 

Date: 

By: Greg Rubens 

CITY ATTORNEY 

Date: By: Mark Weiss 

 Assistant City Attorney 

For SAN FRANSCISCO BAYKEEPER: 

LAWYERS FOR CLEAN WATER INC. 

Date: 

By: Daniel Cooper 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 31 of 32
[Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. CV 09-05677 SBA 32

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

 ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above captioned action is dismissed with prejudice. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction over Baykeeper’s claims 

against the City of San Carlos for the sole purpose of enforcing compliance by the Parties with the terms 

of the Consent Decree. All proceedings relating to enforcing compliance with the Consent Decree shall 

be before the federal Magistrate. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: 4/19/10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

Honorable Saundra Brown Armstrong 

United States District Court Judge 

Northern District of California 

Case 4:09-cv-05677-SBA Document 17 Filed 04/19/10 Page 32 of 32