- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Montana
- /
- Western Organization of Resource Councils v. U.S. ...
Litigation
Western Organization of Resource Councils v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Date
2016
Geography
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
10/15/2018
Appeal
Amended notice of appeal filed by defendant-intervenors Peabody Caballo Mining, LLC, and BTU Western Resources, Inc.
–
10/01/2018
Appeal
Notice of appeal filed by federal defendants.
BLM, Wyoming, three coal mining companies, and environmental groups have appealed a Montana federal court’s decision finding that some climate change analyses for Resource Management Plans for the Powder River Basin were inadequate. The parties are appealing the court’s March 2018 opinion and order as well as its July 2018 remedy order, in which the court declined to enjoin issuance of new mineral leases and gave BLM 16 months to complete new NEPA reviews.
07/31/2018
Decision
Order issued setting schedule for remedial NEPA review and denying motion for reconsideration.
On July 31, 2018, the federal district court for the District of Montana issued an order setting the remedy for a deficient environmental review the court identified in a March 26, 2018 opinion. In the March opinion, the court found that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) had not adequately analyzed climate change issues when it approved resource management plans for two field offices in the Powder River Basin. In its July 31 order, the court adopted a 16-month expedited schedule for the remedial analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Because the court had already required that the federal defendants conduct remedial NEPA analyses prior to issuing any new or pending oil, gas, or coal leases in the planning areas, the court found that the plaintiffs had failed to establish the irreparable injury necessary for an order enjoining issuance of new leases. The court also declined to vacate the record of decision, which would have resulted in invalidating 12 resource management plans for millions of acres and would have caused the management plans for the areas at issue in this case to revert to plans approved in the 1980s and 1990s. The court also denied a motion by the defendants for reconsideration of a portion of its March opinion.
03/26/2018
Decision
Plaintiffs' and defendants' motions for summary judgment granted in part and denied in part.
The federal district court for the District of Montana found that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) had violated the National Environmental Policy Act when it approved Resource Management Plans (RMPs) for two field offices in the Powder River Basin. The court said BLM should have considered alternatives that would decrease the amount of extractable coal available for leasing based on climate change concerns. The court also said BLM was required to consider “the environmental consequences of the downstream combustion of the coal, oil and gas resources potentially open to development under these RMPs” and not defer such analysis until the leasing stage, and that BLM had based its assessment of methane pollution on outdated science and a scientifically inappropriate time horizon. The court deferred, however, to BLM’s assessment of cumulative greenhouse gas impacts, rejecting the plaintiffs’ assertion that BLM should have been required to use a metric such as a “global carbon budget” or “social cost of carbon protocol” as the standard for measuring cumulative climate impacts. The court also upheld BLM’s consideration of methane mitigation measures and its reliance on national ambient air quality standards in its air quality analysis.
10/06/2017
Reply
Reply brief filed by defendant-intervenor Cloud Peak Energy Inc. in support of cross-motion for summary judgment.
–
10/06/2017
Reply
Reply brief filed by Peabody Caballo Mining, LLC and BTU Western Resources, Inc. in support of cross-motion for partial summary judgment.
–
09/29/2017
Reply
Reply brief filed by federal defendants in support of cross-motion for summary judgment.
–
09/08/2017
Reply
Reply submitted by plaintiffs in support of motion for summary judgment and opposing defendants' cross-motions for summary judgment.
–
08/18/2017
Response
Response filed by Wyoming in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment.
–
07/14/2017
Motion For Summary Judgment
Memorandum submitted by plaintiffs in support of motion for summary judgment.
–
01/25/2017
Decision
Opinion and order issued.
The federal district court for the District of Montana declined to sever National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) claims concerning a resource management plan (RMP) for a field office in Wyoming from an action that also concerned an RMP for a Montana field office. The court said that while there was “great benefit in local controversies being decided at home,” other factors tilted slightly in favor of considering the claims together, citing the deference owed to plaintiffs’ choice of forum. The plaintiffs—a collection of environmental groups—contended that the United States Bureau of Land Management’s NEPA review for the RMPs was insufficient because it failed to consider reasonable alternatives that would allow less coal leasing, failed to consider an alternative requiring reasonable and cost-effective mitigation of methane emissions from oil and gas development, failed to address indirect impacts from downstream combustion of fossil fuels, omitted discussion of the “breadth and scale” of greenhouse gas emissions, failed to take a hard look at methane pollution, and failed to consider cumulative air impacts.
Summary
Challenge to resource management plans for areas in Montana and Wyoming in the Powder River Basin.