4920 N.

IH-35
Austin, TX 78751
Phone: 512-374-2700
Toll Free: 888-988-9996
Fax: 512-447-3940
www.trla.org

September 4, 2020

Via U.S. Certified Mail No.: 7019 0700 0001 4673 5033
The Hon. Rick Hall, Mayor
The City of Liberty Hill
P.O. Box 1920
Liberty Hill, TX 78642

Re: Notice of Intent to File Citizen Suit for Violations of the Clean Water Act by The City
of Liberty Hill, TPDES Permit No. WQ0014477001

Dear Mayor Hall:

We write on behalf of Stephanie Morris to provide 60 days’ notice of our intent to sue the City of
Liberty Hill (“the City” or “Liberty Hill”) in federal district court to halt significant, chronic, and
ongoing violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq., and to seek penalties
against the City for past and ongoing illegal discharges from the City’s wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP).

Despite numerous notifications of these violations by Ms. Morris, and prosecution by the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), the City has not stopped the illegal discharges.
As a result, the water quality of the South Fork of the San Gabriel River downstream of the
discharge is so degraded as to regularly limit public swimming and use.

Under Section 505 of the Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations, citizens are entitled
to bring suit in federal court to enjoin violations of effluent standards or NPDES permits and to
seek penalties for such violations.1 Citizens must provide 60 days’ notice of their intention to sue
under the CWA to the alleged violator, and must provide a copy of the notice to the Administrator
of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Regional Administrator of the
EPA, and the chief administration officer of the water pollution contract agency for the state where
the violations are occurring2 The CWA provides for civil penalties of up to $55,800 for each
violation per day occurring after November 2, 2015 and assessed on or after January 13, 2020.3
This means that if more than one violation occurs in one day, the penalties can exceed $55,800 by
a multiplier of the number of violations per day.

1
33 U.S.C. § 1365.
2
40 C.F.R. § 135.2(a).
3
See 33 U.S.C. § 1319(d); 40 C.F.R. § 19.4.
Page 1 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

The City’s violations have been ongoing for many years, but this notice only encompasses the
City’s violations commencing on November 1, 2015. These violations will continue until the City
makes significant changes to its facility and operations, and this notice letter includes all similar
violations that occur after this notice letter. Ms. Morris intends to enjoin the violations described
below and ensure future compliance with the CWA, obtain civil penalties and cleanup for past
noncompliance, recover attorney fees and costs of litigation, and obtain other appropriate relief, as
allowed by the CWA.4

The notice seeks enforcement for 3108 violations of the City of Liberty Hill’s wastewater
discharge permit.

South Fork San Gabriel River – approximately a quarter of a mile downstream from
Liberty Hill’s wastewater outfall – August 19, 2020 at 2:55pm (photo taken by Stephanie
Morris).

4
See 33 U.S.C. § 1365.
Page 2 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

I. Stephanie Morris, Complainant

Stephanie Ryder Morris lives at 1409 Orchard Drive, Leander, TX 78641. Her phone number is
(512) 563-2488.

Ms. Morris lives on and owns a piece of property on the South Fork San Gabriel River,
approximately 1/4 of a mile downstream from the point where Liberty Hill’s wastewater treatment
plant discharges effluent into the river.5 Ms. Morris’s property directly abuts the river, and she
owns half of the streambed of the South Fork of the San Gabriel River. Anything that Liberty
Hill’s wastewater treatment plant discharges into the river affects Ms. Morris as a person and a
property owner.

Ms. Morris began renting the property at 1409 Orchard Drive in 2013 and purchased it in 2014.
She and her husband chose the property to allow their children greater access to nature. The home
and the land surrounding it were meant to provide an idyllic sanctuary for her family. A view of
the river and direct access to it were a large component in her decision to move there. Her children
enjoy running around outside and playing in the river. Her family likes to be on the water, and
takes part in wading, fishing, tubing, kayaking, floating, and swimming in the river. The river
existing in its natural state, free of degradation, is important to Ms. Morris and her enjoyment of
her property.

II. The City and its Wastewater Permit

The City of Liberty Hill is located in Williamson County, Texas, east of Georgetown and north of
Austin and Leander. The City is just north of the South Fork San Gabriel River, a waterway often
used for recreation by those in the area.

