The court of appeals reversed a district court judgment. The court held that the Bureau of Land Management failed its statutory duty to provide a comparative analysis of the likely environmental consequences of a proposed land exchange where it incorrectly assumed that mining would occur on the land in the same manner regardless of the exchange.
The Center for Biological Diversity, the Western Land Exchange Project, and the Sierra Club (collectively Center) brought suit against Asarco LLC (Asarco), a mining company, and the Department of Interior and the Bureau of Land Management (collectively BLM). Center challenged the BLM’s approval of a land exchange, under which Asarco would take fee simple ownership of land and its use of the land would not be subject to the requirements of the Mining Law of 1872. Otherwise, the land would continue to be owned by the United States, and Asarco would not be permitted to conduct mining operations absent compliance with the Mining Law. In particular, Asarco would have to submit a Mining Plan of Operations (MPO) to the BLM before undertaking new mining operations. Any MPOs would have to include detailed information about the operations, management, monitoring, and environmental impacts of the proposed mining activities. The BLM would then have to approve the MPO before the new mining could proceed.
