Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:52:33.359Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Public and Private Lands

Extraction and Infrastructure versus Competing Economic Pursuits

from Part II - America’s Lands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2022

Shanti Gamper-Rabindran
Shanti Gamper-Rabindran
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access

Summary

Oil and gas extraction and infrastructure compete with economic activities on public and private lands, and thanks to the Trump administration, the industry secured even more privileges for its operations. The administration reoriented federal agencies with oil and gas insiders at their helm to open more public lands to drilling, despite companies not drilling on half of the 23 million acres already leased and despite the sizable financial and ecosystem benefits from conservation. It facilitated the buildout of interstate gas pipelines by promulgating regulations that narrowed states’ powers to protect their water resources from proposed pipelines and by narrowing federal agencies’ assessment of the environmental impacts of infrastructure projects. It weakened the legal oversight of oil and gas operations that already enjoyed exemptions from a number of provisions under federal environmental laws. Despite professed concerns for private property rights, congressional Republicans failed to take steps to improve protections for landowners whose lands were traversed by pipeline projects. Despite Congress’s pervasive failures to keep the administration in check, the rare bipartisan legislation that provided conservation protections to segments of public lands offers some hope that voters’ strong support for public lands, as evidenced in polls, can still compel Congress to take critical action.

Keywords

public landsenvironmental lawspipelineseminent domainClean Water ActEndangered Species ActNational Environmental Policy Act. cooperative federalism
Type
Chapter
Information
America's Energy Gamble
People, Economy and Planet
 , pp. 109 - 155
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Congressional Research Service. The Federal Land Management Agencies. Report by K. Hoover, coordinator, specialist in Natural Resources Policy. IF10585 (Washington, DC: February 16, 2021). https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10585.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. US Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Nonfederal Areas. Report by M. Humphries, specialist in Energy Policy. R42432 (Washington, DC: October 23, 2018). https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42432.Google Scholar
Light v. United States, 220 US 523, 537 (Supreme Court 1911).Google Scholar
Pidot, J. R.. “Compensatory Mitigation and Public Lands.” Boston College Law Review 61, no. 3 (March 30, 2020): 1045–1110. https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol61/iss3/5.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, C. F.. “The Public Trust Doctrine in Public Land Law.” Colorado Law Scholarly Commons 14 (1980): 269–316. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2098&context=articles.Google Scholar
Holden, E., Tobias, J. and Chang, A.. “Revealed: The Full Extent of Trump’s ‘Meat Cleaver’ Assault on US Wilderness.” The Guardian, October 26, 2020. www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2020/oct/26/revealed-trump-public-lands-oil-drilling.Google Scholar
Bureau of Land Management Alaska. “Notice of Sale to Be Issued for Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Dec. 7.” News release, December 3, 2020. www.blm.gov/press-release/notice-sale-be-issued-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program-dec-7.Google Scholar
Lipton, E.. “In Last Rush, Trump Grants Mining and Energy Firms Access to Public Lands.” New York Times, December 19, 2020. www.nytimes.com/2020/12/19/us/politics/in-last-rush-trump-grants-mining-and-energy-firms-access-to-public-lands.html.Google Scholar
Increasing Consistency and Transparency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process: Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations 83. Environmental Protection Agency. 85 Federal Register 84130–84157 (December 23, 2020). www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-27368/increasing-consistency-and-transparency-in-considering-benefits-and-costs-in-the-clean-air-act.Google Scholar
Wilderness Society and Avarna Group. “How Did Public Lands Come to Be?” In Public Lands in the United States: Examining the Past to Build a More Equitable Future (July 2019). www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Module%202%20-%20Reading.pdf.Google Scholar
Wilderness Society and Avarna Group. Public Lands in the United States: Examining the Past to Build a More Equitable Future (July 2019). www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/Public%20Lands%20in%20the%20United%20States.pdf.Google Scholar
Kantor, I.. “Ethnic Cleansing and America’s Creation of National Parks.” Public Land and Resources Law Review 28 (2007): 41–64. https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1267&context=plrlr.Google Scholar
Ruple, J. C.. “The Transfer of Public Lands Movement: The Battle to Take Back Lands That Were Never Theirs.” Colorado Natural Resources Energy & Environmental Law Review 29, no. 1 (2018): 1–78. www.colorado.edu/law/sites/default/files/attached-files/ruple_final_1-5-web_1.pdf.Google Scholar
Sax, J. L.. “Why We Will Not (Should Not) Sell the Public Lands: Changing Conceptions of Private Property.” Utah Law Review, no. 2 (1983): 313–326.Google Scholar
Sax, J. L.. “The Legitimacy of Collective Values: The Case of the Public Lands.” University of Colorado Law Review 56 (1984): 537–558.Google Scholar
Leshy, J. D.. “Public Land Policy after the Trump Administration: Is This a Turning Point?” Colorado Natural Resources, Energy & Environmental Law Review 31, no. 3 (2020): 472–507. www.colorado.edu/law/sites/default/files/attached-files/002_leshy_final_copy.pdf.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data. Report by C. H. Vincent, specialist in Natural Resources Policy; L. A. Hanson, senior research librarian; and L. F. Bermejo, research assistant. R42346 (Washington, DC: October 23, 2020). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Revenues and Disbursements from Oil and Natural Gas Production on Federal Lands. Report by B. S. Tracy, analyst in Energy Policy. R46537 (Washington, DC: September 22, 2020). www.everycrsreport.com/files/2020-09-22_R46537_a7dc7a1cdb61406e0cd5344716eccaf9e960bc72.pdf.Google Scholar
