Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02438/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02438-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alliance Recycling, Inc.
Defendant
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
Plaintiff
United States
Amicus

Document Text:

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 

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGREEMENT CASE NO. 07-C-02438-CRB 

AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 1 

ANDREW L. PACKARD (Cal. Bar No. 168690) 

MICHAEL P. LYNES (Cal. Bar No. 230462) 

Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard 

319 Pleasant Street 

Petaluma, CA 94952 

Tel: (707) 763-7227 

Fax: (707) 763-9227 

E-mail: andrew@packardlawoffices.com 

MICHAEL R. LOZEAU (Cal. Bar No. 142893) 

Law Office of Michael R. Lozeau 

1516 Oak Street, Suite 216 

Alameda, CA 94501 

Tel: (510) 749-9102 

Fax: (510) 749-9103 

E-mail: mrlozeau@lozeaulaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff CALIFORNIA 

SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING 

PROTECTION ALLIANCE, a non profit 

corporation, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

ALLIANCE RECYCLING, INC., 

 Defendant. 

 Case No. 07-C-02438-CRB 

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF 

CONSENT AGREEMENT AND 

DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS 

WITH PREJUDICE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING 

CONSENT AGREEMENT AND 

GRANTING DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE [FRCP 41(a)(2)]

WHEREAS, on February 2, 2007, Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

(“CSPA”) provided Defendant Alliance Recycling, Inc. (“Alliance”) with a Notice of Violations 

and Intent to File Suit (“Notice”) under Clean Water Act § 505, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. 

WHEREAS, on May 7, 2007, CSPA filed its Complaint against Alliance in this court, 

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Alliance Recycling, Inc., Case No. 07-C-02438-

CRB. Said Complaint incorporates by reference all of the allegations contained in CSPA’s 

Notice. 

WHEREAS, CSPA and Alliance (collectively “Parties”), through their authorized 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 1 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 2 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 3 of 36
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 

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGREEMENT CASE NO. 07-C-02438-CRB 

AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 3 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

WHEREAS, the Parties have consented to entry of the foregoing Consent Agreement and 

requested the Court’s approval and entry thereof; and 

WHEREAS, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1365, Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection 

Alliance (“CSPA”) has served the complaint herein on the United States Attorney General and 

the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1365(c)(3), at least 45 days have elapsed since the 

United States Attorney General was served on May 7, 2007, and the Administrator of the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency was served on May 7, 2007 with copies of the Consent 

Agreement; and 

WHEREAS, the Court has reviewed the Consent Agreement, and fully considered all 

comments received thereon to date from the Parties hereto, the United States Attorney General 

and the United States Environmental Protection Agency; and 

WHEREAS, the Court has fully considered the Parties’ request to enter this Consent 

Agreement as an order; and 

WHEREAS, the Court finds the Consent Agreement to be: (1) fair, adequate and 

reasonable; (2) consistent with applicable laws; and (3) protective of the public interest; and 

WHEREAS, good cause appearing therefor, 

1. THIS CONSENT AGREEMENT IS HEREBY APPROVED AND JUDGMENT 

IS ENTERED IN ACCORDANCE THEREWITH; 

2. Plaintiff California Sportfishing Protection Alliance’s claims against Alliance 

Recycling, Inc. as set forth in the Notice and Complaint filed in Case No. 07-C-02438-CRB, are 

hereby dismissed with prejudice; and 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 4 of 36
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 

STIPULATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGREEMENT CASE NO. 07-C-02438-CRB 

AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 4 

3. This Court shall retain and have jurisdiction over CSPA and Alliance Recycling, 

Inc. with respect to implementation of the terms of their Consent Agreement and the resolution of 

any disputes that may arise under that Consent Agreement attached to the parties’ Stipulation to 

Dismiss as Exhibit A. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

NORTHERN DISTRICT COURT OF CALIFORNIA 

Dated:__________________ __________________________________________ 

United States District Court Judge 

July 10, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 5 of 36
EXHIBIT A 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 6 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 7 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 8 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 9 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 10 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 11 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 12 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 13 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 14 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 15 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 16 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 17 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 18 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 19 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 20 of 36
Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 21 of 36
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

“An Advocate for Fisheries, Habitat and Water Quality”

February 2, 2007 

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL 

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

Jerome Anast 

Alliance Recycling, Inc. 

3426 Peralta Street 

Oakland, CA 94608 

Rena Ricles 

Agent of Service of Process, Alliance Recyclers, Inc. 