The City of Liberty Hill has a Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (TPDES) permit
that currently allows it to discharge up to 1.2 million gallons of treated wastewater effluent a day
into the South Fork San Gabriel River. This was an expansion from the previous limit of 0.4
million gallons a day (MGD); the additional discharge began on April 1, 2018. The permit also
allows the City to expand its plant such that it discharges 4 MGD into the river in the future. This
is 38 times the average quantity of wastewater that was being discharged when the authorization
was granted (the average discharge was 0.105 MGD).6 In September 2018, the City applied to
renew its permit, which expired on December 1, 2018. TCEQ proposed a draft permit in March
2020 and reissued the draft permit in July 2020. A remote public meeting occurred on August 17,
2020.

III. Clean Water Act Violations

Liberty Hill has violated its permit and the Clean Water Act by 1) discharging effluent that exceeds
the limitations placed on it in its TPDES permit; 2) making numerous reporting errors; 3) causing
5
See Exhibit A for a map depicting the locations of Ms. Morris’s home, the outfall, the WWTP,
and the 183 Bridge.
6
TCEQ, Fact Sheet and Executive Director’s Preliminary Decision, WQ0014477001, 2 (March
21, 2014, revised July 1, 2014 and September 15, 2014).
Page 3 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

the growth of aquatic vegetation in the river such that the river’s designated uses are impaired; 4)
impairing the aesthetic condition of the river; and 5) discharging foam.

A. Permit Limit Violations

The City of Liberty Hill has illegally discharged levels of ammonia nitrogen, phosphorus, total
suspended solids (TSS), carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD), and E. coli which
violate the limits in its permit. It has also discharged too much effluent (violating both its daily
flow limit and its two-hour limit) in the past. A violation of the effluent limitations set out in a
permit is a violation of the Clean Water Act actionable under its citizen suit provision.7 Copies of
the relevant effluent limitations charts from Liberty Hill’s permit are included as Exhibit B.8
Because the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has previously brought enforcement
actions against the City, those violations subject to previous enforcement are not covered by this
notice letter.

From November 1, 2015 through July 31, 2020, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data show
that the City has exceeded total phosphorus permit limits for at least 994 violation days. This
includes violations of the daily average, 7-day average, daily maximum, and single grab limits for
phosphorus. This notice seeks CWA enforcement for 827 violation days.

From November 29, 2015 through February 29, 2020, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data
show that the City has exceeded ammonia nitrogen permit limits for at least 1070 violation days.
This includes violations of the daily average, 7-day average, daily maximum, and single grab limits
for ammonia nitrogen. This notice seeks CWA enforcement for 1039 violation days.

From December 1, 2015 through February 28, 2018, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data
show that the City has exceeded total suspended solids (TSS) permit limits for 321 violation days.
This includes violations of the daily average, 7-day average, daily maximum, and single grab limits
for total suspended solids. This notice seeks CWA enforcement for 228 violation days.

From February 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data
show that the City has exceeded carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) permit limits
for 66 days. This includes violations of the daily average and 7-day average for CBOD. This
notice seeks CWA enforcement for 66 violation days.

From March 20, 2017 through March 19, 2020, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data
possessed by Protestant show that the City has exceeded E. coli permit limits for 20 days. This
includes violations of the single grab standard and daily max. The City’s levels of E. coli have
7
33 U.S.C. § 1365(a) and (e); 33 U.S.C. §§ 1311(a), 1342, and regulations implementing the
Clean Water Act at 40 C.F.R. §§ 122.41, and 122.44; the City has violated 30 Tex. Admin Code
§§ 305.125, 307.4(b)(2-6), 307.4(e-i), and 307.5 (b)(2), which can be enforced pursuant to the
citizen suit provision.
8
Note that there are three different sets of limitations and requirements. Interim I applied until
April 1, 2018; Interim II applies from April 1, 2018 until the present; and the final set will apply
when the plant expands to 4.0 MGD. If the permit renewal is granted, there will be an additional
interim phase of 2.0 MGD.
Page 4 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

been as high as 2419.6 colony forming units (CFU), more than six times the 399 CFU regulatory
standard. This notice seeks enforcement for 20 violation days.