Bilmes, L. J. and Loomis, J. B.. Valuing US National Parks and Programs: America’s Best Investment. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2019.Google Scholar
US Government Accountability Office. Oil and Gas: Bureau of Land Management Should Address Risks from Insufficient Bonds to Reclaim Wells. Report by F. Rusco, director of Natural Resources and Environment (September 2019). www.gao.gov/assets/710/701450.pdf.Google Scholar
Department of the Interior and US Geological Survey. Federal Lands Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sequestration in the United States: Estimates for 2005–14. Report by M. D. Merrill, B. M. Sleeter, P. A. Freeman, J. Liu, P. D. Warwick and B. C. Reed (Reston, VA: 2018). https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2018/5131/sir20185131.pdf.Google Scholar
Department of the Interior, Office of Policy Analysis. US Department of the Interior Economic Report FY 2018 (September 30, 2019). www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/fy-2018-econ-report-final-9-30-19-v2.pdf.Google Scholar
National Park Service and Department of the Interior. 2019 National Park Visitor Spending Effects: Economic Contributions to Local Communities, States, and the Nation. Report by C. C. Thomas and L. Koontz (Fort Collins, CO: April 2020). www.nps.gov/subjects/socialscience/vse.htm.Google Scholar
Costanza, R. et al. “Twenty Years of Ecosystem Services: How Far Have We Come and How Far Do We Still Need to Go?” Ecosystem Services 28 (June 4, 2017): 1–16. www.robertcostanza.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/2017_J_Costanza-et-al.-20yrs.-EcoServices.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. The Economic Benefits of Protecting Healthy Watersheds (April 2012). www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/economic_benefits_factsheet3.pdf.Google Scholar
Congressional Budget Office. Options for Increasing Federal Income from Crude Oil and Natural Gas on Federal Lands. Report by A. Stocking and P. Beider. (Washington, DC: April 2016). www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/51421-oil_and_gas_options.pdf.Google Scholar
Walls, M., Lee, P. and Ashenfarb, M.. “National Monuments and Economic Growth in the American West.” Science Advances 6, no. 12 (March 18, 2020). https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/12/eaay8523/tab-pdf.Google Scholar
Dinerstein, E. et al. “A Global Deal for Nature: Guiding Principles, Milestones, and Targets.” Science Advances 5, no. 4 (April 19, 2019). https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/4/eaaw2869.Google Scholar
Conservation Science Partners. Executive Summary: Loss and Fragmentation of Natural Lands in the Conterminous US from 2001 to 2017. Report by D. M. Theobald, I. Leinwand, J. J. Anderson, V. Landau and B. G. Dickson (January 18, 2019). www.csp-inc.org/public/CSP%20Disappearing%20US%20Exec%20Summary%20011819.pdf.Google Scholar
State of the Rockies Project. Key Findings: The 2021 Survey of the Attitudes of Voters in Eight Western States. Report by L. Weigel and D. Metz (January 2021). www.coloradocollege.edu/other/stateoftherockies/conservationinthewest/2021/2021-State-of-the-Rockies-D2a1.pdf.Google Scholar
Shiffman, D.. “An Ambitious Strategy to Preserve Biodiversity.” Scientific American, October 4, 2020. www.scientificamerican.com/article/an-ambitious-strategy-to-preserve-biodiversity.Google Scholar
Center for Western Priorities. Winning the West: Election 2018 (January 2019). https://westernpriorities.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Winning-the-West_2018.pdf.Google Scholar
Center for Western Priorities. Winning the West: Election 2020 (December 2020). https://westernpriorities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/WinningTheWest2020_CWP.pdf.Google Scholar
Bolton, A.. “McConnell Gives Two Vulnerable Senators a Boost with Vote on Outdoor Recreation Bill.” The Hill, May 21, 2020. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/499084-mcconnell-gives-two-vulnerable-senators-a-boost-with-vote-on-recreation-bill.Google Scholar
Edelstein, K.. The Growing Web of Oil and Gas Pipelines. FracTracker Alliance (February 28, 2019). www.fractracker.org/2019/02/the-growing-web-of-oil-and-gas-pipelines.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas and Crude Oil: Federal and State Regulatory Authority. Report by B. J. Murrill, legislative attorney. R44432 (Washington, DC: March 28, 2016). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44432.pdf.Google Scholar
Squillace, M. et al. “Presidents Lack the Authority to Abolish or Diminish National Monuments.” Virginia Law Review Online 103 (June 9, 2017): 55–71. www.virginialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Hecht%20PDF.pdf.Google Scholar
Ruple, J. C.. “The Trump Administration and Lessons Not Learned from Prior National Monument Modifications.” Harvard Environmental Law Review 43, no. 1 (2019): 1–76.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Congressional Roll Call Votes on the Keystone XL Pipeline. Report by L. J. Cunningham, senior research librarian. R42432 (Washington, DC: June 7, 2019). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43870.pdf.Google Scholar
Call for Nominations and Comments for the Coastal Plain Alaska Oil and Gas Lease Sale: Notice. 19X.LLAK930000.L13100000.EI0000.241A. Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior. 85 Federal Register 73292–73293 (November 17, 2020). www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/17/2020-25316/call-for-nominations-and-comments-for-the-coastal-plain-alaska-oil-and-gas-lease-sale.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR): An Overview. Report by L. B. Comay, M. Ratner and R. E. Crafton. RL33872 (Washington, DC: January 9, 2018). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33872.pdf.Google Scholar
Resource Management Planning: Final Rule. 43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 1600. Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior. 81 Federal Register 89580–89671 (December 28, 2018). www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-12-12/pdf/2016-28724.pdf.Google Scholar
Burr, T.. “Effort to Shrink Bears Ears National Monument Started before Donald Trump Was Elected President.” Salt Lake Tribune, December 3, 2017. www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2017/12/03/effort-to-shrink-bears-ears-national-monument-started-before-donald-trump-was-elected-president/.Google Scholar
Cama, T.. “GOP Lawmaker Withdraws Bill to Sell Federal Land.” The Hill, February 2, 2017. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/317514-gop-rep-pulls-bill-to-sell-federal-land.Google Scholar
Friedman, L. and O’Neil, C.. “Who Controls Trump’s Environmental Policy?” New York Times, January 14, 2020. www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/14/climate/fossil-fuel-industry-environmental-policy.html.Google Scholar
Davenport, C.. “Inspector General Says Official at Interior Dept. Violated Ethics Rules.” New York Times, December 11, 2019.Google Scholar
Patterson, B.. “Zinke Donors Include Oil and Gas Firms Using Public Land.” E&E News, January 13, 2017. www.eenews.net/stories/1060048348.Google Scholar
Natter, A. and Dlouhy, J. A.. “Ryan Zinke Is Now Taking Clients from Industries He Oversaw in Trump’s Cabinet.” Bloomberg, July 23, 2019. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-23/former-interior-chief-zinke-now-enlisting-energy-mining-clients.Google Scholar
Western Values Project. The Curious Case of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s Recusals (August 2, 2019). https://westernvaluesproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/20190802-WVP-Report-Curious-Case-of-Bernhardts-Recusal.pdf.Google Scholar
Pendley, W. P.. “The Federal Government Should Follow the Constitution and Sell Its Western Lands.” National Review, January 19, 2016. www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/federal-government-should-sell-western-land-follow-constitution.Google Scholar
US House of Representatives. Oversight Hearing on BLM Disorganization: Examining the Proposed Reorganization and Relocation of the Bureau of Land Management Headquarters to Grand Junction, Colorado. Committee on Natural Resources. 116th Congress, 1st Sess. September 10, 2019.Google Scholar
Meghani, Z. and Kuzma, J.. “The ‘Revolving Door’ between Regulatory Agencies and Industry: A Problem That Requires Reconceptualizing Objectivity.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24, no. 6 (September 17, 2010): 575–599.Google Scholar
Blanes i Vidal, J., Draca, M. and Fons-Rosen, C.. “Revolving Door Lobbyists.” American Economic Review 102, no. 7 (December 2012): 3731–3748.Google Scholar
Bertrand, M., Bombardini, M. and Trebbi, F.. “Is It Whom You Know or What You Know? An Empirical Assessment of the Lobbying Process.” American Economic Review 104, no. 12 (December 2014): 3885–3920.Google Scholar
Fennell, A.-M. and Rusco, F., directors of Natural Resources and Environment. Bureau of Land Management: Agency’s Reorganization Efforts Did Not Substantially Address Key Practices for Effective Reforms. Submitted to R. Grijalva, chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources. March 6, 2020.Google Scholar
Friedman, L.. “A War against Climate Science, Waged by Washington’s Rank and File.” New York Times, July 14, 2020.Google Scholar
Tabuchi, H.. “A Trump Insider Embeds Climate Denial in Scientific Research.” New York Times, March 2, 2020.Google Scholar
Goldman, G. T. et al. “Perceived Losses of Scientific Integrity under the Trump Administration: A Survey of Federal Scientists.” PLoS ONE 15, no. 4 (April 23, 2020): e0231929. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231929.Google Scholar
Abbey, B. and Caswell, J.. “The Stealth Plan to Erode Public Control of Public Lands.” Politico, December 12, 2019. www.politico.com/news/agenda/2019/12/12/public-lands-bureau-land-management-082689;.Google Scholar
Freemuth, J. and Skillen, J. R.. “Moving Bureau of Land Management Headquarters to Colorado Won’t Be Good for Public Lands.” The Conservation, January 8, 2020. https://theconversation.com/moving-bureau-of-land-management-headquarters-to-colorado-wont-be-good-for-public-lands-126990.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, D.. 22 Secretarial Order 3369: Promoting Open Science (September 28, 2018). www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3369_promoting_open_science.pdf.Google Scholar
Doyle, M.. “Interior Department Moves to Impose New Rules on Use of Science in Decision-Making.” Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science), February 27, 2020. www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/interior-department-moves-impose-new-rules-use-science-decision-making.Google Scholar
Bureau of Land Management. Air Resources Management Program Strategy. Report by K. E. Rodgers, R. A. Boyd, T. H. Alexander and L. A. Ford (February 2015). www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/AirResourceProgramStrategy.pdf.Google Scholar
Freedom of Information Act Regulations. 43 Code of Federal Regulations 2. Environmental Protection Agency. 83 Federal Register 67175–67180 (December 28, 2018). www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/12/28/2018-27561/freedom-of-information-act-regulations.Google Scholar
McGrath, D.. Interior’s Proposed FOIA Rule Threatens Transparency and Accountability. American Oversight (January 29, 2019). www.americanoversight.org/interiors-proposed-foia-rule-threatens-transparency-and-accountability.Google Scholar
Townsend, M. E.. open government staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. Comments on the US Department of the Interior’s Freedom of Information Act Rule Revisions, Docket No. DOI-2018-0017. Submitted to C. Cafaro, Office of Executive Secretariat and Regulatory Affairs. January 29, 2019.Google Scholar
Brown, B. D., executive director of Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Proposed Revisions to the Department of the Interior’s Freedom of Information Act Regulations, RIN 1093-AA26/Docket No. DOI-2018-0017. Submitted to Office of the Secretary, the Interior. January 28, 2019.Google Scholar
United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 US 749 (Supreme Court 1989).Google Scholar
Wilderness Society and Center for Western Priorities. America’s Public Lands Giveaway (April 2020). https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36d517f10bb0424493e88e3d22199bb3.Google Scholar
Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior. Oil and Gas Statistics (2019). www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/oil-and-gas/oil-and-gas-statistics.Google Scholar
Center for Western Priorities. Dashboard: Oil and Gas Leasing (2021). https://westernpriorities.org/dashboard-oil-gas-leasing.Google Scholar
Bucks, D. R.. A Fair Return for the American People: Increasing Oil and Gas Royalties from Federal Lands (March 2019). https://naturalresources.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Testimony%20Attachment%20-%20Dan%20Bucks%20-%20EMR%20Leg%20Hrg%2009.24.19.pdf.Google Scholar
Government Accountability Office. Federal Oil and Gas Revenue: Actions Needed to Improve BLM’s Royalty Relief Policy. Report by F. Rusco, director Natural Resources and Environment (October 6, 2020). www.gao.gov/assets/720/710030.pdf.Google Scholar
Department of the Interior. Fact Sheet on Methane and Waste Prevention Rule. (2016). www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/methane_waste_prevention_rule_factsheet.pdf.Google Scholar
California v. Bernhardt, 472 F. Supp. 3d 573 (N.D. Cal. 2020).Google Scholar
Anchondo, C.. “‘Roller Coaster’: Judge Scraps Obama-Era Methane Rule.” ClimateWire, October 9, 2020. www.eenews.net/climatewire/stories/1063715891?t=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eenews.net%2Fstories%2F1063715891.Google Scholar
Oil and Gas; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal and Indian Lands; Rescission of a 2015 Rule: Final Rule. 43 Code of Federal Regulations 3160. Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 82 Federal Register 61924–61949 (December 29, 2017) www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/29/2017-28211/oil-and-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-on-federal-and-indian-lands-rescission-of-a-2015-rule.Google Scholar
Oil and Gas; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal and Indian Lands: Final Rule. 43 Code of Federal Regulations 3160. Bureau of Land Management, Interior. 80 Federal Register 16127–16222 (March 26, 2015) www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/03/26/2015-06658/oil-and-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-on-federal-and-indian-lands.Google Scholar
Taxpayers for Common Sense. Locked Out: The Cost of Speculation on Oil and Gas Leases on Federal Land (October 2017). www.taxpayer.net/wp-content/uploads/ported/images/downloads/LOCKED_OUT_Energy_Report.pdf.Google Scholar
Center for American Progress. Oil and Gas Companies Gain by Stockpiling America’s Federal Land. Report by M. K. DeSantis (August 29, 2018). www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2018/08/29/455226/oil-gas-companies-gain-stockpiling-americas-federal-land.Google Scholar
Government Accountability Office. Oil and Gas: Onshore Competitive and Noncompetitive Lease Revenues. Report by F. Rusco, director of Natural Resources and Environment (November 19, 2020). www.gao.gov/products/GAO-21-138.Google Scholar
New York Times Staff. “Documents: Leaked Industry Emails and Reports.” New York Times, August 2011. https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4.html.Google Scholar
Modernization of Oil and Gas Reporting: Final Rule. 17 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 210 and 211. Securities and Exchange Commission. 74 Federal Register 2158–2197 (January 14, 2009) www.sec.gov/rules/final/2009/33-8995fr.pdf.Google Scholar
Glick, R. and Christiansen, M.. “FERC and Climate Change.” Energy Law Journal 40, no. 1 (2019). www.eenews.net/assets/2019/05/06/document_gw_02.pdf.Google Scholar
Bateman, C. J. and Tripp, J. T. B.. “Toward Greener FERC Regulation of the Power Industry.” Harvard Environmental Law Review 38 (2014): 275–333.Google Scholar
Flyer, A.. “FERC Compliance under NEPA: FERC’s Obligation to Fully Evaluate Upstream and Downstream Environmental Impacts Associated with Siting Natural Gas Pipelines and Liquefied Natural Gas Terminals.” Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 27 (2015): 301–319. https://gielr.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/flyer-final-pdf-27-2.pdf.Google Scholar
John, J. S.. “Senate Confirms Democrat Clements, Republican Christie to FERC.” GreenTech Media, December 1, 2020. www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/senate-confirms-democrat-clements-republican-christie-to-ferc#.Google Scholar
Analysis Group. FERC’s Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Facilities. Report by S. F. Tierney (Washington, DC: November 2019). www.analysisgroup.com/globalassets/content/insights/publishing/revising_ferc_1999_pipeline_certification.pdf.Google Scholar
Glick, R., chairman of the Federal Regulatory Commission. Dissent on PennEast Pipeline Co. LLC. Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket No. CP15-558-001. August 10, 2018.Google Scholar
Glick, R., chairman of the Federal Regulatory Commission. Dissent Regarding Jordan Cove Energy Project L.P. (Jordan Cove LNG Terminal). Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. May 21, 2020.Google Scholar
LaFleur, C. A.. Dissent on Order Issuing Certificates and Granting Abandonment Authority (Mountain Valley Pipeline and Atlantic Coast Pipeline). Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket Nos. CP15-554-000 CP16-10-000. October 13, 2017.Google Scholar
LaFleur, C. A.. Testimony at the Hearing on the Natural Gas Act. Submitted to United States House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy. February 5, 2020.Google Scholar
McNamee, B. L., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Order Issuing Certificates and Approving Abandonment. Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. July 17, 2020.Google Scholar
Webb, R.. “Climate Change, FERC, and Natural Gas Pipelines: The Legal Basis for Considering Greenhouse Gas Emissions under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.” NYU Environmental Law Journal 28, no. 2 (2019): 179–226.Google Scholar
Sierra Club v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 867 F.3d 1357, 1374 (D.C. Cir. 2017).Google Scholar
Final Environmental Impact Statement – Midcontinent Supply Header Interstate Pipeline Project. Staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission PF17-3, CP17-458 (2018). www.ferc.gov/final-environmental-impact-statement-midcontinent-supply-header-interstate-pipeline-projectGoogle Scholar