1970 Broadway Street, Suite 1200 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Re: Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit Under the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act 

Dear Sir: 

 I am writing on behalf of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

(“CSPA”) in regard to violations of the Clean Water Act (“the Act”) occurring at 

Alliance Recycling, Inc’s facility located at 3426 Peralta Street, Oakland, California (“the 

Facility”) and operating under the name “Alliance Recycling.” The WDID identification 

number for the Facility is 201S012241. CSPA is a non-profit public benefit corporation 

dedicated to the preservation, protection, and defense of the environment, wildlife and 

natural resources of the San Francisco Bay and other California waters. This letter is 

being sent to you as the responsible owners, officers, or operators of Alliance Recycling, 

Inc. (hereafter “Alliance Recycling” or “you”). 

This letter addresses Alliance Recycling’s unlawful discharges of pollutants from 

the Facility to the City of Oakland’s storm drain system, which discharges into the San 

Francisco Bay. This letter addresses ongoing violations of the substantive and procedural 

requirements of the Clean Water Act and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (“NPDES”) General Industrial Storm Water Permit No. CAS000001, State Water 

Resources Control Board Water Quality Order No. 92-12-DWQ, as amended by Order 

No. 97-03-DWQ (“General Industrial Storm Water Permit”). 

Section 505(b) of the Clean Water Act provides that sixty (60) days prior to the 

initiation of a civil action under Section 505(a) of the Act (33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)), a citizen 

must give notice of intent to file suit. Notice must be given to the alleged violator, the 

3536 Rainier Avenue, Stockton, California 95204 ● Tel: 209-464-5067 ● Fax: 209-464-1028 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 22 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 2 of 11

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“the EPA”), and the State in which the violations 

occur. 

As required by the Clean Water Act, this Notice of Violation and Intent to File 

Suit provides notice of the violations that have occurred, and continue to occur, at the 

Facility. Consequently, Alliance Recycling is hereby placed on formal notice by CSPA 

that, after the expiration of sixty (60) days from the date of this Notice of Violation and 

Intent to File Suit, CSPA intends to file suit in federal court against Alliance Recycling 

Industries, Inc. under Section 505(a) of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)), for 

violations of the Clean Water Act and the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. These 

violations are described more fully below. 

I. Background. 

On June 6, 1997, Alliance Recycling submitted its notice of intent to comply with 

the terms of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. Based on CSPA’s review of 

available documents, the Facility is classified under Standard Industrial Classification 

Code 5093 (“Scrap & Waste Materials. The Facility collects and discharges storm water 

from its 8,000 square-foot industrial site to the City of Oakland’s storm drain system, 

which discharges into the San Francisco Bay. 

The San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (the “Regional Board” 

or “Board”) has established water quality standards for the San Francisco Bay, including 

the Oakland Estuary and the San Leandro Bay, in the “Water Quality Control Plan for the 

San Francisco Bay Basin,” generally referred to as the Basin Plan. See 

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb2/basinplan.htm. The Basin Plan includes a narrative 

toxicity standard stating that “[a]ll waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in 

concentrations that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic 

organisms.” See http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb2/basinplan/web/BP_ 

CH3.html. The Basin Plan provides that “[t]he pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor 

raised above 8.5.” See id. The Basin Plan provides that “[w]aters shall not contain 

suspended material in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial 

uses.” See id. The Basin Plan provides that “[w]aters shall not contain biostimulatory 

substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths 

cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.” See id.

The Basin Plan establishes Marine Water Quality Objectives for the following 

pollutants: zinc – 0.081 mg/l (4-day average), 0.090 mg/l (1-hour average); cadmium – of 

0.0093 mg/L (4-day average), 0.042 mg/L (1-hour average); lead – of 0.0081 mg/L (4 

day average), 0.21 mg/L (1hour average). See http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb2/ 

basinplan/web/tab_3-3.html. 

EPA has established secondary MCL, consumer acceptance limits of 0.02 mg/L 

for aluminum and 1.0 mg/L for iron. See http://www.epa.gov/safewater/mcl.html#mcls. 

The California Department of Health Services has also established MCLs of 0.2-1.0 mg/L 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 23 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 3 of 11

for aluminum and.0.3 mg/L for iron. See California Code of Regulations, title 22, §§ 

64431, 64449. EPA has also established numeric water quality standards for priority 

toxic pollutants (at a hardness of 100 mg/l), including: 0.009 mg/L for copper, 1.0 mg/L 

for iron, and 0.1 mg/L for zinc. See http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/wqcriteria. 

htm. 

 The General Industrial Storm Water Permit incorporates benchmark levels 

established by EPA as guidelines for determining whether a facility discharging industrial 

storm water has implemented the requisite best available technology economically 

achievable (“BAT”) and best conventional pollutant control technology (“BCT”). The 

following benchmarks have been established for pollutants discharged by Alliance 

Recycling: aluminum – 0.750 mg/L; arsenic – 0.16854; cadmium – 0.159 mg/L; chemical 

oxygen demand – 120 mg/L; copper – 0.0636 mg/L; pH – 6.0-9.0; iron – 1.0 mg/L; lead 

– 0.0816 mg/L; manganese – 1.0 mg/L; mercury – 0.0024 mg/L; nickel – 1.417 mg/L, 

total suspended solids – 100 mg/L; oil & grease – 15.0 mg/L; and zinc – 0.117 mg/L. 

