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 IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division MICHELLE R. LAMBERT Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Environmental Defense Section P.O. Box 23986 Washington, D.C. 20026-3986 Telephone: (202) 616-7501 Fax: (202) 514-8865 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

COMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE, INC., Plaintiff,

v. LISA JACKSON, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and JARED BLUMENFELD, in his official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region IX of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendants. Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH NOTICE OF LODGING OF PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE

NOTICE OF LODGING OF PROPOSED C ONSENT DECREE CASE NO. 10-cv-02859-PJH Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15 Filed10/12/10 Page1 of 31 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

- 1 - NOTICE OF LODGING OF PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE CASE NO. 10-cv-02859-PJH Defendants Lisa Jackson, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and Jared Blumenfeld, in his official capacity as Administrator for Region IX of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (collectively, “EPA”), hereby lodge with the Court a proposed consent decree that contains the terms of a proposed settlement of this action. See Attachment 1, Consent Decree. The proposed consent decree should not be signed or entered by the Court at this time. Pursuant to section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(g), the EPA Administrator must provide “a reasonable opportunity by notice in the Federal Register to persons who are not named as parties or intervenors to the action or matter to comment in writing” upon the proposed consent decree. Accordingly, EPA will publish in the Federal Register a notice of the proposed consent decree and request comments. After a reasonable comment period, the EPA Administrator will promptly consider any written comments received and, if none of the comments disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the proposed consent decree is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, Defendants will move for entry of the decree. Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 12, 2010 IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division /s/ Michelle R. Lambert MICHELLE R. LAMBERT Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Environmental Defense Section P.O. Box 23986 Washington, D.C. 20026-3986 Telephone: (202) 616-7501 Fax: (202) 514-8865 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15 Filed10/12/10 Page2 of 31 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

- 2 - NOTICE OF LODGING OF PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE CASE NO. 10-cv-02859-PJH CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On October 12, 2010, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree was served electronically via the Court’s e-filing system to Counsel of Record.

/s/ Michelle R. Lambert MICHELLE R. LAMBERT Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15 Filed10/12/10 Page3 of 31 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 GIDEON KRACOV (SBN 179815) 801 S. Grand Avenue, Ste. 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 629-2071 Fax: (213) 623-7755 Email: gk@gideonlaw.net RICHARD TOSHIYUKI DRURY (SBN 163559) Lozeau -Drury LLP 410 12th St., Suite 250 Oakland, CA 94607 Phone: (510) 836-4200 Fax: (510) 836-4205 Email: richard@lozeaudrury.com Attorneys for Plaintiff IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division MICHELLE R. LAMBERT Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Environmental Defense Section P.O. Box 23986 Washington, D.C. 20026-3986 Telephone: (202) 616-7501 Fax: (202)514-8865 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

COMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE, INC., Plaintiff,

v. LISA JACKSON, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and JARED BLUMENFELD, in his official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region IX of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendants. Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH CONSENT DECREE

CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJ H Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page1 of 71 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

- 1 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH WHEREAS, on August 30, 2010, Plaintiff Comite Civico Del Valle, Inc. filed the first amended complaint (“Complaint”) in the above-captioned matter against Defendants Lisa Jackson, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and Jared Blumenfeld, in his official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region IX of the United States Environmental Protection Ag ency (collectively, “EPA”), alleging that EPA has failed to undertake a certain nondiscretionary duty under the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q, and that such alleged failure is actionable under section 304(a)(2) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a)(2); WHEREAS, section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7410(a)(1), requires States to adopt and submit to EPA for review state implementation plans (“SIPs”), which establish specific control measures and other requirements that apply to particular sources of air pollution within a State and are designed to attain, maintain, and enforce National Ambient Air Quality Standards established by EPA that specify the maximum permissible concentrations for those pollutants in the ambient air, see 42 U.S.C. §§ 7408, 7409; WHEREAS, section 110(k) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7410(k), sets forth the process by which EPA is to review SIP submissions, including SIP revisions; WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that EPA has a nondiscretionary duty to act on SIP submissions and revisions submitted to EPA within the time lines set forth in section 110(k)(2) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7410(k)(2); WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that EPA has failed to take timely final action to approve, disapprove, or partially approve/disapprove the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District Rule 217, which was submitted to EPA on or about August 24, 2007 and includes measures to control particulate matter emissions from large confined animal facilities within the Imperial Valley (hereinafter, “Rule 217”); WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that EPA has failed to take timely final action to approve, disapprove, or partially approve/disapprove the Imperial County Air Pollution Control District Rules 201 and 202, which were submitted to EPA on or about August 24, 2007 and includes permitting requirements and exemptions within the Imperial Valley (hereinafter, Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page2 of 71 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

- 2 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH “Rule 201" and “Rule 202"); WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s complaint seeks an order from this Court directing EPA to take final action on Rules 201, 202, and 217 pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA; WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to a settlement of this action without admission of any issue of fact or law; WHEREAS, the parties, by entering into this Consent Decree, do not waive or limit any claim or defense, on any grounds, related to any final EPA action; WHEREAS, the parties consider this Consent Decree to be an adequate and equitable resolution of all of the claims in this matter; WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the public, the parties, and judicial economy to resolve this matter without protracted litigation; WHEREAS, the parties agree that this Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the citizen suit provision in section 304(a)(2) of the CAA and that venue lies in the Northern District of California; WHEREAS, the Court, by entering this Consen t Decree, finds that the Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, in the public interest, and consistent with the CAA; NOW THEREFORE, before the taking of testimony, without trial or determination of any issue of fact or law, and upon the consent of the parties, it is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed that: 1. EPA shall sign for publication in the Federal Register no later than April 15, 2011 a notice of the Agency’s final action on Rule 201 and Rule 202 pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA, and thereafter deliver the notice to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. 2. EPA shall sign for publication in the Federal Register no later than September 15, 2011 a notice of the Agency’s final action on Rule 217 pursuant to section 110(k) of the CAA, and thereafter deliver the notice to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. 3. When EPA’s obligations under Paragraphs 1 and 2 have been completed, the parties will file a joint request to the Court to dismiss this matter with prejudice. 4. The parties may extend the deadlines established in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 10 by Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page3 of 71 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

