Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Energy and Utilities Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

NEPA

Administrative Law

2015

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Energy and Utilities Law

Pit River Tribe V. Bureau Of Land Management, 793 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2015), Kathryn S. Ore Nov 2015

Pit River Tribe V. Bureau Of Land Management, 793 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2015), Kathryn S. Ore

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In Pit River Tribe v. Bureau of Land Management, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained the correct application of the zone of interests test and further solidified the importance of proper NEPA and NHPA analysis in geothermal leasing. The court reaffirmed that the BLM and the Forest Service must conduct additional cultural and environmental analysis when granting lease extensions under the Geothermal Steam Act. Furthermore, it rejected the BLM’s decision to grant forty-year lease continuations to unproven geothermal leases by treating them as a unit rather than individually.


Sierra Club V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015), Ariel E. Overstreet-Adkins Nov 2015

Sierra Club V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015), Ariel E. Overstreet-Adkins

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Despite the majority’s “needlessly circuitous” route, as described by concurring Judge Brown, Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stands as a limit of the application of NEPA to a private pipeline constructed largely on private land. While the main issue identified by the District of Columbia Circuit Court was the scope of environmental review required under NEPA, the court also addressed issues dealing with the ESA and the CWA relating to the construction and operation of a pipeline in the Midwest. The court held that under these circumstances, NEPA review was mandated only for those small stretches where …


High Country Conservation Advocates V. United States Forest Service, 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014), Kathryn S. Ore Aug 2015

High Country Conservation Advocates V. United States Forest Service, 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014), Kathryn S. Ore

Public Land & Resources Law Review

High Country Conservation Advocates v. United States Forest Service concerns the United States Forest Service’s and the Bureau of Land Management’s authorizations of on-the-ground mining exploration activities in the Sunset Roadless Area of western Colorado. The United States District Court for the District of Colorado’s holding has far-reaching consequences for federal agencies’ analysis and disclosure of impacts on the climate under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). In addition to bolstering the Plaintiffs’ recent successes at establishing legal standing to challenge federal agencies’ disclosures and analyses of impacts on the climate under NEPA, High Country is the first case to …