Usblm

Western Lands Project v. United States Bureau of Land Management

Good Law
668 F. App'x 802
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 13, 201614-56386California310 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Environmental Impaet Statements must “inform decisionmakers and the public of the reasonable alternatives which would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance the quality of the human environment.” 40 C.F.R. § 1502.1 . When agencies produce such statements they must consider “every reasonable alternative,” not "every possible alternative.” Citizens for a Better Henderson v. Hodel, 768 F.2d 1051, 1057 (9th Cir. 1985) (emphasis added).

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) did not unlawfully fail to consider a stand-alone alternative plan relying on “degraded” lands in its Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. “The stated goal of a project necessarily dictates the range of ‘reasonable’ alternatives” that an agency must consider. City of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 123 F.3d 1142 , 1155 (9th Cir. 1997); see also 40 C.F.R. § 1502.13 . BLM’s goal was to develop a utility-scale solar energy plan that is flexible, efficient and able to meet projected demand. In selecting land for the program at this early stage, the agency chose to balance a variety of considerations — the size of the plots, the available transmission capacity —…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.