The State Water Quality Control Board also recently proposed adding a benchmark level 

for specific conductance of 200 μmho/cm. 

 

II. Pollutant Discharges in Violation of the NPDES Permit. 

Alliance Recycling has violated and continues to violate the terms and conditions 

of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. Section 402(p) of the Act prohibits the 

discharge of storm water associated with industrial activities, except as permitted under 

an NPDES permit (33 U.S.C. § 1342) such as the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. 

Discharge Prohibition A(1) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit prohibits the 

discharge of materials other than storm water (defined as non-storm water discharges) 

that discharge either directly or indirectly to waters of the United States. Discharge 

Prohibition A(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit prohibits storm water 

discharges and authorized non-storm water discharges that cause or threaten to cause 

pollution, contamination, or nuisance. 

Receiving Water Limitation C(1) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit 

prohibits storm water discharges and authorized non-storm water discharges to surface or 

groundwater that adversely impact human health or the environment. Receiving Water 

Limitation C(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit also prohibits storm water 

discharges and authorized non-storm water discharges that cause or contribute to an 

exceedance of any applicable water quality standards contained in a Statewide Water 

Quality Control Plan or the applicable Regional Board’s Basin Plan. 

A. Discharges in Violation of the Permit. 

Alliance Recycling has discharged and continues to discharge stormwater with 

levels of total suspended solids (“TSS”), pH, specific conductivity, oil and grease, 

chemical oxygen demand (“COD”), aluminum, copper, iron, lead, and zinc in violation of 

the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. These high pollutant levels have been 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 24 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 4 of 11

documented during significant rain events, including rain events indicated in the table of 

rain data attached hereto as Exhibit A. Alliance Recycling’s Annual Reports and 

Sampling and Analysis Results confirm discharges of specific pollutants and materials 

other than stormwater in violation of the Permit provisions listed above. Self-monitoring 

reports under the Permit are deemed “conclusive evidence of an exceedance of a permit 

limitation.” Sierra Club v. Union Oil, 813 F.2d 1480, 1493 (9th Cir. 1988). 

Alliance Recycling has violated Discharge Prohibitions A(1) and A(2) and 

Receiving Water Limitations C(1) and C(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit 

by discharging storm water with unacceptable levels of TSS, pH, specific conductivity, 

oil and grease, COD, aluminum, copper, iron, lead, and zinc on at least the following 

occasions: 

Date Parameter Concentration Water Quality 

Objective 

12/25/2005 (# 1) TSS 633 mg/L 100 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) pH 4.27 6.0 – 9.0; 6.5 – 8.5 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Specific 

Conductivity 

1400 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Oil & Grease 110 mg/L 15.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) COD 3000 mg/L 110 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Aluminum 8.02 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Copper 1.16 mg/L 0.0636 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Iron 27.1 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Lead 0.352 mg/L 0.016 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 1) Zinc 2.97 mg/L 0.117 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) TSS 350 mg/L 100 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) pH 4.74 6.0 – 9.0; 6.5 – 8.5 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Specific 

Conductivity 

1570 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Oil & Grease 60 15.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) COD 3200 110 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Aluminum 6.25 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Copper 0.325 mg/L 0.0636 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Iron 32.2 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Lead 1.57 mg/L 0.016 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 2) Zinc 3.42 0.117 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) TSS 480 mg/L 100 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) pH 4.89 6.0 – 9.0; 6.5 – 8.5 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Specific 

Conductivity 

2480 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Oil & Grease 75 mg/L 15.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) COD 5000 mg/L 110 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Aluminum 18.4 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 25 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 5 of 11

12/25/2005 (# 3) Copper 0.462 mg/L 0.0636 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Iron 76.2 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Lead 0.202 mg/L 0.016 mg/L 

12/25/2005 (# 3) Zinc 5.12 mg/L 0.117 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) TSS 1110 mg/L 100 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Specific 

Conductivity 

1259 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Oil & Grease 180 mg/L 15 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) COD 9100 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Aluminum 13.8 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Copper 0.675 mg/L 0.0636 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Iron 58.5 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Lead 0.259 mg/L 0.0816 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 1) Zinc 3.06 mg/L 0.117 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) TSS 1380 mg/L 100 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) pH 6.15 6.0 – 9.0; 6.5 – 8.5 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Specific 

Conductivity 

1400 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Oil & Grease 220 mg/L 15 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) COD 11,000 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Aluminum 13.9 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Copper 0.816 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Iron 56.8 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Lead 0.466 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 2) Zinc 5.04 mg/L 0.117 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) TSS 1400 100 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) pH 6.41 6.0 – 9.0; 6.5 – 8.5 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Specific 

