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 to Dismiss with Prejudice

and [Proposed] Order Thereon No. CV 08-00227 SC

IGNACIA S. MORENO

Assistant Attorney General

Environment and Natural Resources Division

ROCHELLE L. RUSSELL (Cal. Bar No. 244992)

Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice

Environment and Natural Resources Division

Environmental Defense Section

301 Howard Street, Suite 1050

San Francisco, CA 94105

Tel: (415) 744-6566

Fax: (415) 744-6476

Email: rochelle.russell@usdoj.gov

Counsel for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED

RESIDENTS, et al., 

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 08-cv-00227 SC

STIPULATION TO DISMISS

WITH PREJUDICE

AND

[PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

Case 3:08-cv-00227-SC Document 33 Filed 04/01/10 Page 1 of 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

Stipulation to Dismiss with Prejudice

and [Proposed] Order Thereon No. CV 08-00227 SC 2

Pursuant to Paragraph 5 of the Consent Decree entered by the Court on September 12,

2008 in the above-captioned matter (Dkt. 21) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), the

parties to this action, Plaintiffs Association of Irritated Residents and the Natural Resources

Defense Council, Inc. and Defendants the United States Environmental Protection Agency et al.

(“EPA” or “Agency”), hereby stipulate and agree, through their undersigned counsel, that this

action shall be dismissed with prejudice.

Paragraph 5 of the Consent Decree provides that the parties will jointly request the Court

to dismiss this action with prejudice when the actions in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Consent

Decree, taken pursuant to section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7410(k), have been

completed.

EPA has fulfilled the obligations set forth in Paragraph 1 of the Consent Decree, which

required EPA to sign for publication in the Federal Register no later than October 15, 2008

notices of the Agency’s proposed actions on the 2003 State SIP, the 2004 San Joaquin Valley

SIP, and the 2003 South Coast SIP, and to deliver the notices to the Office of the Federal

Register for publication. See Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: 1-Hour

Ozone Extreme Area Plan for San Joaquin Valley, CA, 73 Fed. Reg. 61,381 (Oct. 16, 2008);

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of California; 2003 State Strategy

and 2003 South Coast Plan for One-Hour Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide, 73 Fed. Reg. 63,408

(Oct. 24, 2008).

EPA has also fulfilled the obligations set forth in Paragraph 2 of the Consent Decree, as

amended on January 15, 2009 (Dkt. 28) and August 10, 2009 (Dkt. 31), which required EPA to:

(1) sign for publication in the Federal Register by January 15, 2009 a notice of the Agency’s final

action on the 2003 South Coast SIP and related portions of the 2003 State SIP; (2) sign for

publication in the Federal Register by December 11, 2009 a notice of the Agency’s final action

on the 2004 San Joaquin Valley SIP and related portions of the 2003 State SIP; and (3) deliver

the notices to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. See Approval and Promulgation

of Implementation Plans: 1-Hour Ozone Extreme Area Plan for San Joaquin Valley, CA, 75 Fed.

Reg. 10,420 (Mar. 8, 2010); Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of

Case 3:08-cv-00227-SC Document 33 Filed 04/01/10 Page 2 of 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

Stipulation to Dismiss with Prejudice

and [Proposed] Order Thereon No. CV 08-00227 SC 3

California; 2003 State Strategy and 2003 South Coast Plan for One-Hour Ozone and Nitrogen

Dioxide, 74 Fed. Reg. 10,176 (Mar. 10, 2009).

Accordingly, the terms of Paragraph 5 of the Consent Decree have been satisfied, and

dismissal of this action with prejudice is appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

 FOR THE DEFENDANTS: IGNACIA S. MORENO

Assistant Attorney General

Environment & Natural Resources Division

Dated: April 1, 2010 /s/ Rochelle L. Russell

ROCHELLE L. RUSSELL

United States Department of Justice

Environmental Defense Section

301 Howard Street, Suite 1050

San Francisco, CA 94105

(415) 744-6566

rochelle.russell@usdoj.gov

FOR THE PLAINTIFFS:

Dated: April 1, 2010 /s/ Brent Newell

BRENT NEWELL

Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment

47 Kearney Street, Suite 804

San Francisco, CA 94108

(415) 346-4179

bnewell@crpe-ej.org

Attorney for Association of Irritated Residents

Dated: April 1, 2010 /s/ Adriano Martinez

ADRIANO MARTINEZ

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

1314 Second Street

Santa Monica, CA 90401

(310) 434-2300

amartinez@nrdc.org

Attorney for Natural Resources Defense Council

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _________________ __________________________________

Hon. Samuel Conti

Senior Judge

United States District Court

April 1, 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Samuel Conti

Case 3:08-cv-00227-SC Document 33 Filed 04/01/10 Page 3 of 3