12 ‎(10)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 7/21/2009
• Description: Attorney General's Report, Legal Briefing and Executive Session
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Page 5
fc~r failing to prepare decisic~nal documents befare issuing the ~~nnual CC?per~ting Plan each year
~~ {claims 4-5). The court ~ranted the Federal Defendants' rr~otian to dismiss and motion far
~~ ~
~~~~ sum~nary j~dgment c~r~ clai~s ~ anc~ 5 regarding the AQPs. The eourt stayec~ its ruling or~ ela~rns
l-3, until after com~~etic~n af briefing by all parties an claims 6-8 (alleged violatic~ns of I`~EPA,
ESA and Grand Canyon Prc~tection Act by the Bureau and Fish arld Wi~dlife Service). The cc~urt
reasoned that the vaiidity of the 2008 biolc~gical opinicrn, which is the s~zbject of Claim 7, must
be determined before any ruling can bc made c~n claims 1-3.
C}n C}ctaber 10, 2008, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration regarding the September 26,
2008 Order. The judge denied this Motion in a November 11, 2Q08 Order and reconfirmed the
rulings set farth in the September 26, 200$ Order. Pursuant to that Order, Plaintif~ filed its
mation for summary judgment on Claims 6-8 on Navember 14, 20Q8. The parties conducted
further briefing on the motion and cross-motion for surnmary judgment on Claims 6-8 that
eoneiuded on February 2Q, 2009. Also, both Plaintiff and Federal Defendants, as specifically
requested by the court, fited supplemental briefs an the APA and praper standard of review in
regard to Claims I-3 on February 20, 2009. Defendant-Intervenors collectively filed a joinder ta
Federal Defendants' supplemental brief on that same date. Cln April 9, 20fl9, the parties
participated in oral argument before the court an all pending ciaims. Qn April 22, 2009, Federal
Defendants filed a motion for leave to file a notice of supplemental citation in which they sought
to point the court to various portions of the administrative record relevant to questions the court
asked at the aral argument. On April 28, 2049, the eaurt granted that m4tion and granted
Plaintiff the right to file a brief in response to Federal Defendants' notice of supplemental
eitation by May 6, 2009.
C}n May 26, 2009, the court issued an Qrder ruling in favor of the Federal Defendants 4n Claims
6(NEPA} and 8(GCPA). As a result, those claims are now dismissed. The caurt ruled in favor
of the Piaintiff an Claim 7 and decided to take Claims 1-3 under advisement pending the
campletion of the remedy. In fashioning a remedy for ~laim 7, the court remand~d the 2008
Biological Qpinian to the Fish and Wildlife Service for review and revisian regarding the MLFF
portion of the Biote~gical Opinian. The Serviee has until Octaber 30, 2Q09 to revise the Qpinion.
At that point, and depending on the substance Qf the Service's revision, the court will order the
following: I} further briefing on Claims 1-3; 2) a status conference with the parties io discuss
how the Bureau af Reciamation wiil implement the revised C}pinit~n {if the Service makes
substantive revisic~ns}; 3} further discussion on the next steps in the litigation; and 4) sorne
combination of the above.