the role of the project proponent in the nepa process public lands advocacy nepa & permitting...
TRANSCRIPT
The Role of the Project Proponent in the NEPA
Process
PUBLIC LANDS ADVOCACYNEPA & PERMITTING
SEMINAR
Zeke Williams
June 11, 2008
Faegre & Benson LLP
NEPA & Private Applicants
• Federal action trigger• Private proposals
– Permits– Leases– Authorizations– Decisions
Faegre & Benson LLP
Federal Oil and Gas Lease & Development
Faegre & Benson LLP
Corps of Engineers 404 Permit
Faegre & Benson LLP
Natural Gas Pipeline on Federal Lands
Faegre & Benson LLP
BLM Resource
Management Plan
Faegre & Benson LLP
MMS Permits & Approvals for Offshore Oil & Gas Development
Faegre & Benson LLP
Ski Area on National Forest System Lands
Questions & Issues
Faegre & Benson LLP
Proposed Action
• Federal proposals vs. private proposals• Proposal contents
– Specific technical information– Objectives– Goals– Agency statutes, regulations and policies– Relationship to purpose and need
Faegre & Benson LLP
Purpose & Need• Agency’s goals
and objectives• Defines range of
reasonable alternatives
• Agency objectives vs. proponent objectives
• Majority rule• 7th Circuit rule
Faegre & Benson LLP
Alternatives
• Agency’s obligation• Relationship to proposal• Proponent’s role
Faegre & Benson LLP
Comments & Responses
• Agency required to request comments from the applicant
• Value of public comments to proponent
• Response to comments by proponent
• Agency review
Faegre & Benson LLP
Meetings With the Agency
• Can the applicant meet with the agency?
• Open exchange of information• Agency independence• Administrative record• Federal Advisory Committee Act
Third Party NEPA Contracts
Faegre & Benson LLP
Third Party NEPA Contracts - Overview
• Contractor prepares EIS or EA• Contractor works for agency• Proponent funds work• Agency independently evaluates
work• Voluntary• Benefits
Faegre & Benson LLP
Selecting the Contractor
• Agency selects contractor for an EIS• Proponent’s role
– solicit candidates– recommend a contractor– document that agency makes decision
• EA– Proponent selects contractor– Agency independently evaluates EA
Faegre & Benson LLP
The Contract
• Between contractor and proponent• No required form• Recite elements of 40 CFR 1506.5
– Contractor works for the agency– Agency will independently evaluate the
contractor’s work– Proponent will fund the work
• Agency/applicant MOU • Administrative record
Faegre & Benson LLP
Conflicts of Interest
• Potential for conflicts• Disclosure statement for EIS• “No financial or other interest in the
outcome of the project”– 40 CFR 1506.5
• EA• Poor guidance on issue• Caselaw
Faegre & Benson LLP
“A contractor with an agreement, enforceable promise or guarantee of future work has a conflict of interest.”– Associations Working for Aurora’s Residential
Environ. v. Colorado Dep’t of Transp., 153 F.3d 1122, 1128 (10th Cir. 1998)
Faegre & Benson LLP
Conflict of Interest Caselaw
• Focus on the integrity and objectivity of the NEPA process
• Agency oversight and independent evaluation overcomes alleged defects
• Prior work for the proponent• “Heightened expectations” of future
work• Bidding on future work• “Guaranteed outcome”
NEPA Litigation
Faegre & Benson LLP
Three Roles for the Proponent in NEPA Litigation
• Department of Justice Defends the Agency
• Participate as Amicus
• Intervene as Party Defendant
Faegre & Benson LLP
Proponent as Amicus in NEPA Litigation
• By permission of the Court• File a brief
Limitations– not a party– no right to be heard– no appeal rights – no seat at settlement table
Faegre & Benson LLP
Proponent as Intervenor Defendant
• Intervention as of Right• Rule 24(a)(2)• Legal right to intervene• Timely• Protectable Interest• Impairment• Inadequate representation
• Permissive Intervention• Rule 24(b)(2)• Discretionary• Timely• Common questions• No undue delay or prejudice
Faegre & Benson LLP
Effect of Intervention in a NEPA Case
• Proponent is a party to litigation• Proponent files briefs, motions, etc.• Proponent can defend an injunction• Proponent participates in settlement
negotiations• Appeal rights
Faegre & Benson LLP
NEPA Intervention Issues
• Adequacy of representation• Prudential standing under APA• Intervention as of right
– 10th, 5th, and 3rd Circuits– 9th and 7th Circuits
• Permissive intervention
