Articles Posted in Environmental

Posted
by

On September 7, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a stay of a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) order, following a hearing conducted by an agency administrative law judge (ALJ), assessing a civil penalty against a former banking officer and also requiring his withdrawal from the banking industry. The case is Burgess v. FDIC.

In so ruling, the Fifth Circuit joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which concluded, in Bandimere v. SEC, that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ALJs were “inferior Officers” who are subject to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Appointments Clause, U.S. CONST. art. II, § 2, cl. 2..

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

In an unusual case, Western Watersheds Project, et al v. Michael, Attorney General of Wyoming, decided on September 7, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision upholding recently-enacted Wyoming laws which impose civil and criminal liability on any persons who “cross private land to access adjacent or proximate land where he collects resource data.”

The Court of Appeals concluded that the statutes regulate protected speech under the First Amendment and that they are not shielded from constitutional scrutiny merely because they touch upon access to private property. Although trespassing does not enjoy First Amendment protection, the statutes at issue target the ‘creation’ of speech by imposing heightened penalties on those who collect resource data.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On August 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided the case of Sierra Club, et al., v. State of North Dakota, et al., a Clean Air Act (CAA) Citizen lawsuit. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, in a 2-1 ruling, the District Court’s approval of a Consent Decree between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Sierra Club that established a schedule by which EPA would promulgate “designations” determining which geographic locations met the National Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) under the CAA.

These NAAQS must, by law, be revised periodically. When EPA fails to make these designations in a timely manner and fails to adhere to the statutory deadlines, EPA was subject to Citizen Suits under the law, as happened here, and several states intervened in this litigation. Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

In the case of EQT Production Company v. Wender, et al., on August 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed, in a 2-1 ruling, the lower court’s decision that a West Virginia county’s ordinance effectively barring the operation of a state-licensed injection well was preempted by a “web of state and federal laws comprehensively regulating oil and gas production and wastewater disposal in West Virginia.”

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On August 15, 2017, President Trump issued Executive Order 13807 (EO 13807), which seeks to streamline federal environmental review and approvals of major infrastructure projects by imposing new timelines and procedures. The EO aims to hold federal agencies accountable to a two-year deadline for all federal authorizations for infrastructure projects, including highways and transit, airports and ports, fossil, nuclear and renewable energy, pipeline and water projects.

EO 13807 defines “major infrastructure projects” as those which require both a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and multiple permits, approvals and/or other forms of authorization from federal agencies, and for which sufficient and reasonably available funding has been identified. The EO requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establish a federal goal of completing NEPA review and permitting in “not more than an average of approximately two years” from the notice of intent to prepare an EIS. The goal must be incorporated in each federal agency’s strategic and annual performance plans and progress must be reviewed by agency leadership.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, in the case of Sierra Club, at al., v. FERC, rejected most of the arguments made against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) decision to approve the construction and operation of three interstate natural gas pipelines that would serve customers in the southeast.

The Court of Appeals was notably unconvinced by the environmental justice arguments made by the petitioners. However, the Court of Appeals decided, on a 2 to 1 vote, that FERC’s environmental impact statement (EIS) was deficient in that it failed to come to grips with the argument that the downstream greenhouse gas emissions generated by the burning of this gas by the customers of the pipelines would have adverse impacts.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in the case of Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC v. New York Department of Environmental Conservation, et al. (released August 18, 2017), rejected the Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC ’s (Constitution) petition for review after the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC) denied its application for a Clean Water Act (CWA) 401 certification. NYDEC denied the application on the ground that Constitution had not complied with requests for relevant information.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On August 14, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion in the case of ExxonMobil Pipeline Company v. U.S. Department of Transportation.  In May of 2013, ExxonMobil Pipeline Company’s (ExxonMobil) Pegasus Pipeline spilled several thousand barrels of oil near Mayflower, AK. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (Administration) cited Exxon for several violation of the pipeline integrity and safety rules (49 C.F.R. Parts 190-199), and levied a fine of $2.6 million and ordered the company to take corrective actions to ensure compliance with these rules.

On appeal, the Fifth Circuit held that the Administration’s findings were arbitrary and capricious. This is an important regulatory and administrative law decision, and it will be interesting to see how the Administration and the pipeline industry react to this ruling.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On August 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided the case of Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of Energy. The Sierra Club challenged the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) grant of a license to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) from new Texas LNG terminals and liquefaction facilities. The Court of Appeals concluded that

Sierra Club has standing but that its challenges to the Commission’s orders fail on the merits, largely for the reasons stated in the companion case, Sierra Club v. FERC (Freeport), No. 14-1275 (D.C. Cir June 28, 2016), and otherwise the court lacks jurisdiction over challenges to the Commission’s cumulative impacts analysis due to Sierra Club’s failure to exhaust its administrative remedies. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition in part and deny the petition in part.

Continue Reading ›

Posted
by

On August 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, decided the case of Friends of Lydia Ann Channel v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, vturtle-1-300x225acating the preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in March of 2017. The injunction halted the operation of a barge mooring facility that had been authorized by the U.S. Corps of Engineers to operate in the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway near Port Aransas and the City of Corpus Christi, TX.

Continue Reading ›