Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00407/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00407-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment

---

[Proposed] Order Re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

COUNSEL IDENTIFICATION AT END 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THE DELTA SMELT CASES Case No: 1:09-CV-00407 OWW GSA 

Partially consolidated with: 

1:09-cv-00480 OWW GSA 

ORDER RE MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT 

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD 

Date: October 19, 2009 

 Time: 11:00 a.m. 

Courtroom: 3 

 Hon. Oliver W. Wanger 

SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER 

AUTHORITY et al v. SALAZAR et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-407) 

STATE WATER CONTRACTORS v. SALAZAR 

et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-422) 

COALITION FOR A SUSTAINABLE DELTA et 

al. v. UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE 

SERVICE et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-480) 

METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT v. 

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE 

SERVICE et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-631) 

STEWART & JASPER ORCHARDS et al. v. 

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE 

SERVICE et al. 

(Case No. 1:09-cv-892) 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 1 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 1 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On October 19, 2009, the Court heard Plaintiffs’ Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 

(Docket # 170). 

The Court has fully considered the briefs, evidence, and oral arguments submitted by the parties, 

and, good cause appearing therefore, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS: 

Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED with respect to documents 7-8, 42-46, 87, 89-102, 105, 

120, 126, 135, 147-148, 192, 229, 244, 249, which the federal defendants have agreed will be added to 

the administrative record. 

2. Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED with respect to documents 103, 117, 128-132 and those 

documents are admitted as part of the administrative record. 

3. Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part with respect to documents 

149-177, 179-191, 193-214. The documents are not admitted as part of the record, but the Court may 

consider these documents under the relevant factors exception. 

4. Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED as to documents 104, 106, 109, 119. The Court may take 

judicial notice of these documents, if needed. 

5. Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED without prejudice with respect to documents 1-3, 9-12, 15, 

17, 19, 69-71, 73, 75, 78-79, 81, 85, 88, 114-115, 121-125, 127, 133-134. 

6. Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED with respect to documents 5-6, 14, 222, 266-268, which 

are post-decisional documents. 

7. Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED with respect to document 265 with the understanding 

that this is a post-decisional document, and the Court may consider this document under the exception to 

explain complex scientific and technical materials. 

8. Plaintiffs may submit supplemental briefing presenting the foundation for documents 

215-221, 223-228, 230-243, 245-248, 250-264 to be considered under the relevant factors exception. 

This briefing will be submitted by November 6, 2009. Responses, if any, will be submitted by 

November 20, 2009. 

9. The parties have agreed that documents 4, 13, 16, 20-21, 36, 52-53, 67-68, 72, 74, 76-77, 

86, 107-108, 110-113, 116, and 118 are already included in the administrative record. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 2 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 2 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

10. The federal defendants have indicated that documents 18 and 84 are missing, and 

therefore they are unable to add them to the administrative record. 

11. Federal defendants are hereby ORDERED to produce documents 22-35, 37-41, 47-51, 

54-66, 80, 82-83 to the Plaintiffs by October 26, 2009 for Plaintiffs to review, to the extent they are in 

the federal defendants’ possession. Federal defendants will make an affirmative assertion as to any 

documents they do not have within their possession. Plaintiffs will then have an opportunity to submit 

supplemental briefing regarding whether these documents should be considered under the relevant 

factors exception. 

12. The Court will conduct further review of documents 79a, 136-146 to determine whether 

these documents should be admitted as part of the administrative record. 

The table below summarizes the Court’s ruling. 

Document # Court’s Ruling 

1-3 Denied. 

4 Already included in administrative record. 

5-6 Post-decisional – parties agree not to be added. 

7-8 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

9-12 Denied. 

13 Already included in administrative record. 

14 Post-decisional – parties agree not to be added. 

15 Denied. 

16 Already included in administrative record. 

17 Denied. 

18 Missing. 

19 Denied. 

20-21 Already included in administrative record. 

22-35 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

36 Already included in administrative record. 

37-41 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 3 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 3 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Document # Court’s Ruling 

42-46 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

47-51 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

52-53 Already included in administrative record. 

54-66 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

67-68 Already included in administrative record. 

69-71 Denied. 

72 Already included in administrative record. 

73 Denied 

74 Already included in administrative record. 

75 Denied. 

76-77 Already included in administrative record. 

78-79 Denied. 

79a Court will conduct further review of this document. 

80 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

81 Denied. 

82-83 Federal defendants to produce documents to Plaintiffs for review by 10/26/09. 

