ARTICLE
18 September 2013

Environmental Groups Set Stage For Litigation Challenging BLM’s Proposed Hydraulic Fracturing Rulemaking With Claim That BLM Is Violating NEPA

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
Eighteen environmental organizations – lead by the Sierra Club – are claiming that the Bureau of Land Management will violate the National Environmental Policy Act.
United States Energy and Natural Resources

Eighteen environmental organizations – lead by the Sierra Club – are claiming that the Bureau of Land Management ("BLM") will violate the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") if it finalizes its proposed rulemaking related to hydraulic fracturing on federal lands without preparing a full-scale Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS").

Under NEPA, an EIS is required if the proposed major federal action would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. 42 U.S.C. § 4332(C). BLM assessed the environmental impacts of operators' compliance with the proposed regulations and issued an Environmental Assessment ("EA") finding that its proposed regulations "would not have a significant impact on the environment." Accordingly, BLM concluded that "an environmental impact statement is not required."

The environmental groups state their contrary position – that the EA does not satisfy BLM's obligations under NEPA and that BLM must instead prepare an EIS – in an August 23, 2013 letter commenting on BLM's proposed rulemaking. Their letter is one of more than 1 million submissions to BLM regarding its proposed rulemaking, which specifies standards for the structural integrity of wells, requires disclosure of fracking fluids (such as through the FracFocus registry), and requires wastewater management plans. (See " Public Comment Period for Proposed Federal Fracking Regulations Draws to a Close")

The environmental groups criticize BLM's EA for not assessing the cumulative environmental impacts of increased "well stimulation" on federal lands, including "effects on climate," and for not considering additional alternatives to the proposal, such as a "prohibition on hydraulic fracturing in all areas not currently undergoing unconventional oil and gas production."

The environmental groups' assertion that BLM's EA is insufficient portends litigation under NEPA when BLM finalizes its proposed regulations. BLM has not announced a date by which it intends to do so.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More