Powertech (USA) Inc. (Board decision, February 9, 2011)
In re Powertech (USA) Inc. (EAB UIC Appeal Nos. 11-01 and 11-02): petitions dismissed as moot
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Board precedent from 2011, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
EPA Region 8 issued an Underground Injection Control permit to Powertech (USA) Inc. Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction and James B. Woodward petitioned the Environmental Appeals Board to review the permit. Before the Board ruled on the petitions, Region 8 withdrew the permit and said it intended to issue a new draft permit for notice and comment. The Board concluded that the withdrawal made the petitions moot and dismissed them with prejudice.
Decision snapshot
- Cited authorities: 40 C.F.R. § 124.19(d) and § 1.25(e)(1)
- Outcome: The two petitions for review were dismissed with prejudice as moot after Region 8 withdrew the permit.
- Key point: Withdrawal of a challenged permit before the Board decides whether to grant review can moot the petitions.
Full text (EPA EAB public release)
BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C.
In re: )
)
Powertech (USA) Inc. ) UIC Appeal Nos. 11-01 & 11-02
)
UIC Permit No. CO51237-08412 )
---------------------------------------)
ORDER DISMISSING PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
On December 3, 2010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 ("Region") issued an
Underground Injection Control ("UIC") permit to Powertech (USA) Inc. ("Powertech"). The Board
received two petitions seeking review of the permit: one from Coloradoans Against Resource
Destruction ("CARD") and one from Mr. James B. Woodward. Both petitions appear to have been
timely filed.
On February 7, 2011, the Region issued a notice withdrawing the December 3, 2010 permit
pursuant to its authority under 40 C.F.R. § 124.19(d). 1 See U.S. EPA Region 8, Notice of Withdrawal
of UIC Permit No. CO51237-08412 (Feb. 7, 2011). On the same day, the Region filed a motion with
the Board requesting that the petitions be dismissed as moot. Respondent Region 8's Motion to
Dismiss as Moot the Petitions for Review of the UIC Permit ("Motion to Dismiss"). The Region
states that it is withdrawing the permit in its entirety and intends to issue a new draft permit, which
will be subject to notice and comments in accordance with the applicable regulations. Motion to
Dismiss at 2. The Region states further that it has contacted both CARD and Mr. Woodward "and
they concur with the Region's request to dismiss the petition[s]." Id.
Upon consideration, the Board concludes that the Region's withdrawal of the permit in its
entirety renders the two petitions challenging the permit moot. The petitions are therefore
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
So ordered. 2
Dated: February 9, 2011
ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
By: [signature]
Kathie A. Stein
Environmental Appeals Judge
1 Section 124.19(d) allows a permit issuer to unilaterally withdraw a permit decision (or portion
thereof) prior to the Board rendering a decision to grant or deny review. See In re Desert Rock
Energy Co., PSD Appeal Nos. 09-03 through 09-06, slip op. at 11 (EAB Sept. 24, 2009), 14 E.A.D.
__ (Remand Order).
2 The three-member panel deciding this matter is comprised of Environmental Appeals Judges
Edward E. Reich, Kathie A. Stein, and Anna L. Wolgast. 40 C.F.R. § 1.25(e)(1).
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Order Dismissing Petitions for Review in the
matter of Powertech (USA) Inc., UIC Appeal Nos. 11-01 & 11-02, were sent to the following
persons in the manner indicated:
First Class Mail: Jeffrey C. Parsons
Western Mining Action Project
P.O. Box 349
Lyons, CO 80540
James B. Woodward
P.O. Box 599
Wellington, CO 80549
Interoffice Mail: Leslie Darman (2355A)
Office of General Counsel
Pouch Mail: Lucita C. Chin (MC-8RC)
Associate Regional Counsel
U.S. EPA Region 8
1595 Wynkoop St.
Denver, CO 80202
Dated: FEB - 9 2011
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