From August 7, 2017 through May 21, 2018, the City’s worksheets and EPA ECHO data show
that the City has discharged excessive total flows for 93 days. This includes violations of the two-
hour flow rate and daily average flow. This notice seeks enforcement for 91 violation days.

A list of exceedances is included as Exhibit C. This list is not exclusive and may be updated when
new information becomes available. This chart is based on data taken from EPA’s Enforcement
and Compliance History website (ECHO), as well as from effluent data worksheets obtained from
the City through public information requests. It includes the pollutant limit, the measured value,
the number of days of violations, and the dates of violation.

B. Reporting Violations

The City of Liberty Hill has made numerous errors with regards to recording, calculating, and
reporting the testing results of the WWTP’s effluent, errors which have been made abundantly
clear when the City’s worksheets are studied in sufficient detail. The City has averaged zeroes
into their calculations of daily averages, calculated daily average concentrations in the incorrect
manner when the City did an insufficient number of effluent tests during some months, performed
an insufficient number of tests, and other various smaller, calculating errors.

The importance of accurately testing and reporting details regarding the City’s effluent are
paramount. The City’s TPDES permit states: “This permit is granted on the basis of information
supplied and representations made by the permittee during action on an application, and relying
upon the accuracy and completeness of that information and those requirements.”9 Additionally,
the permit requires the City to “promptly submit such facts or information” when the City becomes
aware that it has submitted “incorrect information . . . in any report to the Executive Director.”10
In addition to seeking penalties for permit violations, Ms. Morris will ask a court to require the
City to submit correct information to TCEQ.

1. Liberty Hill failed to properly calculate averages by using a zero in an

averaging formula when no sample was taken.

Liberty Hill is required to monitor the quality of its wastewater effluent, which not only involves
sampling and testing this effluent, it also requires the City to record and report the results of these
tests. Some of the results of the testing must then be added together and averaged in order to
determine whether or not the plant is in compliance with the permit limits. In order for the testing
information to be of use to both the City and the TCEQ, and to be accurate for the public and City
decisionmakers to rely on, these test results and the subsequent averaging must be performed
correctly. Otherwise inaccurate information will misrepresent the City’s performance.

9
TCEQ, City of Liberty Hill, TDPES Permit No. WQ0014477001, Permit Conditions 1.b., 9
(Sept. 22, 2015).
10
2015 TPDES Permit No. WQ0014477001, Permit Conditions 1.a, at 8.
Page 5 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

Based on the City of Liberty Hill’s worksheets (and comparing these worksheets with data from
EPA ECHO), it is clear that Liberty Hill incorrectly averaged and reported incorrect results to
TCEQ for several contaminants over many months. The worksheets show for many of the “daily
averages” (those measurements that must be added together and averaged over the course of a
month) that zeros were entered on the days without measurements and averaged in, producing
daily averages that were far below even the lowest measurements for that month.

For example, for the month of December 2018, zeroes were averaged into the daily average
calculations for the daily average weight of CBOD, TSS, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, total
phosphorus, and total nitrogen. This leads to some exceedingly low daily averages: while every
sample measurement was a value of greater than 5.5 lbs/day of TSS, the daily average weight for
December 2018 was reported as 1.60 lbs/day. This has led to repeated and absurdly low incorrect
reported measurements for many of the limits for which Liberty Hill is required to sample. It has
also resulted in at least two violations of daily averages going unnoticed. December 2015 had a
TSS daily average weight violation, and July 2017 had an ammonia nitrogen daily average weight
violation. This is 62 days’ worth of effluent limit violations.

The City incorrectly added a zero for every day without a measurement and averaged these zeros
into the average daily weight of CBOD, TSS, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, total phosphorus,
and total nitrogen during the following months: September 2015, December 2015, January 2016,
February 2016, May 2016, June 2016, October 2016, January 2017, and July 2017. (In March
2017, there were zeros added into the daily flow average, too.) There was at least one additional
month (March 2016) in which two zeroes were added into all of these averages. And there were
multiple other months in which random zeroes were incorrectly entered into calculations
(generally those concerning flow) and incorporated into averages that were then erroneously
reported to the TCEQ.

