Case 1:12-cv RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Similar documents
Case 1:16-cv JDB Document 33 Filed 12/28/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:13-cv GK Document 27-1 Filed 04/28/14 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:10-cv JEB Document 13 Filed 08/03/11 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 2:13-cv JCJ Document 23-1 Filed 05/06/14 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 1:10-cv PLF Document 17 Filed 08/04/11 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This Settlement Agreement is made by and between: 1) Sierra Club; and 2)

Case 1:12-cv RPM Document 8 Filed 07/11/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:12-cv CKK Document 12 Filed 06/21/12 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:12-cv RLW Document 48 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case4:12-cv PJH Document82-1 Filed02/20/14 Page1 of 11

Case 1:12-cv RLW Document 47-1 Filed 08/31/12 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 4:08-cv RH-WCS Document 90 Filed 08/25/09 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

Case 1:12-cv RBW Document 40 Filed 10/29/13 Page 1 of 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, on August 10, 2011, Plaintiffs Sierra Club and WildEarth Guardians filed

Case KRH Doc 3040 Filed 07/12/16 Entered 07/12/16 17:55:33 Desc Main Document Page 62 of 369

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Case 1:09-cv JLK Document 80-1 Filed 02/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:12-cv JDB Document 25-2 Filed 08/20/12 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) WHEREAS, Portland General Electric Company ( PGE ) is an Oregon corporation;

stipulated that each of the above parties shall bear its own costs and fees.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CONSENT DECREE

Upon the motion, dated June 20, 2009 (the Motion ), as orally modified at the

BEFORE THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PREAMBLE I. JURISDICTION II. PARTIES BOUND III. DEFINITIONS IV. FINDINGS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Judge CONSENT DECREE

Case 1:02-cv JR Document 78 Filed 01/29/2009 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

rdd Doc 1001 Filed 09/11/14 Entered 09/11/14 14:52:49 Main Document Pg 1 of 54

Case 1:04-cv RWR Document 27-2 Filed 01/14/2005 Page 1 of 11

3. Retirement of Certain Coal-Fired Generating Units. DEC and PEC will retire coal-fired electrical generating units ( EGUs ), as follows:

Intervenor-Respondent. Contested Case Hearing in the above-identified consolidated cases (the "Consolidated Appeals").

[QIJ$&J ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CONSENT DECREE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

Case 1:16-cv EGS Document 21 Filed 07/05/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

BEFORE THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

mg Doc 5847 Filed 11/18/13 Entered 11/18/13 19:33:43 Main Document Pg 1 of 10

Case 2:10-cv Document 59-1 Filed 11/30/11 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 819

BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WYOMING

EEOC v. River View Coal, LLC

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED: OCTOBER 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 6:15-cv JR Document 72 Filed 10/28/16 Page 1 of 16

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. 1. This Settlement Agreement is entered into this 23d day. of December, 1998 (hereinafter the Effective Date ) among

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:08-cv BSJ-MHD Document 93 Filed 12/05/11 Page 1 of 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:14-cv Document 1-1 Filed 06/17/14 Page 1 of 61 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:09-cv RB-RHS Document 139 Filed 11/01/13 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

\{."--, Under Section 307 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607(b), Section 706 of

Case: jtg Doc #:596 Filed: 09/08/17 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN.

Case 1:16-cv Document 2-1 Filed 08/18/16 Page 1 of 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

YOU ARE NOT BEING SUED

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE RECITALS

Case 9:14-cv WPD Document 251 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2017 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:15-cv WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14

Case: 3:91-cv WHR Doc #: Filed: 03/19/15 Page: 1 of 19 PAGEID #: 12654

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIN ENERGY CORPORATION (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

GOODS & SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ORDINARY MAINTENANCE. between the City of and

Case KJC Doc 441 Filed 09/11/18 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Signed November 1, 2016 United States Bankruptcy Judge

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

NEW YORK STATE - EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR SALE OF SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY * * * SAMPLE * * *

Case cec Doc 326 Filed 10/30/14 Entered 10/31/14 10:01:10

Case Document Filed in TXSB on 10/31/2007 Page t of 12 EXHIBIT A

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

INTERIM ORDER UNDER 11 U.S.C. 105, 362 AND 541 AND FED R. BANKR. P

Case 2:17-cv JFB-SIL Document 16 Filed 07/14/17 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 71

EEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc.

