Endangered Species Law & Policy

On March 18, three advocacy organizations and their members filed a lawsuit challenging an offshore wind project against the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The lawsuit alleges that the Biological Opinion (BiOp) issued by NMFS for Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it fails to adequately analyze the project's impacts on the endangered North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis). … 

On Friday, October 21, a Draft North Atlantic Right Whale and Offshore Wind Strategy ("Draft Strategy") was jointly announced by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, also known as NOAA Fisheries). The Draft Strategy identifies three categories of actions: (1) Mitigation and Decision-Support Tools; (2) Research and Monitoring; and (3) Collaboration, Communication, and Outreach; and identifies specific priorities ... 

On April 28, 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted a motion for summary judgment filed by Wild Fish Conservancy, holding that EPA and NMFS failed to use the best scientific and commercial data available in their informal consultation regarding EPA's approval of water-quality standards that exempted salmon farms from various state water quality standards.  Wild Fish Conservancy v. U.S.E.P.A., No. C08-0156, 2010 WL 1734850 (W.D. Wash April 28, 2010).

Specifically, the court held that when EPA and NMFS engaged in informal consultation over EPA's approval of the disputed water quality standards, they should have considered the recent recovery plans for Puget Sound Chinook salmon (2007) and for the Southern Resident Killer Whales (2008) (PDF).  Both recovery plans expressly stated that they were developed based on the best scientific data available regarding each species.  The letter that NMFS issued concurring in EPA's not-likely-to-adversely-affect determination referenced three earlier studies prepared by NMFS and one prepared by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, but not the more recent recovery plans.  Indeed, the court found that the administrative record was devoid of any mention of the two recovery plans.

Ultimately, the court ordered EPA and NMFS to reconsider whether formal consultation is required taking into account the best available science.