Birckhead v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 925 F.3d 510 (D.C. Cir. 2019).Google Scholar
Klass, A. B.. “Eminent Domain Law As Climate Policy.” Wisconsin Law Review 49, no. 1 (June 8, 2020): 50–83.Google Scholar
City of Oberlin v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 937 F.3d 599, 601, 603 (D.C. Cir. 2019).Google Scholar
Klass, A. B.. “The Public Use Clause in an Age of US Natural Gas Exports.” Stanford Law Review Online 72 (April 2019): 103–111. https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/03/72-Stan.-L.-Rev.-Online-Klass.pdf.Google Scholar
Bookbinder, D. and Gibson, M., Niskanen Center. Comments on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Jordan Cove Energy Project. Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. PF17-4-000. January 2020.Google Scholar
Allegheny Defense Project v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 964 F.3d. 1 (D.C. Cir. 2020).Google Scholar
House Committee on Oversight and Reform. “Subcommittee Releases Preliminary Findings Showing FERC Pipeline Approval Process Skewed Against Landowners.” News release, April 28, 2020. https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/subcommittee-releases-preliminary-findings-showing-ferc-pipeline-approval.Google Scholar
Ewing, R.. “Pipeline Companies Target Small Farmers and Use Eminent Domain for Private Gain.” North Carolina Central Law Review 38, no. 2 (2016): 125–141.Google Scholar
Bell, J.. “Big Changes May Be Ahead for Natural Gas Pipelines, If FERC Does Its Job.” Utility Dive, September 16, 2020. www.utilitydive.com/news/big-changes-may-be-ahead-for-natural-gas-pipelines-if-ferc-does-its-job/585182/.Google Scholar
Limiting Authorizations to Proceed with Construction Activities Pending Rehearing: Final Rule. 18 Code of Federal Regulations Part 153 and 157. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket No. RM20-15-000; Order No. 871 (June 9, 2020). www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/RM20-15-000.pdf.Google Scholar
Hayes, D., staff attorney at Sierra Club. Comments on the US Army Corps of Engineers’ Proposal to Reissue and Modify Nationwide Permit 12, Docket No. COE-2015-0017. Submitted to US Army Corps of Engineers (August 1, 2016).Google Scholar
Northern Plains Resource Council v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, No. CV-19-44-GF-BMM, F.Supp. 3d, 2020 WL 1875455 (D. Mont. April 15, 2020).Google Scholar
Frazin, R.. “Overnight Energy: Supreme Court Reinstates Fast-Track Pipeline Permit Except for Keystone, Judge Declines to Reverse Dakota Access Pipeline Shutdown.” The Hill, July 7, 2020. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/506266-overnight-energy-supreme-court-reinstates-fast-track-pipeline.Google Scholar
Feldman, H. J., senior director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs. Re: EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190 (82 FR 17793) Comments in Response to the EPA’s Solicitation of Input from the Public to Inform Its Regulatory Reform Task Force’s Evaluation of Existing Regulations. Submitted to S. K. Dravis, regulatory reform officer and associate administrator in the Office of Policy at the Environmental Protection Agency. May 15, 2017.Google Scholar
American Petroleum Institute. Attachment 1: Comments on Specific Regulations (Washington, DC: May 15, 2017). www.api.org/~/media/Files/News/Letters-Comments/2017/5-15-17-API-Comments-on-specific-regulations.pdf.Google Scholar
Feldman, H. J., senior director of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs, Black, A. J., president and CEO of Association of Oil Pipelines and Van Liew, D., vice president of IAGC. Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 85 Fed. Reg. 1,684 (January 10, 2020). Submitted to E. A. Boling, Council on Environmental Quality. March 10, 2020.Google Scholar
Turner, A. J., counsel for the ESA Cross-Industry Coalition, et al. Comments in Response to the Three Proposals from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to Amend Their Endangered Species Act Regulations. Submitted to US Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. September 24, 2018.Google Scholar
Indigenous Environmental Network v. United States Department of State, 347 F. Supp. 3d 561 (D. Mont.) order amended and supplemented, 369 F. Supp. 3d 1045 (D. Mont. 2018), and appeal dismissed and remanded sub nom. Indigenous Environmental Network v. United States Department of State, No. 18-36068, 2019 WL 2542756 (9th Cir. June 6, 2019).Google Scholar
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. v. US Army Corps of Engineers, 471 F. Supp. 3d 71 (D.D.C 2020), affirmed in part, revised in part sub nom. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 985 F.3d 1032 (D.C. Cir. 2021).Google Scholar
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. US Army Corps of Engineers, No. 20-5197, 2020 WL 4548123 (D.C. Cir. August 5, 2020).Google Scholar
WildEarth Guardians v. Zinke, 368 F. Supp. 3d 41 (D.D.C. 2019).Google Scholar
WildEarth Guardians v. Bernhardt, No. CV 16-1724 (RC), 2019 WL 3253685 (D.D.C. July 19, 2019).Google Scholar
WildEarth Guardians v. US Bureau of Land Management, 457 F. Supp. 3d 880 (D. Mont. 2020).Google Scholar
Liptak, A.. “Supreme Court Won’t Block Ruling to Halt Work on Keystone XL Pipeline.” New York Times, July 8, 2020.Google Scholar
Western Watersheds Project v. Zinke, 441 F. Supp. 3d 1042 (D. Idaho 2020).Google Scholar
Montana Wildlife Federation v. David Bernhardt, No. CV-18-69-GF-BMM, 2020 WL 2615631 (D. Mont. May 22, 2020), appeal dismissed, No. 20-35609, 2020 WL 6194597 (9th Cir. Oct. 16, 2020).Google Scholar
Freeman, M.. “Court Strikes Down Trump Administration’s Sage-Grouse Directive, Canceling Hundreds of Oil and Gas Leases.” News release, May 26, 2020, https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2020/court-strikes-down-trump-administrations-sage-grouse-directive-canceling-hundreds-of-oil-and-gas-leases.Google Scholar
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Protest in Opposition to the Petition for Declaratory Order Filed by Jordan Cove Energy Project LP and Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LP. Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. May 2020.Google Scholar
