ELR Citation: 54 ELR 20093
No(s). 20-5382 (D.C. Cir. Jun 25, 2024)

The D.C. Circuit, 2-1, affirmed summary judgment for BLM in a challenge to the agency's 2003 final rule withdrawing a proposed rule that would have limited the maximum size of "mill sites" for mining claims on federal lands and instead codifying the agency's historical understanding that the governing statute imposed no such limit. Environmental groups argued BLM's interpretation of §42 of the 1872 Mining Law was unreasonable because §42 unambiguously limited a claimant to one five-acre mill site per mining claim. The appellate court concluded the operative words of §42 plainly contained no limit on the number of mill sites a claim owner might locate. The groups next argued BLM violated NEPA by failing to prepare an EIS. The court found the final rule was not a "major federal action," and thus BLM was not required to prepare an EIS. The groups also argued BLM violated the notice provision of the APA by issuing the final rule without an additional notice-and-comment cycle, but the court found the rule to be a "logical outgrowth" of the proposed rule. It affirmed summary judgment for BLM.