A California appellate court reversed and remanded a lower court decision invalidating a settlement agreement between the state and three water and irrigation agencies concerning the intra-state right to water from the Colorado River. In addition to allocating water rights within the state, the sett...

A district court held that the state of Washington is not liable as an arranger under CERCLA for hazardous waste contamination stemming from mining operations on state lands. The state entered into mining contracts with a Canadian mining company that allowed the company to excavate and remove metal-...

A district court held that an oil company is liable for property damages caused by its predecessor-in-interest who conducted oil and gas exploration and production activities on the site under three subleases. Article 128 of the Louisiana Mineral Code provides that a sublessee acquires the rights an...

A district court denied an environmental group's motion to preliminarily enjoin the DOE from providing funding assistance for the construction and operation of a coal-fired power plant in Mississippi. Before granting the funding, the DOE issued an EIS evaluating the funding's environmental effects, ...

A district court held that DOE complied with NEPA when it determined that the construction of a "supercomputer" project on a college campus would have no significant environmental impact and did not require an EIS. The EA took a hard look at direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, adequa...

The D.C. Circuit upheld BLM’s decision to allow additional natural gas drilling in the Pinedale Anticline Project Area of western Wyoming. In 2008, the BLM adopted a record of decision (ROD) that, among other things, authorized the development of more natural gas wells than a previous ROD had sanc...

The Tenth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision dismissing a lawsuit challenging the Forest Service's approval of a ski area improvement project near Aspen, Colorado. A conservation group alleged that the Forest Service violated NEPA by approving the project without examining certain cumulative ef...