Council on Environmental Quality. Major Cases Interpreting the National Environmental Policy Act. June 1997. https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/laws-regulations/Major_NEPA_Cases.pdfGoogle Scholar
Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act: Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500–1508, 1515–1518. Council on Environmental Quality. 85 Federal Register 43304–43376 (July 16, 2020) www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/07/16/2020-15179/update-to-the-regulations-implementing-the-procedural-provisions-of-the-national-environmental.Google Scholar
State of California v. Council on Environmental Quality WL 672540 (N.D. Cal. 2021).Google Scholar
Environmental Justice Health Alliance et al. v. Council on Environmental Quality et al, No. 1:20CV06143 (S.D.N.Y. 2020).Google Scholar
Buccino, S., senior director of Lands Division at Natural Resources Defense Council. Comments of the Natural Resources Defense Council on CEQ’s proposed Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. Submitted to M. Neumayr, chairman of Council on Environmental Quality. March 10, 2020.Google Scholar
Attorneys General of Washington, California, New York, District of Columbia, Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 85 Fed. Reg. 1684 (Jan. 10, 2020) Docket ID No. CEQ-2019-0003. Submitted to E. A. Boling, associate director for the National Environmental Policy Act, and V. Z. Seale, chief of staff and general counsel for Council on Environmental Quality. March 10, 2020.Google Scholar
Sierra Club v. Babbitt, 65 F. 3d. 1502, 1509 (9th Cir. 1995).Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. The Legal Framework of the National Environmental Policy Act. Report by N. M. Hart and L. Tsang (Washington, DC: October 22, 2020).Google Scholar
Endangered Species Act. 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544, 87 Stat. 884. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior (1973). www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/ESAall.pdf.Google Scholar
Campbell, T. IV et al. “Protecting the Lesser Prairie Chicken under the Endangered Species Act: A Problem and an Opportunity for the Oil and Gas Industry.” Texas Environmental Law Journal 45, no. 1 (February 2015): 31–50.Google Scholar
Galperin, J.. “Trust Me, I’m a Pragmatist: A Partially Pragmatic Critique of Pragmatic Activism.” Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 42, no. 2 (2017): 425–496.Google Scholar
Center for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt, No. 19-CV-05206-JST, 2020 WL 4188091 (N.D. Cal. May 18, 2019).Google Scholar
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, California v. David Bernhardt, 472F. Supp. 3d 573 (N.D. Cal. 2020) (No. 4:18-cv-05712-YGR).Google Scholar
Attorneys General of Massachusetts, California, Maryland, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia. Comments on the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Proposed Rules. Submitted to R. K. Zinke, secretary of the Department of the Interior and W. Ross, secretary of the Department of Commerce. September 24, 2018.Google Scholar
Comments on Proposed Revisions to Regulations for Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat. Submitted to G. Frazer, assistant director for Endangered Species Ecological Services Program and S. D. Rauch III, deputy assistant administrator for Regulatory Programs Office of Protected Resources. Docket ID: FWS–HQ–ES–2020–0047. September 3, 2020.Google Scholar
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Prohibitions to Threatened Wildlife and Plants. 50 Code of Federal Regulations Part 17. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. 84 Federal Register 44753–44760 (August 27, 2019). www.regulations.gov/document?D=FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0007-69538.Google Scholar
Endangered and Threatened Species, Listing Species and Designating Critical Habitat: Final Rule. 50 Code of Federal Regulations Part 424. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. 84 Federal Register 45020–45053 (August 27, 2019). www.regulations.gov/document?D=FWS-HQ-ES-2018-0006-64025.Google Scholar
Duncan, D.. “Clean Water Act Section 401: Balancing States’ Rights and the Nation’s Need for Energy Infrastructure.” Hastings Environmental Law Journal 25, no. 2 (2019): 235–262.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Clean Water Act Section 401: Background and Issues. Report by C. Copeland, specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy. 97-488 (Washington, DC: July 2, 2015). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-488.pdf.Google Scholar
Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule: Draft of Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0405; FRL-10009-80-OW (June 2020). www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-06/documents/pre-publication_version_of_the_clean_water_act_section_401_certification_rule_508.pdf.Google Scholar
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Suquamish Tribe et al. v. Andrew Wheeler and US Environmental Protection Agency (N.D. Cal. 2019) (No. 3:20CV06137).Google Scholar
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, State of California et al. v. Andrew R. Wheeler et al., WL 9172918 (N.D. Cal. 2020) (Nos 20-cv-04869-WHA, 20-cv-04636-WHA).Google Scholar
Attorneys General of California, Connecticut, Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. Objection to the Clean Water Act Section 401 Guidance for Federal Agencies, States, and Authorized Tribes. Submitted to A. R. Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. July 25, 2019.Google Scholar
Nasmith, M., staff attorney at Earthjustice, et al. Comments on EPA Proposed Rule Updating Regulations on Water Quality Certification. Submitted to A. R. Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. EPA–HQ–OW–2019–0405. October 21, 2019.Google Scholar
Bellon, M. D., director of Washington State Department of Ecology. Decision on the Request for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Submitted to K. Gaines, Millennium Bulk Terminals-Longview, LLC. September 26, 2017.Google Scholar
