midpage
Sign in to see your projects.
482 F.Supp.3d 543
W.D. Tex.
2020
Read the full case

Background

  • The Permian Highway Pipeline is a 429-mile natural gas pipeline in Texas; Sierra Club seeks to enjoin Corps verifications for 129 water crossings that allegedly affected listed species without NEPA review.
  • Kinder Morgan proceeded under Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit 12; for 129 crossings Corps required preconstruction notifications and initiated ESA section 7 consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service.
  • The Service issued a Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement (Feb. 3, 2020) identifying effects on five species and imposing terms and conditions; Corps district verifications (Feb. 13, 2020) incorporated those terms but did not perform project-level NEPA analysis.
  • Kinder Morgan began construction before litigation and was ~72% complete by July 2020; there were documented inadvertent drilling-fluid releases (Blanco River) and smaller returns at the Pedernales crossing.
  • Sierra Club moved for a preliminary injunction to halt Corps verifications pending NEPA compliance and later sought leave to file supplemental declarations about drilling-fluid releases; the court granted leave but denied the preliminary injunction.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Standing Sierra Club members (esp. Frantzen) have concrete, imminent injuries to property, recreation, and water use. Kinder Morgan: only one member affected; past completed work is unredressable; other injuries generalized. Court: Association has standing; Frantzen and members’ injuries are sufficiently concrete, traceable, and redressable.
Whether Corps’ failure to perform NEPA analysis supports injunction Failure to complete NEPA and lack of public participation warrant injunctive relief (procedural injury + member harms). Federal Defendants: procedural NEPA violation alone is insufficient to show irreparable harm; Corps not required to do additional NEPA. Court assumed procedural injury for analysis but held Sierra Club failed to show irreparable harm necessary for injunction.
Irreparable harm from drilling-fluid spills and HDD operations Past Blanco incident and Pedernales returns create substantial risk of future spills harming groundwater and members’ uses. Kinder Morgan: Pedernales returns were minor, HDD is common and mitigated; Corps’ and contractor’s mitigation plans reduce risk. Court: Evidence too speculative as to future, imminent, and irreparable harm; plaintiffs’ chain of assumptions falls short.
Permanent environmental impacts (easement, dredge/fill, species harm) Permanent right-of-way, dredge-and-fill, and habitat loss cause ongoing irreparable injury not cured by mitigation. Kinder Morgan: permanent impacts are minimal, offset by mitigation and conservation measures in Biological Opinion. Court: Permanent impacts not shown to be more-than-minimal or unredressed by mitigation; no basis for injunction.

Key Cases Cited

  • Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (four-factor preliminary-injunction standard requiring likelihood of irreparable harm)
  • Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010) (courts must apply traditional injunction factors in NEPA cases)
  • Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requirements: injury-in-fact, traceability, redressability)
  • City of Austin v. Paxton, 943 F.3d 993 (5th Cir. 2019) (association-member standing framework and elements)
  • Aransas Project v. Shaw, 775 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 2014) (injunctive relief requires a certainly impending future injury)
  • Sabine River Auth. v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 951 F.2d 669 (5th Cir. 1992) (procedural NEPA violations and injunctive relief context)
  • Friends of Lydia Ann Channel v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, [citation="701 F. App'x 352"] (5th Cir. 2017) (speculative harms insufficient to show imminent threat justifying injunction)
  • Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n v. Nat’l Marine Fisheries Serv., 886 F.3d 803 (9th Cir. 2018) (harm that is extremely unlikely or speculative does not justify injunctive relief)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
Court Name: District Court, W.D. Texas
Date Published: Aug 28, 2020
Citations: 482 F.Supp.3d 543; 1:20-cv-00460
Docket Number: 1:20-cv-00460
Court Abbreviation: W.D. Tex.
Log In