Laserfiche WebLink
Land Letter <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />associated NEPA documentation were adequate to determine what lands within a 1 million -acre <br />area in Montana's Powder River Basin should be available for leasing. Secondly, BLM contends that <br />it m d f rward with the resource man_ agem t e an to allow coalbed methane development on oil <br />and gas leases only after conducting additional NEPA documentation, including an environmental <br />impact statement. <br />BLM completed the additional environmental analysis in April 2003, clearing the way for full -field <br />development of coalbed methane (Greenwire, May 1, 2003). Seven additional lawsuits challenging <br />the coalbed methane development plan are now pending in federal courts, according to BLM <br />officials. <br />While the appeals case in the 9th Circuit deals with leases on just 300,000 acres in Montana with a <br />high probability of containing coalbed methane gas, both sides of the dispute agree the final ruling <br />could pose much broader impiLations for BLM 1e1 tt� ghout the court's nine states. The court <br />has jurisdiction in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and <br />Washington. <br />Should the court's three judge panel deem the Montana leases invalid, the ruling could ultimately <br />force BLM to reconsider leases it has issued within the nine states. And at a minimum, such a ruling <br />coup force BLM to reconsider the w <br />ay it distinguishes between -aaalbed methane a it <br />and aas development. �--- <br />"In that case, the world will be watching," promised Frykman. <br />The ranchers and farmers are pinning their hopes on the 9th Circuit, which is generally considered <br />the nation's most liberal appellate court. Last year, the court rued that water from coalbed methane <br />well pollutant under�he�lPa�niat�r Q�t (Land Letter, April 17, 2003). <br />Should the court find in BLM's favor, however, the lower court decision allowing coalbed methane <br />development to proceed would stand. <br />The Justice Department, which is representing BLM in the appeal, declined to comment on the case. <br />Fidelity Corp., which holds leases in the disputed area, has filed a brief with the court as an <br />intervener In the case on the behalf of BLM. Fidelity officials did not return calls for comment. <br />The Northern Cheyenne Tribe be hasIiled an amicus brief with the court on the behalf of the plaintiff. <br />Oral arguments for Northern Plains v. BLM et al. are posted on the court's Web site. <br />ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY , <br />PUBLISHING, LLC <br />122 C. St. NW, Ste. 722 Washington, D.C. 20001 <br />E -mail: pubs@eenews.net * Phone: 202 -628 -6500 <br />All contents is 2004 E &E Publishing, LLC. <br />http: / /www.eenews. net / Landletter /Backissues /080504/08050403.htm 8/5/2004 <br />