Save the Peaks Coalition v. United States Forest Service
669 F.3d 1025
9th Cir.2012Background
- Snowbowl ski area on federal land operated by ASRLP under USFS permit; Snowbowl depends on natural snowfall and lacks snowmaking today.
- ASRLP proposed building a snowmaking facility using Class A+ reclaimed water treated at Rio de Flag facility.
- USFS released a Draft EIS in 2004 and then FEIS in 2005 with extensive analysis on water quality and ingestion risks.
- Navajo Nation litigation (RFRA and NEPA claims) led to appellate decision upholding NEPA/RFRA violations in 2007-2009, then certiorari denied in 2009.
- Save the Peaks Plaintiffs filed September 21, 2009 after watching Navajo Nation litigation; attorney represented both Navajo Nation and Save the Peaks in this case.
- District court granted summary judgment, finding laches and then NEPA/APA defenses; Save the Peaks appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether laches bars the Save the Peaks claims | Save the Peaks lacked diligence; timely filing after FEIS | USFS/ASRLP prejudice shown by delay | Laches does not apply due to lack of prejudice |
| Whether USFS adequately considered human ingestion risks in FEIS | FEIS failed to discuss ingestion risks; relied on panel opinion | FEIS discussed risks; thorough hard look under NEPA | FEIS took a hard look; upheld district court on merits |
| Whether USFS ensured scientific integrity of NEPA analysis | Decision rested on ADEQ conclusions without independent review | USFS considered ADEQ conclusions but analyzed data itself | USFS did not fail to ensure scientific integrity |
| Whether USFS provided high-quality environmental information to the public | USFS failed to provide high-quality information on reclaimed water safety | District court found claim abandoned on appeal | Waived by Save the Peaks; not reached on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Ocean Advocates v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 402 F.3d 846 (9th Cir. 2005) (NEPA challenge standard; hard look/undoing of agency action)
- Neighbors of Cuddy Mountain v. U.S. Forest Serv., 137 F.3d 1372 (9th Cir. 1998) (prejudice evaluation in laches; environmental context)
- Apache Survival Coal. v. United States (I), 21 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 1994) (diligence and prejudice in environmental laches)
- Apache Survival Coal. v. United States (II), 118 F.3d 663 (9th Cir. 1997) (prejudice/serial litigation; unusual facts)
- Pres. Coal., Inc. v. Pierce, 667 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1982) (diligence/prejudice factors in laches)
- Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Serv., 535 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc decision, RFRA/NEPA context; precedential value limited)