Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Environmental Law Blogs -> ESA Blawg
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Environmental Law
: ESA BlawgIn Lake Belt mining case, 11th Circuit rebukes lower court, reaffirms deference principles in Federal APA litigation
By Keith Rizzardi
Sierra Club v. Flowers, No. 07-13297 (May 9, 2008) available online
BACKGROUND: Sierra Club brought this action against the Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) after the Corps granted Rinker Materials and other mining concerns (“Miners”) Clean Water Act (“CWA”) permits. 33 U.S.C. ? 1251 et seq. The Miners sought to extract high-quality limestone from the “Lake Belt” area—a stretch of wetlands between the Florida Everglades and the northwest edge of metropolitan Miami. To mine the Lake Belt wetlands, however, the Miners had to first secure CWA permits from the Corps. The Corps, in reviewing whether to issue permits, had to follow procedures required by the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S.C. ? 4321 et seq., Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. ? 1531 et seq., and CWA. After the Corps granted the permits, Sierra Club brought suit, alleging inter alia that in granting the permits the Corps performed its NEPA, ESA, and CWA duties arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. ? 706. The District Court found that the Corps violated NEPA, and remanded the permits to the Corps.
RULING: On Appeal, the 11th Circuit was quite critical of the District Court, clearly establishing that the lower court should have been much rmore deferential to the agency, and ruling, in pertinent part, as follows:
On remand, the district court should address the issues with an eye toward the proper deferential APA standard and NEPA’s limited, procedural scope... The same pervasive lack of deference infects the district court’s APA-CWA analysis. As with its NEPA analysis, the court failed to view the CWA claims
decisions through the deferential lens of the APA. The judgment on the CWA-APA claim also is vacated... The district court seems to have predetermined the answer to the ultimate issue, concluding that the Corps should not permit mining in the Lake Belt, and analyzed the permitting process with that answer in mind. Indeed, the court made its predetermination of the ultimate issue explicit in its conclusion... (where the lower court stated that 'even if a more probing analysis reveals that there truly are no practicable and environmentally preferable alternatives to mining in this precious resource, the Court’s conclusion would be unchanged.'... In other words, no matter what the Corps concluded, and no matter what evidence supported that conclusion, the court would have banned mining because of its own conclusion that mining in the Lake Belt is a bad thing... The discretion to grant or deny CWA permits, however, is first given to federal agencies, not federal courts.
Photo of wood storks nesting in nearby Everglades National Park, from USGS
For additional commentary and resources...
COMMENTARY: Although the District Court's opinion dealt with the impacts of the Lake Belt mining upon endangered wood storks, this case ultimately did not reach the ESA issues, because the claims had become moot. However, the ruling -- that a District Court judges must provide adequate deference to Federal agencies implementing the laws within their responsibility -- remains important for ESA lawyers, and this case will serve as important precedent reaffirming a basic principle of administrative law.
OTHER RESOURCES:
- For more information about the Lake Belt, visit www.evergladesplan.org or lakebeltplan.org
- Documents related to the Corps ongoing SEIS on the Lake Belt plan are also available online
- For information about the importance of Lake Belt mining to Florida's road construction, visit the Florida DOT, The St. Pete Times, Washington Post, and other resources such as those produced by keepfloridarockin.com
Full post as published by ESA Blawg on May 09, 2008 (boomark / email).
Mesothelioma Law Suit
Asbestos Exposure
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Specialty Lamp International
Recalls Counterfeit Circuit Breakers
Lake Superior Center Authority
$275,000 settlement reached in construction dispute.
Unsafe Work Site
Employee awarded $2.5 million personal injury settlement after suffering burns to his lower body.
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
Breakthrough Settlement Reached In Chinese Drywall Litigation
Chinese Drywall Litigation Breakthrough Settlement Reached
Atlas Mining
Settles Class Action for $1.25 Million

Should Judge Hoeveler recuse in the rock-mining case
Lake v. Canada (Minister of Justice) - Reaffirming Judicial Deference To Federal Decisionmaking
Supreme Court Reviewing Alabama's Scheduled Execution
Second Circuit Reverses Lower Court On Injunction Against Cablevision's Remote Storage DVR System
Lovenox Patent Case Back at Federal Circuit; Generic Versions Still Not Yet Approved
11th Circuit Grants Rehearing En Banc in Mail Fraud Case