Ogsbury, J. D., executive director of Western Governors’ Association, et al. Comments in Response to the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Proposed Rule, Updating Regulations on Water Quality Certification. Submitted to A. R. Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. No. EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0405. October 16, 2019.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service Legal Sidebar. Wading into the “Waters of the United States.” Report by S. P. Mulligan, legislative attorney. LSB10236 (Washington, DC: December 28, 2018). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/LSB10236.pdf.Google Scholar
Chung, D. Y. and Frost, L. P.. “Dueling Navigable Waters Protection Rule Decisions Leave Uncertainty in Their Wake.” Trends (American Bar Association), October 30, 2020. www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/publications/trends/2020-2021/november-december-2020/dueling-navigable-water.Google Scholar
The Navigable Waters Protection Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States”: Final Rule. 33 Code of Federal Regulations 328 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 110, 112, 116, 117, 120, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302, 401. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense and Environmental Protection Agency. 85 Federal Register 22250–22342 (April 21, 2020) www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/21/2020-02500/the-navigable-waters-protection-rule-definition-of-waters-of-the-united-states.Google Scholar
Sullivan, S. M. P., Rains, M. C. and Rodewald, A. D.. “The Proposed Change to the Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’ Flouts Sound Science.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 116, no. 24 (June 11, 2019): 11558–11561. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907489116. www.pnas.org/content/116/24/11558.Google Scholar
Sullivan, S. M. P. et al. “Distorting Science, Putting Water at Risk.” Science 369, no. 6505 (August 14, 2020): 766–768.Google Scholar
Honeycutt, M., chair of the Science Advisory Board. Draft Commentary on the Proposed Rule Defining the Scope of Waters Federally Regulated under the Clean Water Act. Submitted to A. R. Wheeler, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-SAB-20-xxx. October 16, 2019.Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence (Final Report). EPA/600/R-14/475 F (Washington, DC: 2015). https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=296414.Google Scholar
Alexander, L. C.. “Science at the Boundaries: Scientific Support for the Clean Water Rule.” University of Chicago Press Journal 34, no. 4 (August 7, 2015). www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/684076.Google Scholar
Science Advisory Board. SAB Review of the Draft EPA Report Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence. Submitted to G. McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. October 17, 2014.Google Scholar
Boyle, K. J., Kotchen, M. J. and Smith, V. K.. “Deciphering Dueling Analyses of Clean Water Regulations.” Science 358, no. 6359 (October 6, 2017): 49–50. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/358/6359/49.summary.Google Scholar
Creed, I. F. et al. “Enhancing Protection for Vulnerable Waters.” Nature Geoscience, no. 10 (October 2, 2017): 809–815. www.nature.com/articles/ngeo3041?WT.feed_name=subjects_law.Google Scholar
Complaint, Conservation Law Foundation et al. v. US Environmental Agency et al., WL 8669769 (D. Mass. 2020) (No. 1:20-cv-10820-DPW).Google Scholar
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, California. v. Wheeler, 472 F. Supp. 3d 573 (N.D. Cal. 2020) (No 4:18-cv-05712-YGR 2020).Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. P. and King, P.. “Biden Races Courts for Chance to Torpedo Trump Water Rule.” E&E News, April 28, 2021.Google Scholar
Lalley, T.. “Fifteen State AGs Challenge Rule Allowing Transport of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) by Rail.” News release, NYU School of Law State Energy & Environmental Impact Center, August 18, 2020, www.law.nyu.edu/centers/state-impact/press-publications/press-releases/lng-by-rail-challenge.Google Scholar
Associated Press. “A Timeline of Recent Oil Train Crashes in the US and Canada.” Associated Press, June 13, 2016. https://apnews.com/article/oil-spills-fires-north-dakota-accidents-canada-84b1e8273d854697b34af57bc60badc2.Google Scholar
Campbell, B.. The Lac-Mégantic Rail Disaster: Public Betrayal, Justice Denied. Toronto, ON: Lorimer, 2018.Google Scholar
Cama, T.. “Trump Officials Roll Back Obama Oil Train Safety Rule.” The Hill, September 24, 2018. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/408125-trump-admin-rolls-back-obama-oil-train-safety-rule.Google Scholar
Hazardous Materials: Liquefied Natural Gas by Rail: Final Rule. 49 Code of Federal Regulations 172–174, 179, 180. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Department of Transportation. 85 Federal Register 44994–45030 (July 24, 2020). www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/07/24/2020-13604/hazardous-materials-liquefied-natural-gas-by-rail.Google Scholar
Marshall, B., staff attorney at Earthjustice. Comments Objecting to the Proposed Rulemaking to Authorize the Transportation of Methane, Refrigerated Liquid by Rail, Docket No. PHMSA‐2018‐0025 (HM‐264). Submitted to D. Pearce, deputy administrator for the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration. January 13, 2020.Google Scholar
Maykuth, A.. “Plan to Send LNG Trains through Philly to S. Jersey Port Sparks Outrage from Residents, Environmentalists.” Philadelphia Inquirer, September 20, 2020. www.inquirer.com/business/philadelphia-lng-gibbstown-new-fortress-energy-port-drbc-fracking-trains-20200920.html.Google Scholar
Petition for Review, State of Maryland et al. v. United States Department of Transportation et al., D.C. No. 20-___ (Court of Appeals 2020).Google Scholar
Petition for Review, Sierra Club et al. v. United States Department of Transportation et al., D.C. No. 20-___ (Court of Appeals 2020).Google Scholar
Attorneys General of Maryland, New York, California, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia. Comments to Voice Their Strong Objection to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Submitted to D. Pearce, deputy administrator for the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration. January 13, 2020.Google Scholar
Congressional Research Service. Rail Transportation of Liquefied Natural Gas: Safety and Regulation. Report by P. W. Parfomak, specialist in Energy and Infrastructure Policy and J. Frittelli, specialist in Transportation Policy. R46414 (Washington, DC: July 28, 2020). https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R46414.pdf.Google Scholar
