UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

____________________________________

)

LOUISIANA ENVIRONMENTAL )

ACTION NETWORK, and SIERRA )

CLUB, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) Civil Case No. 3:15-CV-858-JJB-RLB

)

GINA MCCARTHY, in her official )

capacity as Administrator, United States )

Environmental Protection Agency, )

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

CONSENT DECREE

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Louisiana Environmental Action Network and Sierra Club 

(collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action pursuant to section 304(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act 

(“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a)(2), alleging that Defendant Gina McCarthy, in her official 

capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), failed to 

perform a non-discretionary duty under CAA § 505(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 7661d(b)(2), to grant or 

deny an administrative petition submitted by Plaintiffs in May 2015 (“Petition”) requesting that 

EPA object to a CAA Title V permit (“Permit”) issued by the Louisiana Department of 

Environmental Quality to Yuhuang Chemical, Inc. for operation of a new methanol 

manufacturing plant in St. James, Louisiana;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and EPA (collectively, “the Parties”) wish to effect a settlement of 

the above-captioned matter without expensive and protracted litigation;

WHEREAS, the Parties consider this Consent Decree to be an adequate and equitable

resolution of the claims in the above-captioned matter;
-2-

WHEREAS, the Court, by entering this Consent Decree, finds that the Consent Decree is 

fair, reasonable, in the public interest, and consistent with the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 et seq.;

NOW THEREFORE, before the taking of testimony, and upon the consent of the Parties, 

it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that:

1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims set forth in the 

Complaint and to order the relief contained in this Consent Decree. Venue is proper in the 

United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana.

2. On or before September 1, 2016, EPA shall sign a response granting or denying

the Petition, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7661d(b)(2). EPA shall promptly provide a copy of its 

response to the Plaintiffs.

3. Following signature of such response to the Petition, EPA shall expeditiously 

deliver notice of EPA’s response to the Office of the Federal Register for review and publication. 

4. If EPA’s response to the Petition includes the granting of any portion of the

Petition in whole or in part, EPA shall promptly transmit its response to the Louisiana 

Department of Environmental Quality.

5. The deadline for filing a motion for costs of litigation, including attorneys’ fees, 

incurred prior to entry of this Consent Decree is hereby extended until sixty (60) days after the 

entry of this Consent Decree by this Court. During this time, the Parties shall seek to resolve 

informally any claim for costs of litigation, including attorneys’ fees, and if they cannot, will 

submit that issue to this Court for resolution. The United States does not waive or limit any 

defenses it may have to such claim. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to resolve any requests 

for costs of litigation, including attorneys’ fees. 
-3-

6. Any provision of this Consent Decree may be modified by (a) written stipulation 

of the Parties with notice to the Court, or (b) by the Court following motion of any party to this 

Consent Decree, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and upon consideration of any 

response by the non-moving party.

7. The Parties recognize that the possibility exists that a lapse in the appropriations 

that fund EPA could delay compliance with the timetables contained in this Consent 

Decree. Should a delay occur due to a lapse in appropriations, any resulting failure to meet the 

timetables set forth herein shall not constitute a failure to comply with the terms of this Consent 

Decree, and any deadlines occurring within one hundred twenty (120) days of the termination of 

the delay shall be automatically extended one day for each day of the delay. Nothing in this 

paragraph shall preclude EPA from seeking an additional extension through modification of this 

Consent Decree pursuant to Paragraph 6.

8. Plaintiffs and EPA shall not challenge the terms of this Consent Decree or this 

Court’s jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree. 