- 3 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH written stipulation executed by counsel for the parties and filed with the Court. In addition, the deadlines established in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 10 may be extended by the Court upon motion by any party to this Consent Decree for good cause shown, after consideration of any response by the non-moving party. 5. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit or modify the discretion accorded EPA by the CAA and by general principles of administrative law, including the discretion to alter, amend or revise any response and/or final action contemplated by this Consent Decree. EPA’s obligation to take the action set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 by the time specified therein does not constitute a limitation or modification of EPA’s discretion within the meaning of this paragraph. 6. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to confer upon the district court jurisdiction to review any decision made in the final action identified in Paragraphs 1 or 2. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to confer upon the district court jurisdiction to review any issues that are within the exclus ive jurisdiction of the United States Courts of Appeals pursuant to sections 307(b)(1) and 505 of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7607(b)(1), 7661d. 7. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Consent Decree and to consider any requests for costs of litigation, including attorneys’ fees. 8. In the event of a dispute between the parties concerning the interpretation or implementation of any aspect of this Consent D ecree, the disputing party shall provide the other party with a written notice outlining the nature of the dispute and requesting informal negotiations. If the parties cannot reach an agreed-upon resolution within ten (10) business days after receipt of the notice, any party may move the Court to resolve the dispute. 9. No motion or other proceeding seeking to enforce this Consent Decree shall be considered properly filed, unless Plainti ff has followed the procedure set forth in Paragraph 8 and provided EPA with written notice received at l east ten (10) business days before the filing of such motion or proceeding. 10. EPA agrees that, pursuant to section 304(d) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(d), Plaintiff is both eligible and entitled to recover its costs of litigation in this action, including Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page4 of 71 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

- 4 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred prior to entry of this Consent Decree. The deadline for filing a bill of costs pursuant to Local Rule 54-1 and a motion for costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to Local Rule 54-6 for activities performed in this case prior to entry of this Consent Decree, is hereby extended until 90 days after the date on which the Court enters this Consent Decree. During this time the parties shall seek to resolve informally any claim for costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. 11. The obligations imposed upon EPA under this Consent Decree may only be undertaken using appropriated funds. No provisions of this Consent Decree shall be interpreted as or constitute a commitment or requirement that EPA obligate or pay funds in contravention of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341, or any other applicable federal law. 12. Plaintiff and EPA shall not challenge the terms of this Consent Decree or this Court’s jurisdiction to enter this Consent Decree. 13. The parties agree and acknowledge that before this Consent Decree is entered by the Court, EPA must provide notice of this Consent Decree in the Federal Register and an opportunity for public comment pursuant to section 113(g) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(g). After this Consent Decree has undergone notice and comment, the Administrator and/or the Attorney General, as appropriate, shall promptly consider any such written comments in determining whether to withdraw or withhold th eir consent to the Consent Decree, in accordance with section 113(g) of the CAA. If the Administ rator and/or the Attorney General do not elect to withdraw or withhold their consent, EPA shall pr omptly file a motion that requests the Court to enter this Consent Decree. 14. Any notices required or provided for by this Consent Decree shall be made in writing, via facsimile, e-mail or other means, and sent to the following: For Plaintiff: Gideon Kracov 801 S. Grand Avenue, Ste. 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 629-2071 Fax: (213) 623-7755 Email: gk@gideonlaw.net Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page5 of 71 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

- 5 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH For Defendants: Michelle R. Lambert U.S. Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division Environmental Defense Section P.O. Box 23986 Washington, D.C. 20026-3986 Phone: (202) 616-7501 Fax: (202) 514-8865 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Geoffrey Wilcox Office of General Counsel U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Bldg., MC 2344A 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20460 Phone: (202) 564-5601 Fax: (202) 564-5603 Email: wilcox.geoffrey@epa.gov Kara Christenson Office of Regional Counsel U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 75 Hawthorne Street, ORC-2 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 972-3881 Fax: (415) 947-3570 Email: christenson.kara@epa.gov 14. The undersigned representatives of each party certify that they are fully authorized by the party that they represent to bi nd that party to the terms of this Consent Decree.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _________________ __________________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF: Dated: October 12, 2010 /s/ Gideon Kracov (with permission) GIDEON KRACOV 801 S. Grand Avenue, Ste. 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 629-2071 Fax: (213) 623-7755 Email: gk@gideonlaw.net RICHARD TOSHIYUKI DRURY Lozeau -Drury LLP 410 12th St., Suite 250 Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page6 of 71 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

- 6 - CONSENT DECREE Case No. 10-cv-02859-PJH Oakland, CA 94501 Phone: (510) 836-4200 Fax: (510) 836-4205 Email: richard@lozeaudrury.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Comite Civico del Valle, Inc. COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS: Dated: October 12, 2010 IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division /s/ Michelle R. Lambert MICHELLE R. LAMBERT Attorney, Environmental Defense Section United States Department of Justice 301 Howard Street, Suite 1050 San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel: (202) 616-7501 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants Case4:10-cv-02859-PJH Document15-1 Filed10/12/10 Page7 of 7