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

COMPLIANCE ORDER ON CONSENT Case No

Case 5:07-cv VAP-JCR Document 11 Filed 06/14/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DIVISION

Currently before the Court for preliminary approval is a settlement (the

Case 3:15-cv MMC Document 32 Filed 08/26/16 Page 1 of 10

Case reg Doc 978 Filed 12/19/17 Entered 12/19/17 15:39:15. Debtor.

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Case4:13-cv YGR Document104 Filed05/12/15 Page1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION. Consol. Case No

Case Doc 1443 Filed 06/08/17 Entered 06/08/17 13:49:03 Main Document Pg 1 of 91

~~~~I.::~)~~:~~;~~:~: t~ EJ~'.i.;V411Ii:':~~{~ ~i~~~uq.r,/i:;iyj~,p:~'.

Case 2:03-cv RCJ-PAL Document 2795 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

EEOC v. Pacific Airport Services, Inc.,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

TENNESSEE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) DIVISION OF AIR POLLUTION NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC. ) ) CASE NO. APC RESPONDENT )

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND FAIRNESS HEARING

Case 1:17-cv LAP Document 1 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 3

COMPROMISE AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Case 2:03-cv RCJ-PAL Document 2907 Filed 06/05/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:03-cv LJM-TAB Document 745 Filed 05/22/07 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 8174

Case KJC Doc 597 Filed 11/17/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 2:15-cv LDD Document 54 Filed 12/12/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Transcription:

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPALACHIAN VOICES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GINA McCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendant, and UTILITY SOLID WASTE ACTIVITIES GROUP, and NATIONAL MINING ASSOCIATION, Intervenor-Defendants. HEADWATERS RESOURCES, INC., Plaintiff, v. GINA McCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendant. BORAL MATERIAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. GINA McCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Defendant. Civ. No. 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Civ. No. 1:12-cv-00585-RBW Civ. No. 1:12-cv-00629-RBW CONSENT DECREE

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 2 of 18 WHEREAS, these consolidated actions have been brought pursuant to the citizen suit provision of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6972(a(2 against Defendant Gina McCarthy, in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ; WHEREAS, Plaintiff Appalachian Voices, et al., allege in their complaint that EPA has failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty arising under section 2002(b of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6912(b, by failing to complete the required review, at least every three years, and revision if necessary, of RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Headwaters Resources, Inc. and Boral Material Technologies, Inc., similarly allege in their complaints that EPA has failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty arising under section 2002(b of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6912(b, by failing to complete the required review, at least every three years, and revision if necessary, of RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals; WHEREAS, by orders dated September 30, 2013 and October 29, 2013 (Docket Nos. 37 and 41, the Court has granted summary judgment on the merits of Plaintiffs claims that EPA has failed to complete the required review at least every three years, and revision if necessary, of RCRA Subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals; WHEREAS, the Court in its orders dated September 30, 2013 and October 29, 2013 has reserved ruling on establishing a deadline for EPA s compliance with its obligation to review, and revise if necessary, certain RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals, and requested supplemental briefing on remedy; 2

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 3 of 18 WHEREAS, the Court in its orders dated September 30, 2013 and October 29, 2013, has granted summary judgment to EPA and Intervenor Defendants, on additional claims for relief asserted by Plaintiffs Appalachian Voices, et al., in their complaint; WHEREAS, in a proposed rule published on June 21, 2010, 75 Fed. Reg. 24,148, EPA proposed, as one regulatory option, to revise its RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals; WHEREAS, EPA has solicited comment on its proposal to revise its RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals, and on new information and data related to its proposal; WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the public, the parties, and judicial economy to resolve the issues in this action without further litigation; WHEREAS, by entering into this Consent Decree, the Parties do not waive or limit any claim or defense, on any ground, related to any final agency action taken pursuant to this Consent Decree; WHEREAS, the Court finds and determines that it has jurisdiction to enter this Decree; and WHEREAS, the Court finds and determines that this Consent Decree represents a just, fair, adequate, and equitable resolution of the remaining claim raised in this action; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 3

