Village of False Pass, Cross-Appellees v. William C. Clark, Cross-Appellants, Amoco Production Company, Intervenors

The Village of False Pass, another village, one individual, and eight organizations (Village) appeal from a denial, in part, of summary judgment in their action for *607 declaratory and injunctive relief against the Secretary of the Interior’s (Secretary) proposed sale of oil leases in the St. George Basin of the Bering Sea. The Secretary and various intervenor oil companies cross-appeal the partial summary judgment and an injunction against them. The case involves an important marine environment, rare whales, large sums of money, a search for increasingly scarce energy resources, and three basic statutory schemes: the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq. (OCSLA), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq. (NEPA), and the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. (ESA). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm the ruling on appeal. We do not reach the ruling on cross-appeal.

I

The St. George Basin, located off the west coast of Alaska in the Bering Sea, is a rich and diverse marine area, home to many animals and “the gateway to virtually every marine mammal, fish, and bird species moving between…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I concur in parts I, II and III of Judge Wallace’s thoughtful and well-crafted opinion. I respectfully dissent from part IV, however, because I believe that a “worst case” analysis of a major oil spill is necessary at the lease sale stage under NEPA and its relevant implementing regulation, 40 C.F.R. § 1502.22 (1982).

The prime purpose of NEPA in requiring Environmental Impact Statements is to assure that federal decision-makers consider the environmental consequences of their major actions before the decision to act is made. See Kleppe v. Sierra Club, 427 U.S. 390, 409 , 96 S.Ct. 2718, 2729 , 49 L.Ed.2d 576 (1976); Conference Report on NEPA, . 115 Cong.Ree. 40416 (1969). Where some of the consequences are unknown, as they unquestionably are here, and are important to the decision, 1 the Council on Environmental Quality has required that the worst possible consequences be assessed. 40 C.F.R. § 1502.22 (1982). The regulation is thus designed to assure what common sense would in any event dictate: that a decision-maker be given the opportunity to decide against taking action when the benefits to be gained, although substantial, are…

733 F.2d 605 20 ERC 1705 , 14 Envtl. L. Rep. 20 ,398 VILLAGE OF FALSE PASS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, Cross-Appellees, v. William C. CLARK, et al., Defendants-Appellees, Cross-Appellants, Amoco Production Company, et al., Intervenors. Nos. 83-3989, 83-3990, 83-4003 and 83-4036. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 6, 1984. Decided March 12, 1984. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 24, 1984. Eric Smith, Trustees for Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, Lynne Edgerton, Sarah Chasis, Natural Resources Defense Council, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants. Carl J.D. Bauman, Joe Loescher, Hughes, Thorsness, Gantz, Powell & Brundin, Anchorage, Alaska, David C. Shilton, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., E. Edward Bruce, John T. Smith, II, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., for intervenors. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. Before KILKENNY, WALLACE and CANBY, Circuit Judges. WALLACE, Circuit Judge: 1 The Village of False Pass, another village, one individual, and eight organizations (Village) appeal from a denial, in part, of summary judgment in their action for declaratory and injunctive…