2. Liberty Hill used the incorrect method to calculate daily averages for months
in which too few samples were taken.

Liberty Hill’s permit requires the City to take “at least four separate representative measurements”
to determine the daily average concentration of contaminants each month.11 If four samples are
not available “the arithmetic average (weight by flow) of all values in the previous four consecutive
month period consisting of at least four measurements shall be utilized as the daily average
concentration.”12

Liberty Hill failed to take four or more samples in November 2017 and February 2018, instead
taking only three in each month. Instead of following the instructions in their TPDES permit for
how to calculate the daily average concentrations, the City instead took a sample from the
following month and averaged that into the short month’s calculations for both daily average
concentration and daily average weight. For November 2017, the first measurements in December
2017 were added; for February 2018, the first measurements in March 2018 were added.

11
2015 TPDES Permit No. WQ0014477001, Concentration Measurements a, at 3.
12
Id.
Page 6 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

This erroneous choice is not only in contradiction with the plain terms of the permit for how to
calculate daily average concentration when too few samples are available, but it also resulted in
Liberty Hill not averaging in those measurements with the correct months. For example, Liberty
Hill then did not average in the first December 2017 measurements with the other December 2017
measurements, leading to inaccurate reporting for December 2017 as well as November 2017.
Because of this, the reported numbers for daily average weight and daily average concentration of
CBOD, TSS, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate-nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total nitrogen are incorrect
for November 2017, December 2017, February 2018, and March 2018 are incorrect.

3. Liberty Hill failed to take the required number of samples during the first
months of the Interim II phase of its 2015 TPDES permit.

Liberty Hill’s 2015 TPDES permit requires the City to take more frequent samples once the City
entered the Interim II phase, which allows the City to discharge up to 1.2 MGD of effluent into the
South Fork San Gabriel River. On April 1, 2018, the City moved to Interim II phase, failing both
to report this change and to increase its sampling schedule. It was not until halfway through June
2018 that the City began sampling at the correct frequency, despite its increase in effluent
discharge. The City failed to sample sufficiently from April 2018 through mid-June 2018.

4. Duty to report violated.

The duty to report noncompliance with a permit is required by regulation as well as state and
federal law. Liberty Hill must report any permit non-compliance “which may endanger human
health or safety, or the environment” to the Executive Director of the TCEQ.13 Permit conditions
requiring reports of non-compliance are federally mandated.14 Both federal and state statutes
require reports of violations by permittees be publicly available.15 These statutory frameworks are
designed to keep the public informed about the potential presence of pollutants in local water
bodies and the source of those pollutants.16

The City has failed to report exceedances of the daily average weight of a permitted pollutant
during at least two separate months (December 2015: TSS and July 2017: ammonia nitrogen).

Additionally, the inaccurate methodology means that the City has incorrectly reported data, as
described above. The chart in Exhibit D lists reporting violations based on incorrect methodology
as well as failure to report exceedances, made by the City of Liberty Hill, and is also based on
information from EPA ECHO, as well as the worksheets obtained from the City. The City’s permit
prohibits “knowingly making any false statement, representation, or certification on any report,
record, or other document submitted or required to be maintained under this permit.”17 While the
13
30 Tex. Admin. Code § 305.125 (Sub-chapter title “Standard Permit Conditions”).
14
See 33 USC §1342(a)(2) (requiring the EPA to prescribe “conditions for such [state issued]
permits...including conditions on data and information collection, reporting, and such other
requirements…”); and 40 CFR 122.41(a)
15
33 U.S.C.A. §1318(b); Tex. Water Code §26.0151.
16
See Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 86 (1998) (discussing similar
provisions under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act).
17
2015 TPDES Permit No. WQ0014477001, Monitoring and Reporting Requirements 1, at 5.
Page 7 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

City has also made many smaller calculating errors, we have only listed and are seeking
enforcement for the most repetitive, egregious ones.

This notice seeks enforcement for 152 reporting violations.

C. Aquatic Vegetation and Designated Uses and Aesthetic Condition

Discharges of nutrients are a violation if they cause “excessive growth of aquatic vegetation that
impairs an existing, designated, presumed, or attainable use.” 18 The South Fork San Gabriel River
is also known as Segment No. 1250, and is described in the Texas Administrative Code as “from
the confluence with the North Fork San Gabriel River in Williamson County to the most upstream
crossing of SH 29 in Burnet County.19 It is a freshwater stream, it is not impaired, and it is
“classified” and thus protected by site-specific criteria, which can be found at 30 TAC § 307.10(1)
– Appendix A.

The designated uses for the South Fork San Gabriel River, or Segment 1250, are primary contact
recreation, high aquatic life, and public water supply/aquifer protection.20 Primary contact
recreation is a designation that indicates that there is a significant risk of the ingestion of water,
such as through activities like swimming, diving, children wading, kayaking, tubing, etc.21 High
aquatic life is associated with highly diverse habitats, high diversity and richness of species, a
balanced to slightly imbalanced trophic structure, the presence of sensitive species, and a usual
association of the species that are expected in the region.22 The public water supply designation
means that the segment is “known to be used or exhibit characteristics that would allow [it] to be
used as a supply source for public water systems.”23 And aquifer protection means the segment is
“capable of recharging the Edwards Aquifer” – the designation is meant to protect the quality of
the water recharging the aquifer.24

The South Fork San Gabriel River naturally contains a low concentration of nutrients and a
relatively small amount of aquatic plant-life, compared to its current state below the outfall, as
seen in unaffected sections upstream of the outfall. Due to the City’s discharge of phosphorus-
and nitrogen-rich wastewater effluent into the river, the receiving water is often choked with algae
and aquatic vegetation. The high nutrient content of the effluent and the large amount of effluent
compared to the river’s natural flow has led to extensive eutrophication, which is only abated
during and immediately following prolonged and heavy rainfall events, such as the ones in Spring
of 2019. But as seen that summer, even after much of the river was scraped clean, the algae began
to return immediately, and was extensive within a few months.

18
30 TAC § 307(e).
19
30 TAC § 307.10(3) – Appendix C.
20
30 TAC § 307.10(1) – Appendix A.
21
Recreational Use Attainability Analyses for Rivers and Streams/ Texas Waterbodies,
Recreational Uses, https://www.tceq.texas.gov/waterquality/standards/ruaas/index, accessed
August 5, 2020.
22
30 TAC § 307.7(b)(3)(A)(i) – Table 3.
23
30 TAC § 307.7(b)(2)(A)(i).
24
30 TAC § 307.7(b)(2)(A)(iii).
Page 8 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

This massive growth of algae and aquatic vegetation has impaired “an existing, designated,
presumed, or attainable use.”25 The river is no longer swimmable or safe for primary contact
recreation; the algae has presumably had an impact on the naturally occurring aquatic species and
their survival; and it is likely that the ability of the water either to supply a public water system or
to recharge the Edwards Aquifer safely and effectively has been negatively impacted. 26 This
growth of algae on a massive scale is a violation of the City’s wastewater permit and thus
actionable under the CWA.27

Furthermore, “Surface waters must be maintained in an aesthetically attractive condition.”28 The

South Fork San Gabriel River is naturally low in nutrients and, as seen above the outfall, would
normally be a clear, low-flow river with very little algae. The nutrient-rich discharge from Liberty
Hill’s wastewater treatment plant has caused the South Fork San Gabriel River below the plant’s
outfall to deteriorate greatly. The river rocks on the north side of the river downstream of the
outfall are stained a dark color no matter the season and both the riverbed and the surface of the
water are often filled with thick aquatic vegetation. As mentioned above, the river only appears
clean and mostly algae-free after long period of intensive rainfall that effectively scour the
riverbed.

Liberty Hill has already received Notices of Violation in the past for violating 30 TAC § 307(b)(4),
including for significant algal growth starting at the outfall in January 2015 and another based on
the condition of the river in May 2018.29 The effluent from Liberty Hill’s WWTP has caused a
deterioration in the quality of the river for years, and continues to cause this impairment. The steep
decline in the aesthetic condition of the river due to the nutrient-rich, solids-filled discharge from
Liberty Hill’s wastewater treatment plant is a violation of the City’s wastewater permit and thus
actionable under the CWA.

