Northern Alaska Environmental Center v. U.S. Department of the Interior

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a case challenging compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to BLM’s 2017 offer and sale of oil and gas leases in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. The Ninth Circuit deferred to BLM’s “reasonable position” that a 2012 environmental impact statement (EIS) that evaluated the management of all BLM-managed lands in the Reserve encompassed future lease sales; the court therefore rejected claims that BLM violated NEPA or its regulations by failing to prepare a NEPA analysis prior to the 2017 lease sale. The Ninth Circuit further concluded that the claim that BLM failed to take a hard look at the 2017 lease sale’s impacts was time-barred under the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act’s statute of limitations. The Ninth Circuit said the BLM’s only remaining hard look obligation was to analyze new circumstances and new information, but the court said the plaintiffs had waived any supplementation claim.

The federal district court for the District of Alaska rejected assertions that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) was required to prepare an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment prior to issuing 2017 leases in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. The court rejected this argument, concluding that Ninth Circuit precedent upholding issuance of leases prior to a site-specific analysis of each lease parcel was controlling. As in a <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/natural-resources-defense-council-inc-v-zinke/">separate case</a> decided the same day, the court held that the plaintiffs waived any claims that BLM should have supplemented its earlier review in an Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (IAP/EIS) finalized in 2012.