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 4 of 18 I. GENERAL TERMS 1. The Parties to this Consent Decree are Plaintiffs, Defendant, and Intervenor Defendants (hereinafter together and severally the Parties. The Parties understand that (a Gina McCarthy was sued in her official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency; and (b the obligations arising under the Consent Decree are to be performed by EPA and not by Gina McCarthy in her individual capacity. 2. This Consent Decree applies to, is binding upon, and inures to the benefit of the Parties, and their respective successors, assigns, and designees. II. DEFINITIONS 3. The following definitions shall apply to the terms referred to in this Consent Decree: a. Consent Decree shall mean this document; b. Coal combustion residuals shall mean fly ash waste, bottom ash waste, slag waste, and flue gas emission control waste, generated from the combustion of coal; c. EPA shall mean Gina McCarthy, the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency; 4

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 5 of 18 d. Plaintiffs shall mean Appalachian Voices, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Environmental Integrity Project, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, Moapa Band of Paiutes, Montana Environmental Information Center, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Prairie Rivers Network; Sierra Club; Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; Western North Carolina Alliance; Headwaters Resources, Inc., and Boral Material Technologies, Inc.; e. Intervenor Defendants shall mean the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group and the National Mining Association. III. DEADLINE FOR AGENCY ACTION 4. The EPA Administrator shall, by December 19, 2014, sign for publication in the Federal Register a notice taking final action regarding EPA s proposed revision of RCRA subtitle D regulations pertaining to coal combustion residuals. EPA will promptly transmit this signed notice to the Federal Register, and EPA shall provide the Parties with a copy of such notice taking final action within five business days of signature by the Administrator. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE 5. This Consent Decree shall become effective upon the date of its entry by the Court. If for any reason the Court does not enter this Consent Decree, the obligations set forth in this Consent Decree are null and void. 5

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 6 of 18 V. REMEDY, SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW AND CONTINUING JURISDICTION 6. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to determine and effectuate compliance with this Consent Decree, to resolve any disputes thereunder, and to consider any requests for costs of litigation, including attorney s fees, pursuant to Section XI of this Consent Decree. 7. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to confer upon this Court jurisdiction to review any decision, either procedural or substantive, to be made by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree, except for the purpose of determining EPA s compliance with the terms of this Consent Decree. 8. Plaintiffs sole judicial remedy to address the merits of any final agency action taken by EPA pursuant to this Consent Decree is to file a new lawsuit to challenge such final action. Plaintiffs reserve their right to bring any such challenge. EPA reserves all of its defenses to any such suits. Nothing in this Consent Decree alters or affects the standards for judicial review of final EPA action. 9. The obligations imposed by EPA under Paragraph 4 of this Consent Decree can only be undertaken using appropriated funds. No provision of this 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 statute. VI. COVENANTS AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 10. The Parties shall not challenge the terms of this Consent Decree or this Court s jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree. 11. Upon approval and entry of this Consent Decree by the Court in Appalachian Voices et al. v. McCarthy, Case No. Civ. No. 1:12-cv-00523-RBW (and consolidated cases, the 6

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 7 of 18 Parties agree that they will not appeal the orders dated September 30, 2013 and October 29, 2013 and any corresponding judgment thereon. VII. TERMINATION OF CONSENT DECREE 12. After EPA s obligations under Paragraph 4 have been concluded, EPA may move to have this Consent Decree terminated. Plaintiffs shall have 14 days in which to respond to such motion. VIII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 13. In the event of a dispute among the Parties concerning the interpretation or implementation of any aspect of this Consent Decree, the disputing Party shall provide the other Parties with a written notice of the dispute requesting informal negotiations. The Parties shall meet and confer to attempt to resolve the dispute. If the Parties cannot reach an agreed-upon resolution after twenty (20 business days following receipt of the written notice, any Party may move the Court to resolve the dispute. 14. No motion or other proceeding to enforce this Consent Decree or for contempt of court shall be properly filed unless the Party seeking to enforce this Consent Decree has followed the procedure set forth in Paragraph 13. 15. It is hereby understood and agreed that this Consent Decree was jointly drafted by the Parties 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. 7