Conductivity 

920 μmho/cm 200 μmho/cm 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Oil & Grease 190 mg/L 15 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) COD 6700 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Aluminum 18.6 mg/L 0.75 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Copper 0.492 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Iron 63.8 mg/L 1.0 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Lead 0.356 mg/L 

2/12/2003 (# 3) Zinc 5.13 mg/L 0.117 mg/L 

Alliance Recycling’s Annual Reports confirm that Alliance Recycling has known 

that its stormwater contains the above-listed pollutants at levels exceeding EPA 

Benchmarks and other water quality criteria since prior to February 2, 2002. CSPA 

alleges that such violations also have occurred and will occur on other rain dates, 

including during every significant rain event that has occurred since at least February 2, 

2002, and that will occur at the Facility subsequent to the date of this Notice of Violation 

and Intent to File Suit. Attachment A, attached hereto, sets forth specific rain dates on 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 26 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 6 of 11

which CSPA alleges that Alliance Recycling has discharged storm water containing 

impermissible levels of TSS, pH, specific conductivity, oil and grease, COD, aluminum, 

arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, zinc and 

other pollutants in violation of Discharge Prohibitions A(1) and A(2) and Receiving 

Water Limitations C(1) and C(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. 

These unlawful discharges from the Facility are ongoing. Each discharge of 

stormwater containing pollutants at unacceptable levels from the Facility constitutes a 

separate violation of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit and the Act. Consistent 

with the five-year statute of limitations applicable to citizen enforcement actions brought 

pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act, Alliance Recycling is subject to penalties for 

violations of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit and the Act since February 2, 

2002. 

B. Failure to Develop and Implement an Adequate Storm Water 

Monitoring Plan 

Section B(5)(a) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit requires that 

dischargers “shall collect storm water samples during the first hour of discharge from (1) 

the first storm event of the wet season, and (2) at least one other storm event in the wet 

season. All storm water discharge locations shall be sampled.” (emphasis added) 

Section B(5)(c)(i) further requires that the samples shall be analyzed for total suspended 

solids, pH, specific conductance, and total organic carbon. Oil and grease may be 

substituted for total organic carbon. Section B(5)(c)(ii) requires that “samples shall be 

analyzed for . . . [t]oxic chemicals and other pollutants that are likely to be present in 

storm water discharges in significant quantities.” 

Alliance Recycling is a member of the Metal Recyclers Monitoring Group 

(“MRMG”). Pursuant to Section B(15) of the of the General Permit, Alliance Recycling 

must “collect and analyze samples from at least two storm events in accordance with 

Section B.5. over the five-year period of this General Permit.” According to documents 

filed with the Regional Board and the MRMG, Alliance Recycling has failed to comply 

with Section B(5)(a) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit by failing to collect 

storm water samples during the first hour of discharge from the first storm event of the 

wet season and from at least one other storm event per year during each of the wet 

seasons since the 2000-2001 wet season. Alliance Recycling also violated Section B(5) 

by failing to collect storm water samples from all storm water discharge locations at the 

Facility in each of the years it was required to sample. Alliance Recycling failed to 

collect and analyze samples from at least two storm events during a given wet season 

during the past five years. Alliance Recycling also failed to conduct visual observations 

of every discharge point at the Facility at least once per month during each wet season 

since the 2000-2001 wet season, as required by the General Permit. 

Alliance Recycling has also failed to analyze its storm water samples for all 

chemicals and pollutants that are “likely to be present in storm water discharges in 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 27 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 7 of 11

significant quantities.” See Section B(5)(c)(ii). CSPA is informed and believes that at 

least the following pollutants are “likely” to be present in Alliance Recycling’s storm 

water discharges in significant quantities: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, manganese, 

mercury and nickel. Alliance Recycling’s ongoing failure to analyze its storm water 

samples for these and other pollutants likely to be present in its storm water discharges 

constitutes ongoing violations of the Act. 

Each of Alliance Recycling’s failures to comply with these mandatory monitoring 

requirements constitutes an ongoing violation of the Act. Consistent with the five-year 

statute of limitations applicable to citizen enforcement actions brought pursuant to the 

federal Clean Water Act, Alliance Recycling is subject to penalties for these violations of 

the General Industrial Storm Water Permit and the Act since February 2, 2002. 

C. Failure to Implement BAT and BCT.

Effluent Limitation B(3) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit requires 

dischargers to reduce or prevent pollutants in their storm water discharges through 

implementation of BAT for toxic and nonconventional pollutants and BCT for 

conventional pollutants. BAT and BCT include both nonstructural and structural 

measures. General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(8). CSPA’s investigation 

indicates that Alliance Recycling has not implemented BAT and BCT at the Facility for 

its discharges of TSS, pH, specific conductivity, oil and grease, COD, aluminum, iron, 

lead, and zinc, and other pollutants in violation of Effluent Limitation B(3) of the General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit. 