84 Missing. 

85 Denied. 

86 Already included in administrative record. 

87 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

88 Denied. 

89-102 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

103 Admitted. 

104 Court may take judicial notice, if needed. 

105 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

106 Court may take judicial notice, if needed. 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 4 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 4 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Document # Court’s Ruling 

107-108 Already included in administrative record. 

109 Court may take judicial notice, if needed. 

110-113 Already included in administrative record. 

114-115 Denied. 

116 Already included in administrative record. 

117 Admitted. 

118 Already included in administrative record. 

119 Court may take judicial notice, if needed. 

120 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

121-125 Denied. 

126 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

127 Denied. 

128-132 Admitted. 

133-134 Denied. 

135 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

136-146 Court will conduct further review of these documents. 

147-148 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

149-177 Considered under the exceptions to see if it (1) bear on best available science, (2) 

bear on relevant factors, and/or (3) if any of the information in the overall either 

undermines or impeaches the efficacy of the BiOp. 

178 No document. 

179-191 Considered under the exceptions to see if it (1) bear on best available science, (2) 

bear on relevant factors, and/or (3) if any of the information in the overall either 

undermines or impeaches the efficacy of the BiOp. 

192 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

193-214 Considered under the exceptions to see if it (1) bear on best available science, (2) 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 5 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 5 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Document # Court’s Ruling 

bear on relevant factors, and/or (3) if any of the information in the overall either 

undermines or impeaches the efficacy of the BiOp. 

215-221 Plaintiffs have additional time to supplement the foundation to show the Court it 

meets the exception. 

222 Post-decisional – parties agree not to be added. 

223-228 Plaintiffs have additional time to supplement the foundation to show the Court it 

meets the exception. 

229 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

230-243 Plaintiffs have additional time to supplement the foundation to show the Court it 

meets the exception. 

244 Federal defendants agree to add the documents to the record. 

245-248 Plaintiffs have additional time to supplement the foundation to show the Court it 

meets the exception. 

249 Federal defendants agree to add the document to the record. 

250-264 Plaintiffs have additional time to supplement the foundation to show the Court it 

meets the exception. 

265 Considered under the exception to explain scientific and technically complex 

material. 

266-268 Denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 9, 2009 /s/ OLIVER W. WANGER 

 

 OLIVER W. WANGER 

 U.S. District Court Judge

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 6 of 7
[Proposed] Order re Motion to Supplement Administrative Record 6 

09cv407.o.mtn.supp.adm.rec.dpc.DOC

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IDENTIFICATION OF COUNSEL 

NOSSAMAN LLP

ROBERT D. THORNTON (SBN 72934) 

PAUL S. WEILAND (SBN 237058) 

AUDREY M. HUANG (SBN 217622) 

18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800 

Irvine, CA 92612 

Telephone: (949) 833-7800 

Facsimile: (949) 833-7878 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs COALITION FOR A 

SUSTAINABLE DELTA and KERN 

COUNTY WATER AGENCY 

KERN COUNTY WATER AGENCY 

AMELIA T. MINABERRIGARAI 

(SBN 192359) 

P.O. Box 58 

Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058 

Telephone: (661) 634-1400 

Facsimile: (661) 634-1428 

Attorney for Plaintiff KERN COUNTY 

WATER AGENCY 

DANIEL J. O’HANLON (SBN 122380) 

WILLIAM T. CHISUM (SBN 142580) 

HANSPETER WALTER (SBN 244847) 

KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & 

GIRARD 

400 Capitol Mall, 27th Floor 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 321-4500 

Facsimile: (916) 321-4555 

EILEEN M. DIEPENBROCK (SBN 119254) 

JON D. RUBIN (SBN 196944) 

JONATHAN R. MARZ (SBN 221188) 

DIEPENBROCK HARRISON 

400 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 492-5000 

Facsimile: (916) 446-4535 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER 

AUTHORITY and WESTLANDS WATER 

DISTRICT 

CHRISTOPHER J. CARR (SBN 184076)

WILLIAM M. SLOAN (SBN 203583) 

MORRISON & FOERSTER, LLP 

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Telephone: (415) 268-7000 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT 

OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 

GREGORY K. WILKINSON (SBN 054809)

STEVEN M. ANDERSON (SBN 186700) 

PAETER E. GARCIA (SBN 199580) 

MELISSA R. CUSHMAN (SBN 246398) 

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 

3750 University Avenue, Suite 400 

P. O. Box 1028 

Riverside, CA 92502 

Telephone: (951) 686-1450 

Facsimile: (951) 686-3083 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

STATE WATER CONTRACTORS 

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Case 1:09-cv-00407-LJO-BAM Document 406 Filed 11/18/09 Page 7 of 7