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 8 of 18 IX. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSIONS 16. The deadline in Paragraph 4 above may be extended by written stipulation executed by counsel for all Plaintiffs and EPA and filed with the Court. 17. The parties recognize that the performance of this Consent Decree is subject to appropriations laws and regulations of the United States. The possibility exists that a government shut-down such as occurred in 1995, 1996 and 2013 could delay EPA s performance of obligations under this Consent Decree. In the event of a government shut-down affecting EPA occurring within one-hundred and twenty (120 days of the deadline set forth in Paragraph 4 above, the deadline in Paragraph 4 shall be extended one day for each day of the shut-down. EPA will provide the Parties and the Court with notice as soon as is reasonably possible in the event that EPA invokes this term of the Consent Decree. Plaintiffs may challenge the invocation of this term of the Consent Decree under the dispute resolution terms of this Consent Decree. X. AGENCY DISCRETION 18. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be construed to limit or modify any discretion accorded EPA by RCRA or by general principles of administrative law in taking the action which is the subject of this Consent Decree, including the discretion to alter, amend, or revise any final action contemplated by this Consent Decree. EPA s obligation to perform the action specified by Paragraph 4 does not constitute a limitation or modification of EPA s discretion within the meaning of this paragraph. 8

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 9 of 18 XI. COSTS 19. The deadline for filing a motion for costs of litigation (including attorney s fees for activities performed prior to entry of this Consent Decree is hereby extended until 180 days after entry of this Consent Decree by the Court. During this time Plaintiffs and EPA shall seek to resolve informally any claim for costs of litigation (including attorney s fees, and if they cannot, will submit that issue to the Court for resolution. XII. NOTICE AND CORRESPONDENCE 20. Any notice, including correspondence, required or made with respect to this Consent Decree, shall be in writing and shall be effective upon receipt. For any matter relating to this Consent Decree, the contact persons are: For Plaintiffs Appalachian Voices, et al.: Abigail M. Dillen EARTHJUSTICE 48 Wall Street, 19th Floor New York, NY 10005 (212 845-7378 adillen@earthjustice.org For Plaintiff Headwaters Resources, Inc.: Kenneth M. Kastner HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 555 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202 637-5600 ken.kastner@hoganlovells.com For Plaintiff Boral Material Technologies, Inc.: David M. Williamson WILLIAMSON LAW + POLICY 1800 K Street N.W., Suite 714 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202 256-6155 maxwilliamson@williamsonlawpolicy.com 9

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 10 of 18 Bruce Pasfield ALSTON & BIRD LLP 950 F Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202 239-3223 bruce.pasfield@alston.com For Defendant EPA: Eric G. Hostetler Environmental Defense Section U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 7611 Washington, D.C. 20044 (202 305-2326 eric.hostetler@usdoj.gov Laurel Celeste U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariol Rios North Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 (202 564-1751 celeste.laurel@epa.gov For Intervenor Defendant Utility Solid Waste Activities Group: Douglas H. Green, Esq. Venable LLP 575 7th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 (202 344-4483 DHGreen@venable.com For Intervenor Defendant National Mining Association: Donald J. Patterson, Jr., Esq. Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. 1350 I Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202 789-6032 dpatterson@bdlaw.com 10

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 11 of 18 XIII. REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORITY 21. The undersigned certify that they are fully authorized by the Party or Parties they represent to bind that Party or those Parties to the terms of this Consent Decree. SO ORDERED this day of, 2014 HON. REGGIE B. WALTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 11

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 12 of 18

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 13 of 18 FOR PLAINTIFFS APPALACHIAN VOICES, CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK, ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT, KETUCKIANS FOR THE COMMONWEALTH, MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION CENTER, MOAPA BAND OF PAIUTES, PRAIRIE RIVERS NETWORK, PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY, WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA ALLIANCE, AND SIERRA CLUB Abigail M. Dillen EARTHJUSTICE 48 Wall Street, 19th Floor New York, NY 10005 Phone: (212 845-7378 Email: adillen@earthjustice.org 13

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 14 of 18

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 15 of 18

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 16 of 18

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 17 of 18

Case 1:12-cv-00523-RBW Document 44-1 Filed 01/29/14 Page 18 of 18