Alliance Recycling was required to have implemented BAT and BCT by no later 

than October 1, 1992. Alliance Recycling has been in continuous violation of the BAT 

and BCT requirements every day since October 1, 1992, and will continue to be in 

violation every day that Alliance Recycling fails to implement BAT and BCT. Alliance 

Recycling is subject to penalties for violations of the Order and the Act occurring since 

February 2, 2002. 

D. Failure to Develop and Implement an Adequate Storm Water Pollution 

Prevention Plan 

 Section A(1) and Provision E(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit 

require dischargers of storm water associated with industrial activity to develop, 

implement an adequate SWPPP no later than October 1, 1992 and to continuously update 

the SWPPP and its implementation to reflect BAT and BCT storm water controls. 

Section A(1) and Provision E(2) requires dischargers who submitted an NOI pursuant to 

the Order to continue following their existing SWPPP and implement any necessary 

revisions to their SWPPP in a timely manner, but in any case, no later than August 1, 

1997. 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 28 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 8 of 11

The SWPPP must, among other requirements, identify and evaluate sources of 

pollutants associated with industrial activities that may affect the quality of storm and 

non-storm water discharges from the facility and identify and implement site-specific 

best management practices (“BMPs”) to reduce or prevent pollutants associated with 

industrial activities in storm water and authorized non-storm water discharges (General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(2)). The SWPPP must also include BMPs that 

achieve BAT and BCT (Effluent Limitation B(3)). The SWPPP must include: a 

description of individuals and their responsibilities for developing and implementing the 

SWPPP (General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(3)); a site map showing the 

facility boundaries, storm water drainage areas with flow pattern and nearby waterbodies, 

the location of the storm water collection, conveyance and discharge system, structural 

control measures, impervious areas, areas of actual and potential pollutant contact, and 

areas of industrial activity (General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(4)); a list 

of significant materials handled and stored at the site (General Industrial Storm Water 

Permit, Section A(5)); a description of potential pollutant sources including industrial 

processes, material handling and storage areas, dust and particulate generating activities, 

a description of significant spills and leaks, a list of all non-storm water discharges and 

their sources, and a description of locations where soil erosion may occur (General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(6)). 

The SWPPP also must include an assessment of potential pollutant sources at the 

Facility and a description of the BMPs to be implemented at the Facility that will reduce 

or prevent pollutants in storm water discharges and authorized non-storm water 

discharges, including structural BMPs where non-structural BMPs are not effective 

(General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(7), (8)). The SWPPP must be 

evaluated to ensure effectiveness and must be revised where necessary (General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit, Section A(9),(10)). Receiving Water Limitation C(3) of 

the Order requires that dischargers submit a report to the appropriate Regional Water 

Board that describes the BMPs that are currently being implemented and additional 

BMPs that will be implemented to prevent or reduce the discharge of any pollutants 

causing or contributing to the exceedence of water quality standards. 

CSPA’s investigation of the conditions at the Facility demonstrates that Alliance 

Recycling has been operating with an inadequately developed or implemented SWPPP in 

violation of the requirements set forth above. Alliance Recycling’s own Annual Reports 

and sampling and analysis demonstrate the inadequacy of Alliance Metal’s SWPPP. 

Despite having years of data that indicate that Alliance Metal’s storm water discharges 

contain pollutants in excess of EPA Benchmarks and other water quality standards, 

Alliance Recycling has failed to evaluate the effectiveness of its BMPs and to revise its 

SWPPP as necessary. Alliance Recycling has been in continuous violation of Section 

A(1) and Provision E(2) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit every day since 

October 1, 1992, and will continue to be in violation every day that Alliance Recycling 

fails to develop and implement an effective SWPPP. Alliance Recycling is subject to 

penalties for violations of the Order and the Act occurring since February 2, 2002. 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 29 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 9 of 11

E. Failure to Address Discharges Contributing to Exceedances of Water 

Quality Standards. 

Receiving Water Limitation C(3) requires a discharger to prepare and submit a 

report to the Regional Board describing changes it will make to its current BMPs in order 

to prevent or reduce the discharge of any pollutant in its storm water discharges that is 

causing or contributing to an exceedance of water quality standards. Once approved by 

the Regional Board, the additional BMPs must be incorporated into the Facility’s 

SWPPP. The report must be submitted to the Regional Board no later than 60-days from 

the date the discharger first learns that its discharge is causing or contributing to an 

exceedance of an applicable water quality standard. Receiving Water Limitation C(4)(a). 