Time Periods with Significant Amounts of Aquatic Vegetation Total Number of Days
and Aesthetic Violations30 of Violation
06/22/17
03/14/2018 – 04/30/18 628 Days

25
30 TAC § 307.4(e).
26
In fact, at least one TCEQ employee has expressed concern to Ms. Morris, about her wellbeing
and safety due to her physical presence in the river.
27
See Permit at p. 3 adopting standard regulations in permit.
28
30 TAC § 307(b)(4).
29
TCEQ, Liberty Hill Regional WWTP, Investigation #1215564 (investigation occurring Jan.
16, 2015); TCEQ, Liberty Hill Regional WWTP, Investigation # 1496755 (investigation
occurring May 8-31, 2018). See Exhibits E and F.
30
Documented periods of time with significant growth of aquatic vegetation. As discussed
briefly below, large amounts of algae and other issues caused by the wastewater effluent
discharge have been in the river on a regular basis for years; however, we are listing time periods
here for which we can provide documentation. We are excluding May-July 2018, since that time
period was covered in the June 2020 agreed order. Additionally, while 30 TAC § 307(b)(4) and
§ 307(e) are separate requirements, we have only counted one violation per day to avoid being
duplicative.
Page 9 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

8/1/18 – 8/31/18
11/30/18 - 04/05/19
6/22/19
7/13/19 – 9/4/20

D. Foam

In addition, “No foaming or frothing of a persistent nature is permissible.” 31 There is often foam
on the surface of the water in the South Fork San Gabriel River, not only at the site of the outfall,
but also a quarter of a mile downstream, in the water flowing next to and over Ms. Morris’s
property. The discharge of foam of a persistent nature or visible foam in more than trace amounts
is a violation of the City’s wastewater permit and thus actionable under the CWA.32

Total Number of Days

Days with Foam
of Violation
1/24/2019, 2/9/2019, 2/22/2019, 2/26/2019, 2/27/2019, 3/1/2019,
3/2/2019, 3/4/2019, 3/10/2019, 3/11/2019, 3/19/2019, 3/21/2019,
4/4/2019, 5/3/2019, 6/6/2019, 6/9/2019, 6/12/2019, 6/13/2019,
6/17/2019, 6/22/2019, 7/17/2019, 7/18/2019, 7/24/2019, 7/31/2019,
8/7/2019, 8/12/2019, 8/14/2019, 8/28/2019, 9/16/2019, 10/1/2019,
10/22/2019, 10/27/2019, 10/28/2019, 12/12/2019, 12/17/2019, 57 Days
1/4/2020, 1/14/2020, 1/25/2020, 1/26/2020, 2/1/2020, 2/2/2020,
2/4/2020, 2/16/2020, 2/19/2020, 2/24/2020, 2/25/2020, 2/27/2020,
3/6/2020, 3/16/2020, 3/22/2020, 4/10/2020, 4/15/2020, 6/5/2020,
6/16/2020, 6/20/2020, 6/25/2020, 7/3/2020

E. Documentation

Ms. Morris has extensively documented the conditions in the South Fork San Gabriel River for
more than two years. Supplementing her photos with those taken by TCEQ during its numerous
investigations demonstrates that the wastewater treatment plant’s discharges have caused algae
and persistent foam regularly in the receiving waters.

See Exhibits E and F for excerpts and photos from the TCEQ investigation that took place in May
of 2018 and Exhibit G for examples of the photos taken by Ms. Morris. These are to provide
context and visual representations of the chronic and ongoing problems Liberty Hill’s effluent is
causing in the South Fork San Gabriel river. The photos in Exhibit G are only a small sample of
the photos taken by Ms. Morris.

F. TCEQ Action

31
30 TAC § 307(b)(6).
32
30 TAC § 307(b)(6); 2015 TPDES permit No. WQ0014477001 at 2-2b.
Page 10 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

There are have been numerous complaints submitted to TCEQ connected to Liberty Hill’s
wastewater treatment permit, many of which were made by Ms. Morris herself. She has submitted
complaints both over the phone and through the online complaint system about the algae, the foam,
the wastewater solids, and the smell of chlorine that often comes from the effluent, as well as
corresponded directly with TCEQ employees. And on October 26, 2019, Ms. Morris submitted a
complaint directly to the EPA and has been in correspondence with an inspector for Region 6.

In the last five years, TCEQ has investigated Liberty Hill and the South Fork San Gabriel River
several times, including multiple times in the last few years. This includes compliance
investigations in May 2018, December 2018, January/February 2019, March 2019, August 2019,
December 2019, and June 2020.33 These investigations have led to alleged violations based on a
large variety of issues, including discharge of wastewater solids, algae growth, discharge of
chlorine, high levels of foam, impairment of the aesthetic condition of the river, and more.
However, TCEQ has acted slowly in its enforcement, and, even when it has gone through with an
agreed order, has failed to deal with many of the relevant violations.

