(a) Violation of standard, limitation or order. Notice regarding an alleged violation of an effluent standard or limitation or of an order with respect thereto, shall include sufficient information to permit the recipient to identify the specific standard, limitation, or order alleged to have been violated, the activity alleged to constitute a violation, the person or persons responsible for the alleged violation, the location of the alleged violation, the date or dates of such violation, and the full name, address, and telephone number of the person giving notice.
(b) Failure to act. Notice regarding an alleged failure of the Administrator to perform any act or duty under the Act which is not discretionary with the Administrator shall identify the provision of the Act which requires such act or creates such duty, shall describe with reasonable specificity the action taken or not taken by the Administrator which is alleged to constitute a failure to perform such act or duty, and shall state the full name, address and telephone number of the person giving the notice.
(c) Identification of counsel. The notice shall state the name, address, and telephone number of the legal counsel, if any, representing the person giving the notice.
Notes of Decisions
Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Severstal Sparrows Point, LLC, 794 F. Supp. 2d 602 (D. Maryland 2011).
· cites it 7× “The Fourth Circuit further concluded that compliance with the regulation implementing the CWA’s notice requirement, 40 C.F.R. § 135.3 (a), is a mandatory condition precedent to filing suit under the CWA.”
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Gaston Copper Recycling Corp., 629 F.3d 387 (4th Cir. 2011).
· cites it 7× “The corresponding regulation states that the notice must include sufficient information to allow the recipient to identify the specific standard, limitation, or order alleged to have been violated, the activity alleged to constitute a violation, the persons or persons…”
Karr v. Hefner, 475 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 6× “” 40 C.F.R. § 135.3 (a). The guiding principle is that “the purpose of notice to the alleged violator is to give it an opportunity to bring itself into complete compliance with the Act and thus likewise render unnecessary a citizen suit.”
Shark River Cleanup Coalition v. Twp. of Wall, 47 F.4th 126 (3rd Cir. 2022).
· cites it 13× “40 C.F.R. § 135.3 (a) (emphasis added). In Hercules, we read the plain text of the regulation 2 as requiring notices to provide “enough information to enable the recipient”—here, Defendants Township of Wall and the Estate of Fred McDowell, Jr.”
Brod v. Omya, Inc., 653 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× “” 40 C.F.R. § 135.3 (a) (2011). The CWA, 33 U.”
San Francisco Baykeeper, Inc. v. Tosco Corp., Diablo Servs., Inc., 309 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2002).
· cites it 3× “Regulations promulgated under that authorization instruct that the notice shall include sufficient information to permit the recipient to identify the specific standard, limitation, or order alleged to have been violated, the activity alleged to constitute a violation, the…”
All. v. Cruise Terminals of Am., LLC, 216 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (W.D. Wash. 2015).
· cites it 6× “40 C.F.R. § 135.3 (a) explains what proper notice must include: Notice regarding an alleged violation of an effluent standard or limitation or of an order with respect thereto, shall include sufficient information to permit the recipient to identify the specific standard,…”
— 40 C.F.R. § 135.3(a) — 12 cases
— 40 C.F.R. § 135.3(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.