Section C(11)(d) of the Permit’s Standard Provisions also requires dischargers to report 

any noncompliance. See also Provision E(6). Lastly, Section A(9) of the Permit requires 

an annual evaluation of storm water controls including the preparation of an evaluation 

report and implementation of any additional measures in the SWPPP to respond to the 

monitoring results and other inspection activities. 

As indicated above, Alliance Recycling discharges storm water containing 

unacceptable levels of TSS, pH, specific conductivity, oil and grease, COD, aluminum, 

copper, iron, lead and zinc that are causing or contributing to exceedances of applicable 

water quality standards for the receiving waters. For each of these pollutants, Alliance 

Recycling was required to submit a report pursuant to Receiving Water Limitation 

C(4)(a) within 60-days of becoming aware of levels in its storm water exceeding the EPA 

Benchmarks and applicable water quality standards. 

Based on CSPA’s review of available documents, Alliance Recycling was aware 

of high levels of many of these pollutants prior to February 2, 2002. Yet, Alliance 

Recycling has never filed a timely report describing its noncompliance with the General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit in violation of Section C(11)(d). 

Alliance Recycling has been in continuous violation of Receiving Water 

Limitation C(4)(a) and Sections C(11)(d) and A(9) of the General Industrial Storm Water 

Permit every day since at least February 2, 2002, and will continue to be in violation 

every day that Alliance Recycling fails to prepare and submit the requisite reports, 

receives approval from the Regional Board and amends its SWPPP to include approved 

BMPs. Alliance Recycling is subject to penalties for violations of the General Industrial 

Storm Water Permit and the Act occurring since February 2, 2002.

F. Failure to File Timely, True and Correct Annual Reports. 

Section B(14) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit requires dischargers 

to submit an Annual Report by July 1st of each year to the executive officer of the 

relevant Regional Board. The Annual Report must be signed and certified by an 

appropriate corporate officer. General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Sections B(14), 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 30 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 10 of 11

C(9), (10). Section A(9)(d) of the General Industrial Storm Water Permit requires the 

discharger to include in their annual report an evaluation of their storm water controls, 

including certifying compliance with the General Industrial Storm Water Permit. See 

also General Industrial Storm Water Permit, Sections C(9) and (10) and B(14). 

CSPA’s investigation indicates that Alliance Recycling has signed and submitted 

incomplete Annual Reports and purported to comply with the General Industrial Storm 

Water Permit despite significant noncompliance at the Facility. Consequently, Alliance 

Recycling has violated Sections A(9)(d), B(14) and C(9) & (10) of the General Industrial 

Storm Water Permit every time Alliance Recycling submitted an incomplete or incorrect 

annual report that falsely certified compliance with the Act. These violations are 

continuous and ongoing until Alliance Recycling submits a complete and correct Annual 

Report for each year that Alliance Recycling has been subject to the General Permit. 

Alliance Recycling is subject to penalties for violations of Section (C) of the General 

Industrial Storm Water Permit and the Act occurring since February 2, 2002. 

 

III. Persons Responsible for the Violations. 

CSPA puts Alliance Recycling, Inc. on notice that it is the person responsible for 

the violations described above. If additional persons are subsequently identified as also 

being responsible for the violations set forth above, CSPA puts Alliance Recycling on 

notice that it intends to include those persons in this action. 

IV. Name and Address of Noticing Party. 

 Our name, address and telephone number is as follows: 

 

Bill Jennings, Executive Director 

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

3536 Rainier Avenue 

Stockton, CA 95204 

(209) 464-5067 

V. Counsel. 

 CSPA has retained legal counsel to represent it in this matter. Please direct all 

communications to: 

Andrew L. Packard 

Law Offices of Andrew L. Packard 

319 Pleasant Street 

Petaluma, CA 94952 

(707) 763-7227 

Andrew@packardlawoffices.com 

Michael R. Lozeau 

Law Office of Michael R. Lozeau 

1516 Oak Street, Suite 216 

Alameda, California 94501 

(510) 749-9102 

mrlozeau@lozeaulaw.com 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 31 of 36
CSPA Notice of Violation and Intent To File Suit 

February 2, 2007 

Page 11 of 11

VI. Penalties. 

Pursuant to Section 309(d) of the Act (33 U.S.C. § 1319(d)) and the Adjustment 

of Civil Monetary Penalties for Inflation (40 C.F.R. § 19.4) each separate violation of the 

Act subjects Alliance Recycling to a penalty of up to $32,500 per day per violation for all 

violations occurring during the period commencing five years prior to the date of this 

Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit. In addition to civil penalties, CSPA will seek 

declaratory relief and injunctive relief preventing further violations of the Act pursuant to 

Sections 505(a) and (d) (33 U.S.C. §1365(a) and (d)) and such other relief as permitted 

by law. Lastly, Section 505(d) of the Act (33 U.S.C. § 1365(d)), permits prevailing 

parties to recover costs and fees, including attorneys’ fees. 

