This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Environmental Law
Endangered Species Act
Biological Opinion for Ocotillo Wind Energy Facility Project

The Protect Our Communities Foundation, Backcountry Against Dumps and Donna Tisdale v. Daniel M. Ashe, Ren Lohoefener, Jim A. Bartel, U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service, United States Dept. of the Interior, Ocotillo Express LLC

Published: Jan. 4, 2014 | Result Date: Nov. 20, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:12-cv-02212-GPC Summary Judgment –  Defense

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Stephan C. Volker
(Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker)


Defendant

Rickey Doyle Turner Jr.


Facts

In 1980, the Dept. of the Interior approved a Record of Decision (ROD) for the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA). The ROD established a long-range, comprehensive plan for the management, use, development, and protection of over 12 million acres of public land.

In 2009, Ocotillo Express LLC applied to the Bureau of Land Management to construct and operate a wind energy facility on public land in the CDCA. An environmental impact statement was prepared for the proposed Ocotillo Wind Energy Facility, and the project was reduced in size and scope. Eventually, however, the project was approved.

The Protect Our Communities Foundation and others filed suit, challenging the approval of the project and arguing that it threatened an endangered species.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs claimed that the project would jeopardize the existence of the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, a species protected by the Endangered Species Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants argued that they had designed the project to minimize adverse effects on the sheep, and that its project complied with the ESA.

Result

The court granted summary judgment for defendants.


#101199

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390