Mehrbani, R. A., Spitzer fellow and senior counsel at Brennan Center for Justice. Written Testimony at Hearing on H.R. 1: Strengthening Ethics Rules for the Executive Branch. Submitted to US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform. February 6, 2019.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. For the People Act of 2019. H.R. 1, 116th Congress, 1st Sess. Introduced in House January 3, 2019.Google Scholar
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. What Democracy Looks Like. Report by J. Ahearn, C. Shaw, G. Lezra, M. Woodard and H. Hammado (Washington, DC: December 2, 2020). www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/democracy-reform-blueprint-accountable-inclusive-ethical-government.Google Scholar
Yale Center for Business and the Environment; Wilderness Society. Key Economic Benefits of Renewable Energy on Public Lands. Report by N. Springer, Yale Center for Business and the Environment, and A. Daue, Wilderness Society (May 2020). www.wilderness.org/sites/default/files/media/file/CBEY_WILDERNESS_Renewable%20Energy%20Report_0.pdf.Google Scholar
Grassley, S. C. and Udall, S. T.. “End the Taxpayer Giveaway to Big Oil and Gas.” New York Times, December 2, 2020. www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-udall-nyt-op-ed-end-taxpayer-giveaway-big-oil-and-gas.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. Restoring Community Input and Public Protections in Oil and Gas Leasing Act of 2020. H.R. 3225, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in House June 12, 2019.Google Scholar
Government Accountability Office. Oil, Gas, and Coal Royalties: Raising Federal Rates Could Decrease Production on Federal Lands But Increase Federal Revenue. Report by F. Rusco, director of Natural Resources and Environment (Washington, DC: June 2017). www.gao.gov/assets/690/685335.pdf.Google Scholar
Rusco, F., director Natural Resources and Environment. Testimony on Federal Energy Development: Challenges to Ensuring a Fair Return for Federal Energy Resources. Submitted to Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, House of Representatives (September 24, 2019).Google Scholar
US Congress. Senate. Expressing the Sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Government Should Establish a National Goal of Conserving at Least 30 Percent of the Land and Ocean of the United States by 2030. H.R.___ 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in Senate January 8, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. Senate. A Resolution Expressing the Sense of the Senate that the Federal Government Should Establish a National Goal of Conserving at Least 30 Percent of the Land and Ocean of the United States by 2030. S. 372 116th Congress, 1st Sess. Introduced in Senate October 22, 2019.Google Scholar
South Carolina General Assembly. State Senate. To Establish the Goal of Protecting Thirty Percent of the State of South Carolina by Not Later than 2030. Bill 1024, 123rd Sess. Introduced in State Senate January 21, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. Senate. John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act. S. 47, 116th Congress, 1st Sess. Introduced in Senate January 8, 2019.Google Scholar
Beitsch, R.. “House GOP Seeks to Cement Trump Rollback of Bedrock Environmental Law.” The Hill, September 22, 2020. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/517619-house-gop-seeks-to-cement-trump-rollback-of-bedrock-environmental.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. Encouraging the Environmental Protection Agency to Maintain and Strengthen Requirements under the Clean Water Act and Reverse Ongoing Administrative Actions to Weaken This Landmark Law and Protections for United States Waters. H.R. 797, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in House January 14, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. Senate. A Resolution Encouraging the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to Maintain and Strengthen Requirements under the Clean Water Act and Reverse Ongoing Administrative Actions to Weaken the Clean Water Act and Protections for Waters of the United States. S. 714, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in Senate September 9, 2019.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. Encouraging the Trump Administration to Maintain Protections under the National Environmental Policy Act and Reverse Ongoing Administrative Actions to Weaken this Landmark Law and Its Protections for American Communities. H.Con.Res. 89, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in House February 11, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. Senate. A Resolution Encouraging the Trump Administration to Maintain Protections under the National Environmental Policy Act and Reverse Ongoing Administrative Actions to Weaken This Landmark Law and Its Protections for American Communities. S. 537, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in Senate March 10, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. Clean Water for All Act. H.R. 6745, 116th Congress, 2nd Sess. Introduced in House May 8, 2020.Google Scholar
US Congress. House. Federal Regulatory Certainty for Water Act. H.R. 2287, 116th Congress, 1st Sess. Introduced in House April 10, 2019.Google Scholar
US House of Representatives. Pipelines over People: How FERC Tramples Landowner Rights in Natural Gas Projects. Committee on Oversight and Reform. 116th Congress, 2nd sess. December 9, 2020.Google Scholar
Bullock v. Bureau of Land Management, Case No. 4:20-cv-00062-BMM (D. Montana September 25, 2020).Google Scholar
Rapanos v. United States, 547 US 715 (US Supreme Court 2006).Google Scholar
Cantu, A. and Galbraith, R.. Oil and Gas Industry Dominates Federal Agency Responsible for Pipeline Approvals. Public Accountability Initiative (2017).Google Scholar
Trump, D. J. An America First Energy Plan. Trump White House. March 2017.Google Scholar
Gardner, T. and Chiacu, D.. “Biden to Nominate Democrat Willie Phillips to US Energy Regulator – White House.” Reuters, September 9, 2021. www.reuters.com/business/energy/biden-nominate-lawyer-willie-phillips-ferc-white-house-2021-09-09.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×