9. Plaintiffs agree that this Consent Decree shall constitute a complete and final 

settlement of all claims that Plaintiffs have asserted against the United States, including EPA, 

under any provision of law in Louisiana Environmental Action Network, et al. v. McCarthy, 

Civil Case No. 3:15-CV-858-JJB-RLB (M.D. La.), except as provided in Paragraph 5 of this 

Consent Decree. Plaintiffs therefore discharge and covenant not to sue the United States, 

including EPA, for any such claims. 
-4-

10. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit or modify any 

discretion accorded EPA by the CAA or by general principles of administrative law in taking the

actions that are the subject of this Consent Decree, including discretion to alter, amend, or revise 

any responses or final actions contemplated by this Consent Decree. EPA’s obligation to

perform the actions specified in Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of this Consent Decree by the time 

specified therein does not constitute a limitation or modification of EPA’s discretion within the 

meaning of this paragraph.

11. Except for paragraph 1, nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed as an 

admission of any issue of fact or law nor to waive or limit any claim or defense, on any grounds, 

related to any final action EPA may take with respect to the Permit.

12. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to confer upon the District 

Court jurisdiction to review any final decision made by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree. 

Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to confer upon the District Court jurisdiction 

to review any issues that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States Court of 

Appeals pursuant to CAA section 307(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. § 7607(b)(1). Nothing in the terms of 

this Consent Decree shall be construed to waive any remedies or defenses the Parties may have 

under CAA section 307(b)(1), 42 U.S.C. § 7607(b)(1).

13. The obligations imposed upon EPA under this Consent Decree can only be

undertaken using appropriated funds. No provision 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 provision of law.

14. Any notices required or provided for by this Consent Decree shall be made in

writing and sent to each of the following:
-5-

For Plaintiffs:

Corinne Van Dalen, Supervising Attorney

Tulane Environmental Law Clinic 

6329 Freret Street 

New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 

Phone: (504) 865-8814 

Fax: (504) 862-8721 

Email: cvandale@tulane.edu

For Defendants:

Chief, Environmental Defense Section

Re: DJ # 90-5-2-4-20575

Environment and Natural Resources Division

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 7611

Washington, DC 20044

Tel: (202) 514-2219

Fax: (202) 514-8865

John T. Krallman

Office of the General Counsel 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

WJC North, MC 2344A

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20460

Tel: (202) 564-0904

krallman.john@epa.gov

15. In the event of a dispute between the Parties concerning the interpretation or 

implementation of any aspect of this Consent Decree, 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 twenty (20) business 

days after receipt of the notice, any party may move the Court to resolve the dispute.

16. No motion or other proceeding seeking to enforce this Consent Decree or for 

contempt of Court shall be filed unless the Plaintiffs have followed the procedure set forth in 

Paragraph 15.
-6-

17. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine and effect compliance with this 

Consent Decree. When EPA’s obligations under Paragraphs 2 through 4 of this Consent Decree

have been completed, and Plaintiffs’ claim for costs of litigation has been resolved pursuant to 

Paragraph 5, the above-captioned matter shall be dismissed with prejudice. The Parties may 

either jointly notify the Court that the Consent Decree should be terminated and the case 

dismissed, or either party may so notify the Court by motion. If either party notifies the Court by 

motion, then the other party shall have twenty (20) days in which to respond. 

18. The Parties agree and acknowledge that before this Consent Decree can be

finalized and entered by the Court, EPA must provide notice in the Federal Register and an 

opportunity for comment pursuant to CAA section 113(g), 42 U.S.C. § 7413(g). EPA shall 

promptly submit a public notice of this Consent Decree to the Federal Register for publication 

and public comment after lodging this Consent Decree with the Court. After this Consent 

Decree has undergone an opportunity for 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 consent to this Consent Decree, in accordance with 

section 113(g) of the CAA. If the federal government elects not to withdraw or withhold consent 

to this Consent Decree, the Parties promptly shall file a motion that requests the Court to enter 

this Consent Decree. If for any reason the Court does not enter this Consent Decree, the 

obligations set forth in this Consent Decree are null and void.

19. It is hereby expressly understood and agreed that this Consent Decree was jointly 

drafted by Plaintiffs and EPA and that any and all rules of construction to the effect that 

ambiguity is construed against the drafting party shall be inapplicable in any dispute concerning 

the terms, meaning, or interpretation of this Consent Decree.