Appeals Court Rejects Attempts to Continue Premature Litigation against the Proposed Clean Power Plan

<> Appeals Court Rejects Attempts to Continue Premature Litigation against the Proposed Clean Power Plan - The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has denied several petitions for an en banc reconsideration to its decision to reject lawsuits challenging the Administration's proposed Clean Power Plan. Clean Power Plan case resources before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals

National Parks Conservation Association n v. U.S. EPA

<> National Parks Conservation Association n v. U.S. EPA - 9/29/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, Case No. 14-3147. Environmental groups petitioned EPA's approval of Pennsylvania's SIP regarding atmospheric visibility in national parks and wilderness areas after the state concluded that the costs associated with the controls outweighed the limited visibility improvements they would produce.       The Appeals Court granted the petition in part and deny it in part, and remand the matter to the EPA for further consideration. The Panel said, "In the end, the EPA has identified a host of problems with Pennsylvania's BART analysis. What it has not done, however, is provide a sufficient explanation as to why it overlooked these problems and approved Pennsylvania's SIP."

Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps

<> Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps - 9/29/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 14-5205. The Panel said the central question in this appeal is the scope of environmental review the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) required before a particular oil pipeline was built -- specifically the Flanagan South oil pipeline pumps crude oil across 593 miles of American heartland from Illinois to Oklahoma and owned by Enbridge Pipelines (FSP), LLC, (Enbridge).      On appeal, of the district court denial of preliminary injunctive relief, Sierra Club principally contends that the district court erred by failing to require the agencies to analyze and invite public comment on the environmental impact of the whole pipeline under NEPA, including the lengthy portions crossing private land and not otherwise subject to federal approvals.      The Appeals Court ruled, "We hold that the federal government was not required to conduct NEPA analysis of the entirety of the Flanagan South pipeline, including portions not subject to federal control or permitting. . . agencies were not obligated also to analyze the impact of the construction and operation of the entire pipeline. . . the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Sierra Club's motion to supplement and amend its complaint, because the proposed new allegations would not have affected the dispositive legal analysis."

Peoples Gas Light and Coke Com v. Beazer East Inc.

<> Peoples Gas Light and Coke Com v. Beazer East Inc. - 9/21/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, Case No. 14-3634. Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company brought suit against Beazer East, Inc. to recover costs incurred by Peoples in conducting environmental investigation and removal activities at a property, partially owned by Peoples, known as the Crawford Station site.      On appeal, Peoples contests the district court's dismissal of Count II (contribution under CERCLA) of its complaint. The Appeals Court affirmed the dismissal of Peoples' claims against Beazer for contribution under CERCLA.

Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

<> Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - 9/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-17530. The panel affirmed the district court's summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and intervenors Southern Nevada Water Authority and Coyote Springs Investment, LLC in an action brought by the Center for Biological Diversity challenging the Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion which determined that the execution of a Memorandum of Agreement, concerning a groundwater pump test in Nevada, would not jeopardize the Moapa dace, an endangered species.

Bruce Smith v. ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Co.

<> Bruce Smith  v.  ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Co. - 9/15/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, Case No. 14-2191. In this class action alleging defendant had created a nuisance by contaminating drinking well water within a 1.1 mile radius of its contaminated site. The Appeals Court said the district court erred in certifying the class of homeowner plaintiffs; in light of contemporary consensus by persuasive authority on the meaning of common law nuisance in the context of environmental contamination. The Panel concludes that the putative class fear of contamination spreading from the pipeline leak site to harm their property is not a sufficient injury to support a claim for common law nuisance in the absence of proof.

Cascadia Wildlands v. Bureau of Indian Affairs

<> Cascadia Wildlands v. Bureau of Indian Affairs - 9/11/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No.  14-35553. Environmental groups challenge the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) approval of the a timber sale in the Coquille Forest in southwest Oregon. The groups argue that BIA did not adequately consider the cumulative environmental impact under NEPA and that the project is inconsistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Recovery Plan for the northern spotted owl.      The district court granted summary judgment to the BIA and the Tribe on both claims. The Appeals Court affirmed.