ELR Citation: 53 ELR 20051
No(s). 6:21-cv-01487-MC (D. Or. Mar 27, 2023) (McShane, J.)

A district court denied environmental groups' motion for summary judgment in a challenge to BLM's 2020 rule that eliminated the 15-day protest process for timber sales and clarified that an authorizing officer can implement forest management decisions immediately. The groups argued BLM violated the APA by failing to provide a reasoned explanation for its change in policy and failing to respond to public comment, and violated FLPMA by failing to provide for adequate public participation or objective administrative review of agency decisions. The court found that BLM adequately responded to the groups' significant public comments in accordance with the APA, and that the groups failed to show that BLM's reasons for changing course were legally insufficient or that elimination of the protest process violated FLPMA. It denied summary judgment for the groups and granted BLM's cross-motion.