Opinion
Civil Action No. 08-cv-01460-MSK-KLM
12-23-2011
COLORADO ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, COLORADO MOUNTAIN CLUB, COLORADO TROUT UNLIMITED, CENTER FOR NATIVE ECOSYSTEMS, ROCK THE EARTH, NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL, NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, SIERRA CLUB, THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, and WILDERNESS WORKSHOP, Plaintiffs, v. KENNETH SALAZAR, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Interior, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, SALLY WISELY, in her official capacity as Colorado State Director of the Bureau ofLand Management, and JAMIE L. CONNELL, in her official capacity as Field Manager for the Glenwood Springs Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management, Defendants. and BILL BARRETT CORPORATION, OXY USA, INC., WILLIAMS PRODUCTION RMT, ANTERO RESOURCES PICEANCE CORPORATION, Intervenors
Honorable Marcia S. Krieger
ORDER DIRECTING ORAL ARGUMENT
THIS MATTER comes before the Court sua sponte.
The Court has completed a preliminary assessment of the issues raised in this case. Having reviewed the parties briefs and record, the Court is prepared to rule definitively on certain challenges raised by the Plaintiffs, and requests oral argument on others. Specifically, the Court requests that the parties be prepared to address the following issues, focusing particularly on identifying the specific supporting evidence in the administrative record:
• the basis for the BLM's decision to not consider that portion of the "Community Alternative" that proposed that lands atop the Plateau be leased for mineral development but that such development be accomplished only via directional drilling from the base of the Plateau;The Court does not intend to request oral argument on remaining issues, as it believes the record is sufficient on those issues to permit the Court to rule conclusively on them in a Opinion and Order to be issued following such oral argument.
• the basis for the BLM's selection of 20 years, as opposed to some other figure, as the appropriate time horizon for assessing environmental impacts;
• the basis upon which BLM contends it was unable to model potential air pollution effects for future wells drilled outside the Planning Area but was able to model air pollution effects for future wells drilled within the Planning Area; and
• the evidence in the record that supports the BLM's assertion that it conducted an assessment of the potential ratio of ozone precursors likely to be generated by the project.
The parties shall jointly contact chambers to set a date for the oral argument.
BY THE COURT:
_________________
Marcia S. Krieger
United States District Judge