Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Environmental Law

NEPA Requires Agencies to Take a "Hard Look"
at Environmental Impact of Plans

Walt McCarter
National AgLaw Center Research Associate

Summary of Decision

In Central Montana Wildlands Association v. Kimball, 308 Fed. App'x 84, 2009 WL 117851 (9th Cir. Jan. 9, 2009), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the U.S. Forest Service had taken a "hard look" at the environmental consequences of its Travel Management Plan (Plan), adequately explained its methodology, and set forth sufficient reasons for its decision; therefore, it had not violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Montana Wilderness Study Act of 1977.

Background

The Central Montana Wildlands Association (Association) brought this action against the U.S. Forest Service, alleging that the Forest Service violated NEPA and the Montana Wilderness Study Act of 1977 in enacting a Travel Management Plan and subsequent modifications to the Plan. Id. at *1. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Service, and the Association appealed. Id.

Arguments

The Association argued that the modified Plan violated the Montana Wilderness Study Act's requirement that the Forest Service maintain the 1977 wilderness character of the study area. Id.

Analysis and Holdings

The court explained that it would only set aside the Forest Service's decision if it was arbitrary or capricious, and reviewed the NEPA claim to determine if the Forest Service had taken a "'hard look' at the environmental consequences of the plan, reasonably evaluated the relevant factors, and provided a 'convincing statement of reasons' for its decision." Id. The court concluded that the Forest Service "took a hard look at the 1977 wilderness character of the study area and each of the wilderness characteristics, explained its methodology, cited evidence in the record, and adequately assessed the specific wilderness characteristics and regulatory factors for each Travel Plan alternative," and had also adequately considered potential enforcement problems with the Plan. Id. at *1-2. The court therefore affirmed the order of summary judgment in favor of the Forest Service. Id. at *2.

The case was decided on January 9, 2009.