CSPA believes this Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit sufficiently states 

grounds for filing suit. We intend to file a citizen suit under Section 505(a) of the Act 

against Alliance Recycling and its agents for the above-referenced violations upon the 

expiration of the 60-day notice period. However, during the 60-day notice period, we 

would be willing to discuss effective remedies for the violations noted in this letter. If 

you wish to pursue such discussions in the absence of litigation, we suggest that you 

initiate those discussions within the next 20 days so that they may be completed before 

the end of the 60-day notice period. We do not intend to delay the filing of a complaint 

in federal court if discussions are continuing when that period ends. 

Sincerely, 

Bill Jennings, Executive Director 

California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 32 of 36
SERVICE LIST

Steve Johnson, Administrator 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Wayne Nastri, Administrator 

U.S. EPA – Region 9 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA, 94105 

Alberto Gonzalez, U.S. Attorney General 

U.S. Department of Justice 

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20530-0001 

Celeste Cantú, Executive Director 

State Water Resources Control Board 

1001 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814 

P.O. Box 100 

Sacramento, CA 95812-0100 

Bruce H. Wolfe, Executive Officer II 

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board 

1515 Clay Street, Suite 1400 

Oakland, CA 94612 

Paul P. Spaulding 

Farella Braun Martell LLP 

235 Montgomery Street, 30th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

3536 Rainier Avenue, Stockton, California 95204 ● Tel: 209-464-5067 ● Fax: 209-464-1028 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 33 of 36
ATTACHMENT A 

Significant Rain Events, Alliance Recycling, Inc. (Oakland) 

February 2, 2002 – February 2, 2007 

February 08 2002 

February 07 2002 

February 13 2002 

February 16 2002 

February 17 2002 

February 18 2002 

February 19 2002 

February 20 2002 

February 22 2002 

February 23 2002 

March 05 2002 

March 06 2002 

March 07 2002 

March 09 2002 

March 10 2002 

March 17 2002 

March 22 2002 

March 23 2002 

April 09 2002 

April 16 2002 

April 29 2002 

May 19 2002 

May 20 2002 

May 21 2002 

June 21 2002 

June 22 2002 

August 02 2002 

November 07 2002 

November 08 2002 

November 10 2002 

December 06 2002 

December 09 2002 

December 10 2002 

December 13 2002 

December 14 2002 

December 15 2002 

December 16 2002 

December 17 2002 

December 18 2002 

December 19 2002 

December 20 2002 

December 21 2002 

December 25 2002 

December 26 2002 

December 27 2002 

December 28 2002 

December 29 2002 

December 30 2002 

December 31 2002 

January 09 2003 

January 10 2003 

January 12 2003 

January 20 2003 

January 21 2003 

January 22 2003 

January 23 2003 

February 11 2003 

February 12 2003 

February 13 2003 

February 15 2003 

February 16 2003 

February 19 2003 

February 25 2003 

February 26 2003 

March 13 2003 

March 14 2003 

March 15 2003 

March 16 2003 

March 17 2003 

March 18 2003 

March 19 2003 

March 20 2003 

March 23 2003 

March 26 2003 

April 01 2003 

April 02 2003 

April 03 2003 

April 04 2003 

April 12 2003 

April 13 2003 

April 14 2003 

April 16 2003 

April 21 2003 

April 22 2003 

April 24 2003 

April 25 2003 

April 27 2003 

April 28 2003 

April 29 2003 

May 02 2003 

May 03 2003 

May 06 2003 

May 07 2003 

May 08 2003 

May 30 2003 

July 24 2003 

September 03 2003 

November 02 2003 

November 03 2003 

November 06 2003 

November 07 2003 

November 08 2003 

November 09 2003 

November 14 2003 

November 15 2003 

November 17 2003 

November 30 2003 

December 01 2003 

December 02 2003 

December 04 2003 

December 05 2003 

December 06 2003 

December 07 2003 

December 09 2003 

December 10 2003 

December 12 2003 

December 13 2003 

December 14 2003 

December 19 2003 

December 20 2003 

December 21 2003 

December 23 2003 

December 24 2003 

December 25 2003 

December 28 2003 

December 29 2003 

January 01 2004 

January 02 2004 

January 06 2004 

January 08 2004 

January 09 2004 

January 14 2004 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 34 of 36
ATTACHMENT A 

Significant Rain Events, Alliance Recycling, Inc. (Oakland) 

