RE: Rome Family Corporation, Land Use Permit #1R0410-EB (Revocation), Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Dismissal Order (June 29, 1995) VERMONT ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD 10 V.S.A. Chapter 151 Re: Rome Family Corporation Land Use Permit #1R0410-EB (Revocation) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND DISMISSAL ORDER I. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS On March 25, 1991, the Town of Sherburne ("Town"), through Mark L. Sperry, Esq., filed a petition for revocation and administrative enforcement action with the Environmental Board. On April 11, 1991, the Town filed a letter stating that it would agree to staying its revocation petition if the Board determines to seek an administrative order pursuant to 10 V.S.A. Chapter 201. The Town also stated that it might seek to renew the revocation petition depending on the speed of administrative enforcement. On April 18, 1991, the Board received a copy of a letter from the Permittee stating that it intends to apply for a permit amendment. The Board deliberated on April 18, 1991. On April 23, 1991, the Board issued a Memorandum of Decision and Order staying the petition for revocation pending administrative enforcement action. On May 8, 1991, Mr. Sperry sent a letter to Executive Officer Aaron Adler requesting a copy of the Board's request to the Agency of Natural Resources Secretary seeking a possible enforcement action. A Proposal for Dismissal and proposed decision were sent to the parties on May 16, 1995, and the parties were provided an opportunity to file a Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal before the full Board. No party filed a Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal with the Board. The Board deliberated concerning this matter on June 21, 1995. This matter is now ready for decision. II. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The most recent Board file entry prior to the issuance of the Proposal for Dismissal in this matter is dated May 8, 1991. 2. On May 16, 1995, the Board Chair, John T. Ewing, issued a Proposal for Dismissal in this matter, which included a copy of the Docket Management Notice. 3. No party filed a Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal with the Board on or before seven days prior to the Board's deliberations in this matter. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Enivronmental Board Rule 38(B)(2) requires that the Board consider and dispose of revocation petitions in a prompt manner. Pursuant to this authority, the Board has established a docket management protocol governing the failure of parties to diligently prosecute revocation petitions. This protocol is described in a Docket Management Notice provided to all parties. This notice states in pertinent part: In any revocation petition proceeding, the Board Chair may issue, without notice, a Proposal for Dismissal where no document has been filed with the Board by the Petitioner: After the expiration of six months from the most recent Board file entry in the case. However, if a continuance or stay with a definite termination date which has been issued by the Board is in effect, this time period will commence on the termination date; or In the case of an indefinite continuance or stay issued by the Board, after the expiration of twelve months from the issuance of the continuance or stay by the Board. The Board Chair may also issue, without notice, a Proposal for Dismissal upon request of the Board's Director of Administration, where twelve months have passed from the commencement of the petition proceeding, and in the opinion of the Director, the petition is not being diligently prosecuted. Where the Board Chair has issued a Proposal for Dismissal, the Board will dismiss the petition at the next Board deliberation after 30 days have passed from the issuance of the Proposed Dismissal Order, unless any of the parties files a "Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal" on or before seven days prior to the Board deliberation. A form motion will be provided to the parties when the Proposal for Dismissal is issued. If a Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal is timely filed in proper form prior to deliberation on the Proposal for Dismissal by the Board, the Board will postpone consideration on the proposal until the next Board deliberation after 30 days have passed. At that time, the Board will consider the motion and shall either revoke the proposal for dismissal, or dismiss the petition. The most recent Board file entry prior to the issuance of the Proposal for Dismissal in this matter is dated May 8, 1991. On May 16, 1995, the Board Chair, John T. Ewing, issued a Proposal for Dismissal in this matter, which included a copy of the Docket Management Notice. No party filed a Motion to Revoke Proposal for Dismissal with the Board on or before June 14, 1995. As a result, dismissal of this petition by the Board is proper. IV. ORDER Dismissal of this matter is not contrary to the values embodied in Act 250. This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. This Dismissal Order is limited in effect to the petition proceeding before the Environmental Board. Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this 29th day of June, 1995. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD /s/John T. Ewing John T. Ewing, Chair John M. Farmer Arthur Gibb Marcy Harding Samuel Lloyd William Martinez Rebecca M. Nawrath Robert Page Steve E. Wright prot\romefam.ord (ry3)