California industrial facilities that receive a 60-Day Notice alleging stormwater violations are not hearing from a government regulator. In the vast majority of cases, the notice comes from a private environmental organization exercising its right to sue under the citizen-enforcement provision of the federal Clean Water Act — and according to a new analysis, a relatively small number of groups and attorneys are responsible for most of this litigation in the state.
The overview, published by environmental attorney Garrett Jansma of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP, outlines the organizations most active in bringing these claims against industrial dischargers statewide.
Groups affiliated with the national Waterkeeper Alliance account for a significant share of filings. Los Angeles Waterkeeper, established in 1993, is described as one of the most frequent sources of 60-Day Notices in California, with its enforcement work concentrated on industrial facilities in Los Angeles County.
Other regional affiliates operate along similar lines: Orange County Coastkeeper pursues facilities discharging into the San Gabriel River, Santa Ana River and related tributaries; San Diego Coastkeeper, founded in 1995, frequently coordinates with the Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation on enforcement actions across San Diego County; and San Francisco Baykeeper targets facilities near San Francisco Bay, including auto dismantling and recycling operations. California Coastkeeper Alliance, headquartered in Sacramento, functions in a coordinating capacity statewide and at times joins litigation as co-plaintiff or provides legal support through staff attorneys.
Separately, Eden Environmental Citizens Group, LLC — known as EDEN — along with its affiliate, Central Valley Eden Environmental Defenders, is identified as among the most prolific issuers of 60-Day Notices in the state. Based in Santa Rosa, the organization directs its enforcement activity at facilities across the Central Valley, Bay Area and Northern California, spanning industries including ready-mix concrete, wineries, auto recycling and chemical manufacturing. Its notices reportedly follow a consistent format, with attorney Craig A. Brandt frequently serving as counsel.
Additional organizations named in the report include Pacific Environmental Advocates, which focuses on metal recyclers and construction-materials companies in the Bay Area and Central Valley; Ecological Rights Foundation, which pursues claims under both the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, often against utilities and hazardous-materials operators; California River Watch, active against wineries and municipal facilities in Sonoma and Napa counties; and Our Clean Oceans, a newer plaintiff that has increased filings against manufacturing and industrial facilities in the Los Angeles region.
The report also identifies the law firms most frequently representing these plaintiffs, including Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group, which represents multiple Waterkeeper affiliates; Coast Law Group of Encinitas, counsel to CERF and San Diego Coastkeeper; the Law Offices of Jack Silver and David Weinsoff, representing California River Watch; and Brodsky & Smith, which commonly represents individual plaintiffs.
Jansma noted that understanding this landscape allows facilities to better assess compliance risk based on geography and industry sector, though he cautioned that not every notice results in litigation and not every claim asserted is legally sound.
