California v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management

After a California federal court granted motions in February for a preliminary injunction barring the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from enforcing its rule delaying provisions of the Waste Prevention Rule, the federal respondents filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit on April 23.

The federal district court for the Northern District of California granted motions for a preliminary injunction barring the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from enforcing its rule delaying and suspending the requirements of its Waste Prevention Rule, which is intended to “to reduce waste of natural gas from venting, flaring, and leaks during oil and natural gas production activities on onshore Federal and Indian (other than Osage Tribe) leases.” The court found that BLM’s reasoning for delaying the rule was “untethered to evidence contradicting the reasons for implementing the Waste Prevention Rule” and that plaintiffs were therefore likely to prevail on the merits. The court also found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated irreparable injury based on “the waste of publicly owned natural gas, increased air pollution and associated health impacts, and exacerbated climate impacts.” The court also denied motions to transfer the action to the District of Wyoming, where a challenge to the Waste Prevention Rule is pending. The California federal court said the substantive legal issues in the District of Wyoming case were distinct from the procedural issues at issue in this action.

On December 19, 2017, the attorneys general of California and New Mexico filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Northern District of California challenging the U.S. Bureau of Land Management's (BLM’s) final rule postponing most compliance dates in BLM’s Waste Prevention Rule for one year. The Waste Prevention Rule, which was published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2016, imposed requirements on oil and gas companies to reduce the venting, flaring, and leaking of natural gas, including the greenhouse gas methane, during production activities on onshore federal and Indian leases. The states asserted that the one-year suspension of the Waste Prevention Rule’s compliance dates “lacks any reasoned analysis, contravenes BLM’s statutory mandates, and ignores significant environmental consequences.” The states alleged violations of the Mineral Leasing Act, National Environmental Policy Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982, and the Administrative Procedure Act.