As we previously reported, the Federal District Court for Montana vacated the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) Nationwide Permit (“NWP 12”) on April 15, 2020, finding that the Corps had failed to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service prior to issuing NWP 12. The court’s decision vacated NWP 12 nationwide and prevents the Corps from authorizing a broad range of projects that are unrelated to the project at issue in that case, the Keystone XL Pipeline. Yesterday, the Corps requested that the court stay the effect of its ruling pending the Corps’ appeal to the Ninth Circuit. The Corps requested in the alternative that the court stay its ruling with respect to all projects across the country, except the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Continue Reading Update: Corps Seeks Stay of Montana District Court’s NWP 12 Ruling
Administrative Procedure Act
Environmental Group’s Attempt to Compel PHMSA Action Dismissed
By Catherine D. Little, Annie M. Cook & Mandi Moroz on
A Montana federal district court recently dismissed a challenge by an environmental group seeking to compel the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) to comply with certain provisions of the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. § 181 et seq.,. See Wildearth Guardians v. Chao, CV-18-110-GF-BMM, 2020 WL 1875472 (D. Mont. Apr. 15, 2020). In this case, the environmental group Wildearth Guardians brought suit under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) alleging that PHMSA failed to comply with its legal obligation under the Mineral Leasing Act to “[p]eriodically, but at least once a year, . . . cause the examination of all pipelines and associated facilities on Federal lands[.]” Although PHMSA did not contest Wildearth’s assertion that the agency had failed to periodically inspect certain pipelines on federal lands, PHMSA argued that the suit must be dismissed because Wildearth lacked standing to challenge PHMSA’s inaction and the environmental group was unable demonstrate that PHMSA’s failure to inspect the pipelines constituted a “failure to act” under the APA. The district court agreed and narrowly interpreted what constitutes a “failure to act” under the APA in a manner that could present obstacles for third parties seeking to compel agencies to comply with its their regulatory obligations.
…
Continue Reading Environmental Group’s Attempt to Compel PHMSA Action Dismissed