ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2025)
Adam Yaggy
In Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Bureau of Land Management, 141 F.4th 976 (9th Cir. 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the Bureau of Land Management’s use of the “full field development” standard to approve an oil and gas venture did not violate various environmental laws. (Id. at 999). However, the Court also held that the Bureau of Land Management’s approval of the project was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to explain how its final alternative complied with the full field development standard. (Id.). In this case, several environmental agencies challenged the Bureau of Land Management’s approval of an oil and gas venture in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve, the Willow Project. The agencies challenged the decision under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act (NPRPA), and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). (Id. at 989). The Court reviewed the Willow Project’s approval under the Administrative Procedure Act, which allows the Court to set aside agency actions that are arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful. (Id. at 993). After the district court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, remanding the case. (Id. at 989, 999). The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that it was neither arbitrary nor capricious for the Bureau of Land Management to use the “full field development” standard to analyze the Willow Project. (Id. at 999). However, the Court also remanded, labeling the approval of the Willow Project as arbitrary or capricious because the Bureau of Land Management never explained how its final alternative complied with that standard. (Id.).