In August of 2018 an agreed enforcement order regarding violations from 2015 and 2016 was
finalized. This order dealt with violations including, but not limited to, exceedances of permitted
pollutants, failure “to report noncompliance that could endanger human health or safety, or the
environment” within the required time period, and failure to submit a sludge report.34 We removed
the violations included in the enforcement order from our list of violations in Exhibit C.

In June of 2020 an agreed enforcement order regarding violations from 2016 through 2018 was
finalized.35 This order dealt with violations including exceedances of permitted pollutants and the
City’s failure “to take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or
disposal or other permit violation that has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human
health or the environment.”36 We removed the violations enforced in this order from our list of
violations in Exhibit C.

IV. Conclusion

The City of Liberty Hill has had numerous past, continuous, and ongoing violations of its
wastewater permit. It is violating the Clean Water Act and its effluent is clearly degrading the
receiving waters of the South Fork San Gabriel River. The City must abate these violations,
whether through the use of alternative wastewater disposal methods, such as a Texas Land
Application Permit or beneficial re-use of treated wastewater, or through a much more stringent
approach to the treatment and discharge of its effluent such that it does not cause eutrophication
in the river.
33
See
https://www15.tceq.texas.gov/crpub/index.cfm?fuseaction=iwr.invdetail&addn_id=7214388320
04009&re_id=713438822004009.
34
Agreed Order Between TCEQ and the City of Liberty Hill, Docket No. 2017-0141-MWD-E,
August 22, 2018.
35
Agreed Order Between TCEQ and the City of Liberty Hill, Docket No. 2018-1024-MLM-E,
June 10, 2020.
36
Id. at 3.
Page 11 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

We intend to file a citizen suit under Section 505 of the Clean Water Act if the City of Liberty Hill
does not come into compliance within 60 days. If the City would like to negotiate and resolve
this dispute with Ms. Morris prior to litigation, please contact us within 20 days of the date
of this notice letter. We can be reached through Texas RioGrande Legal Aid attorney, Loraine
Hoane, at (512) 374-2737 or LHoane@trla.org.

Sincerely,

TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID, INC.

Loraine Hoane
TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID
4920 N. I-35
Austin, TX 78751
LHoane@trla.org
512-374-2737

Amy R. Johnson
Law Offices of Amy R. Johnson
5836 Se Madison St.
Portland, OR 97215
Amy@savagejohnson.com
503-939-2996
Attorneys for Stephanie Morris

Copy of Notice Sent via U.S. Certified Mail to: 7109 0700 0001 4673 5040
Mr. Andrew Wheeler, Administrator
USEPA Headquarters
William Jefferson Clinton Building
Mail Code: 1101A
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
Washington, DC 20460

Copy of Notice Sent via U.S. Certified Mail to: 7019 0700 0001 4673 5057
Mr. Kenley McQueen, Regional Administrator
USEPA Region 6
1201 Elm Street, Suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75270

Copy of Notice Sent via U.S. Certified Mail to: 7019 0700 0001 4673 5064
Mr. Toby Baker, MC 109

Page 12 of 13
60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue for Clean Water Act Violations

TCEQ
P.O Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087

Attachments:
Exhibit A – Map showing location of Ms. Morris’s home at 1409 Orchard, the outfall, the
WWTP, and the 183 Bridge (which is seen in one of the photos) – created
using Google Maps.
Exhibit B – Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements - pollutant limitations
charts from TPDES Permit No. WQ0014477001 (p. 2-2b). Interim I applied
until April 1, 2018; Interim II applies from April 1, 2018 until the present;
and the final requirements take effect once the plant expands to 4.0 MGD.
Exhibit C – Chart containing permit limit violations between November 1, 2015 and July
31, 2020
Exhibit D – Chart containing reporting errors between November 1, 2015 and December
31, 2018
Exhibit E – Excerpts from July 2018 TCEQ Investigation Report
Exhibit F – Sample photos from July 2018 TCEQ Investigation Report (taken during
May 2018 Investigation)
Exhibit G – Sample photos taken by Stephanie Morris

Page 13 of 13