Dry Creek Rancheria (Board decision, May 19, 2008)

In re Dry Creek Rancheria (EAB NPDES Appeal Nos. 07-14 and 07-15): petitions dismissed with prejudice

Decision type
Board decision
Dockets
NPDES 07-14, NPDES 07-15
Decided
May 19, 2008
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-23

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 2008, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2008
The EPA regulations may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Board or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final EAB decision
This Environmental Appeals Board order is a final disposition of the NPDES appeals. The Board dismissed both petitions with prejudice after the petitioners withdrew them, and cancelled the scheduled status conference and oral argument. The full text below is the official EPA release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official EPA EAB release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Transcribed from a scanned original: EPA EAB released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (epa.gov)

Plain-English summary

The County of Sonoma and Sonoma County Water Agency petitioned over the Dry Creek Rancheria NPDES permit in appeal 07-14, while the Alexander Valley Association petitioned in appeal 07-15. Each petitioner filed a submission withdrawing its petition for review. The Environmental Appeals Board dismissed both petitions with prejudice. Because the appeals were dismissed, the Board cancelled the scheduled May 22, 2008 status conference and June 13, 2008 oral argument.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authorities: None stated in the released order.
  • Outcome: Both petitions were dismissed with prejudice, and the status conference and oral argument were cancelled.
  • Key point: A petitioner’s withdrawal ends the appeal when the EAB enters an order dismissing the petition with prejudice.

Full text (EPA EAB public release)

               BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
           UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                           WASHINGTON, D.C.

[E-FILED stamp: MAY 19 2008; clerk initials illegible]

In re: )
)
Dry Creek Rancheria )
) NPDES Appeal
) Nos. 07-14 & 07-15
NPDES Permit No. CA-0005241 )

     ORDER DISMISSING PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
     AND CANCELLING STATUS CONFERENCE AND ORAL ARGUMENT

The petitioners in the above-captioned matters, the County of Sonoma and Sonoma County

Water Agency ("County") (NPDES Appeal No. 07-14), and the Alexander Valley Association
("AVA") (NPDES Appeal No. 07-15), have filed submissions stating that they are withdrawing their
respective petitions for review. Accordingly, the County's and AVA's petitions are hereby
DISMISSED with prejudice.

Further, in light of these dismissals, the status conference scheduled to take place on May 22,

2008, and the oral argument scheduled to take place on June 13, 2008, are hereby cancelled.

So ordered.

Dated: 5/19/2008

                               ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD

By: [handwritten signature illegible]
Charles Sheehan
Environmental Appeals Judge

                 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I hereby certify that copies of the forgoing Order Dismissing Petitions for Review and

Cancelling Status Conference and Oral Argument in the matter of Dry Creek Rancheria, NDPES
Appeal Nos. 07-14 & 07-15, were sent to the following persons in the manner indicated:

First-Class Mail: Steven M. Woodside, County Counsel
Bruce Goldstein, Assistant County Counsel
Jeffrey M. Brax, Deputy County Counsel
County of Sonoma
575 Administration Dr., Rm. 105A.
Santa Rosa, CA 95403-2881

                                 Dennis J. Whittlesey
                                 Margaret A. Coughlin
                                 H. Scott Althouse
                                 Dickinson Wright, PLLC
                                 1901 L Street N.W., Ste. 800
                                 Washington, D.C. 20036

                                 Donald M. Clary
                                 Michelle Hickey
                                 Holland & Knight
                                 633 W. 5th Street, 21st Floor
                                 Los Angeles, CA 90071

Pouch Mail: Ginette Chapman
Office of Regional Counsel
U.S. EPA Region 9 (ORC-2)
75 Hawthorne St.
San Francisco, CA 94195

                                 Thomas Hagler
                                 Office of Regional Counsel
                                 U.S. EPA Region 9 (ORC-2)
                                 75 Hawthorne St.
                                 San Francisco, CA 94195

Inter-office Mail: James Curtin (MC-2355A)
EPA, Office of General Counsel

Dated: MAY 20 2008 [handwritten signature illegible] for
Annette Duncan
Secretary

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace