Edwardsen

Edwardsen v. United States Department of the Interior

Good Law
268 F.3d 781
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 26, 2001No. 99-71397California4,402 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schroeder, J.

Since 1978, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (“OCSLA”), 43 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq., has set forth the procedures for administrative approval of offshore oil drill *783 ing on the Outer Continental Shelf. In this case, six native Alaskans and the environmental organization Greenpeace, Inc., seek review of the Secretary of the Interi- or’s approval of the development and production plan (“DPP”) for the Northstar oil and gas development project, located off the north coast of Alaska in the Beaufort Sea. Petitioners (“Edwardsen”) challenge both the adequacy of the final environmental impact statement (“EIS”) under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., and the compliance of the oil discharge prevention and contingency plan (“spill response plan”) with the requirements of § 4202(a) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”), codified at 33 U.S.C. § 1321 (j). We have jurisdiction to review the NEPA claims. We lack jurisdiction, however, to review the spill response plan, because it was approved in a separate agency action and OPA vests review of such plans in the district court. See 33 U.S.C. § 1321 (n).

BACKGROUND

BP Exploration (Alaska), Inc.…

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.