February 2, 2002 – February 2, 2007 

January 23 2004 

January 24 2004 

January 26 2004 

January 27 2004 

January 30 2004 

February 01 2004 

February 02 2004 

February 03 2004 

February 06 2004 

February 13 2004 

February 15 2004 

February 16 2004 

February 17 2004 

February 18 2004 

February 20 2004 

February 21 2004 

February 22 2004 

February 24 2004 

February 25 2004 

February 26 2004 

February 27 2004 

March 01 2004 

March 25 2004 

March 27 2004 

April 18 2004 

April 19 2004 

April 20 2004 

April 21 2004 

May 28 2004 

August 23 2004 

August 24 2004 

September 19 2004 

October 17 2004 

October 19 2004 

October 20 2004 

October 23 2004 

October 25 2004 

October 26 2004 

November 03 2004 

November 04 2004 

November 09 2004 

November 10 2004 

November 11 2004 

November 13 2004 

November 27 2004 

December 06 2004 

December 07 2004 

December 08 2004 

December 10 2004 

December 26 2004 

December 27 2004 

December 28 2004 

December 29 2004 

December 30 2004 

December 31 2004 

January 01 2005 

January 02 2005 

January 03 2005 

January 04 2005 

January 05 2005 

January 06 2005 

January 07 2005 

January 08 2005 

January 09 2005 

January 10 2005 

January 11 2005 

January 12 2005 

January 13 2005 

January 16 2005 

January 17 2005 

January 18 2005 

January 19 2005 

January 20 2005 

January 21 2005 

January 22 2005 

January 23 2005 

January 24 2005 

January 25 2005 

January 26 2005 

January 27 2005 

January 28 2005 

February 07 2005 

February 11 2005 

February 14 2005 

February 15 2005 

February 16 2005 

February 17 2005 

February 18 2005 

February 19 2005 

February 20 2005 

February 21 2005 

February 26 2005 

February 27 2005 

February 28 2005 

March 01 2005 

March 02 2005 

March 03 2005 

March 04 2005 

March 09 2005 

March 18 2005 

March 19 2005 

March 20 2005 

March 21 2005 

March 22 2005 

March 23 2005 

March 27 2005 

March 28 2005 

March 29 2005 

April 03 2005 

April 04 2005 

April 07 2005 

April 08 2005 

April 22 2005 

April 23 2005 

April 27 2005 

April 28 2005 

April 29 2005 

May 04 2005 

May 05 2005 

May 08 2005 

May 09 2005 

May 18 2005 

May 19 2005 

June 8 2005 

June 09 2005 

June 16 2005 

June 17 2005 

June 18 2005 

October 14 2005 

October 15 2005 

October 26 2005 

October 29 2005 

November 03 2005 

November 04 2005 

November 07 2005 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 35 of 36
ATTACHMENT A 

Significant Rain Events, Alliance Recycling, Inc. (Oakland) 

February 2, 2002 – February 2, 2007 

November 08 2005 

November 09 2005 

November 25 2005 

November 28 2005 

November 29 2005 

December 01 2005 

December 02 2005 

December 07 2005 

December 17 2005 

December 18 2005 

December 19 2005 

December 20 2005 

December 21 2005 

December 22 2005 

December 25 2005 

December 26 2005 

December 27 2005 

December 28 2005 

December 29 2005 

December 30 2005 

December 31 2005 

January 06 2006 

January 08 2006 

January 13 2006 

January 21 2006 

January 03 2006 

January 18 2006 

January 11 2006 

January 27 2006 

January 07 2006 

January 01 2006 

January 17 2006 

January 30 2006 

January 28 2006 

January 02 2006 

January 14 2006 

February 17 2006 

February 04 2006 

February 02 2006 

February 26 2006 

February 01 2006 

February 27 2006 

February 28 2006 

March 29 2006 

March 17 2006 

March 21 2006 

March 11 2006 

March 13 2006 

March 30 2006 

March 04 2006 

March 10 2006 

March 28 2006 

March 07 2006 

March 01 2006 

March 02 2006 

March 09 2006 

March 27 2006 

March 12 2006 

March 03 2006 

March 16 2006 

March 31 2006 

March 06 2006 

March 24 2006 

March 14 2006 

March 20 2006 

March 25 2006 

March 05 2006 

April 01 2006 

April 17 2006 

April 15 2006 

April 08 2006 

April 10 2006 

April 09 2006 

April 05 2006 

April 03 2006 

April 07 2006 

April 04 2006 

April 12 2006 

April 02 2006 

April 11 2006 

April 16 2006 

May 24 2006 

May 19 2006 

May 21 2006 

June 28 2006 

July 20 2006 

July 06 2006 

July 21 2006 

August 02 2006 

October 05 2006 

November 2 2006 

November 11 2006 

November 13 2006 

November 26 2006 

December 8 2006 

December 9 2006 

December 10 2006 

December 12 2006 

December 13 2006 

December 15 2006 

December 21 2006 

December 26 2006 

January 3 2007 

January 4 2007 

January 27 2007 

January 28 2007 

Case 3:07-cv-02438-CRB Document 6 Filed 07/10/07 Page 36 of 36