Trump Administration Unlawfully Rescinded Protections against Methane Waste, Court Rules

Late yesterday, in a resounding victory for taxpayers, public health, and the environment, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California invalidated the Trump Administration’s rollback of the Obama-era Waste Prevention Rule. This ruling means that the Waste Prevention Rule goes back in effect in 90 days, and the oil and gas industry will have to comply with the Rule’s requirements to prevent waste of gas on federal lands.

Enacted in 2016, the Waste Prevention Rule was designed to protect the public from wasteful venting, flaring, and leaking of gas from drilling operations on federal and tribal lands. In 2018, the Trump administration’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rescinded this rule to give oil and gas companies operating on public lands a free pass for air and climate pollution from wasted gas.

In yesterday’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found that this rescission violated federal law because it ignored the federal government’s statutory duty to prevent waste, instead relying almost entirely on inadequate or nonexistent state regulations. The judge also rejected the administration’s attempt to downplay the costs of the climate impacts of this rule. Further, the judge rejected the administration’s refusal to investigate the public health impacts of this rule on the people living near near oil and gas facilities including tribal communities.

“The court’s ruling is a victory for people who are bearing the brunt of federal and tribal oil and gas development,” said Lisa Deville, vice chair of Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights. “Every day invisible methane spills impact our people's health contributing to asthma and other respiratory health issues. The court rejected BLM’s attempt to ignore these public health impacts.”  

“The judge basically rejected every attempt by the Trump administration to gut these common-sense waste prevention measures on behalf of their oil & gas industry cronies,” said Robin Cooley, an Earthjustice attorney representing tribal and conservation citizen groups. “Most importantly the judge said the administration cannot ignore the impacts on health and well-being of the people who live near oil and gas facilities. This is a resounding win for American taxpayers, the environment, and the communities most at-risk from this industry.”

“Once again, the courts are confirming that the Trump administration can't just scrap environmental protections and ignore its responsibility to hold polluters accountable and protect our communities from toxic pollution,” said Kelly Martin, Director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. "Millions of Americans and diverse stakeholders weighed in when this commonsense standard was developed, and the only people who wanted to see it weakened were fossil fuel industry executives. Today's ruling is a major win for public lands, clean air, and the climate.”

“The court’s decision is a win for science-based decision-making and the climate, at a time when the Trump administration is trying every way possible to give polluters a free pass. The Trump administration is now 0 for 3 in attempting to overturn this rule and should take the hint that they can’t evade the law at the expense of public health and our environment,” said Alison Flint, senior legal director, The Wilderness Society.

“I’m so excited by this ruling because strong air pollution rules for the federal wells on our ranch means I may be able to spend more time with my family in Montana again,” said Laurie Wilson, member of the Western Organization of Resource Councils, in Silver City, New Mexico. “In the midst of a public health crisis, reducing pollution which contributes to asthma and other respiratory diseases is a blessing. Now more than ever these protections are vital.”

In its opinion, the court stated “[It] finds that the rulemaking process resulting in the Rescission was wholly inadequate. In its haste, BLM ignored its statutory mandate under the Mineral Leasing Act, repeatedly failed to justify numerous reversals in policy positions previously taken, and failed to consider scientific findings and institutions relied upon by both prior Republican and Democratic administrations.”

Summary of Ruling:

First, the court found that BLM’s reinterpretation of its obligation under the Mineral Leasing Act to prevent “undue waste” only where it was economically efficient to do so was an arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the statute. 

Second, the court found that BLM failed to provide the required reasoned explanation under the APA for its re-definition of waste, disregard for its earlier factual findings, and ultimate change in position: “an agency cannot flip-flop regulations on the whims of each new administration.” 

Third, the court found that BLM abdicated its responsibility to prevent undue waste by relying on a patchwork of state and tribal regulations with no meaningful analysis of whether they in fact prevent waste.

Fourth, the court found that BLM’s justification that the Methane Rule imposed excessive regulatory burdens was unsupported and failed to comply with APA notice and comment requirements.

Fifth, the court found that BLM’s reliance on an “interim domestic” social cost of methane model to reverse its 2016 conclusion that the Methane Rule’s benefits would far outweigh its costs was arbitrary and capricious, finding that “the President [in an executive order withdrawing the earlier social cost of methane model] did not alter by fiat what constitutes the best available science” and that “an agency simply cannot construct a model that confirms a preordained outcome while ignoring a model that reflects the best science available.”

Sixth, the court found that BLM was required to quantify the public health and other foregone environmental benefits of the rescission rule. Notably, this section includes helpful language re BLM’s broad statutory obligations under the MLA to “safeguard the public welfare” and under FLPMA to prevent “unnecessary and undue degradation” and “protect air and atmospheric” values.

Seventh, the court rejected BLM’s unsupported inflation of administrative and compliance costs for industry.

Eighth, the court found that BLM violated NEPA by failing to take a hard look at (a) the public health impacts associated with increased emissions, particularly to tribal and other low-income communities, (b) the climate impacts of increased GHG emissions, and (c) the cumulative climate impacts of the rescission rule combined with BLM’s nationwide oil and gas program.

Ninth, the court found that BLM violated NEPA by not preparing an EIS.

Finally, the court found that the numerous serious legal violations warrant vacatur of the rescission rule: 
“BLM systematically ignored the basics of rulemaking and steamrolled over the APA and NEPA framework to advance certain special interests. Such conduct should not be condoned.” Nevertheless, the court agreed to stay (i.e., put on hold) vacatur of the rescission rule and re-implementation of the 2016 Methane Rule for the parties to “determine next steps.”

Background:

The court’s decision marks the third time that the Northern District of California has rejected the Trump administration’s attempts to roll back the Waste Prevention Rule. This rule was the first update to BLM’s standards to reduce waste from oil and gas development on public and tribal lands in more than 35 years. The rule requires the oil and gas industry to use proven, low-cost technologies and practices to reduce venting and flaring and to fix leaks in infrastructure. It also saves taxpayers millions of dollars by requiring companies to pay royalties when they waste gas on public lands.

Interior Department data show that companies wasted an estimated 462 billion cubic feet of gas on public and tribal lands through venting, flaring and leaks between 2009 and 2015 — enough gas to serve more than 6.2 million homes for a year. The primary component of that gas is methane, a greenhouse gas 87 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. Other pollutants that are leaked and vented contribute to smog formation, causing asthma attacks and other respiratory problems. And some pollutants, like benzene, are known carcinogens.

Earthjustice is representing the Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Fort Berthold Protectors of Water and Earth Rights, and Western Organization of Resource Councils.

CONTACT:

Alex Thompson | The Wilderness Society | (202) 429-3940 | alex_thompson@tws.org

Robin Cooley | Earthjustice | (303) 263-2472 | rcooley@earthjustice.org 

Gabby Brown | Sierra Club | (914) 261-4626 | gabby.brown@sierraclub.org

Laurie Wilson | Western Organization of Resource Councils | (575) 654-4085 | laurie59212@gmail.com