Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-04060/USCOURTS-ca10-89-04060-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 

---

I 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED 

Uoited States Court of Appeals 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Tenth Circuit 

SIERRA CLUB, a nonprofit corporation; ) 

NATIONAL PARKS AND CONSERVATION } 

ASSOCIATION, a nonprofit organization; ) 

SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE, ) 

a Utah nonprofit organization; and ) 

THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, a District of ) 

Columbia nonprofit corporation, ) 

) 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

DONALD P. HODEL, in his capacity as ) 

Secretary of the United States ) 

Department of the Interior; ) 

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR; BUREAU OF LAND ) 

MANAGEMENT; GARFIELD COUNTY, a ) 

political subdivision of the State ) 

of Utah, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

JUL 18 1990 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 89-4060 

(D.C. No. 87-C-0120A) 

(D. Utah) 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT, and SEYMOUR, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

* This order and · judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except - for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36. 3 . 

Appellate Case: 89-4060 Document: 010110038702 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 1 
.J 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

This action arises out of the plans of Utah's Garfield County 

to improve the Burr Trail, a rugged and historic path winding 

through federally owned land in Utah. Sierra Club and other 

environmental groups (collectively referred to as Sierra Club) are 

presently appealing the district court's denial of attorneys' fees 

under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which prescribes, in 

pertinent part, that "a court shall award ... fees and other 

expenses ... unless the court finds that the position of the 

United States was substantially justified .... " See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2412( d)(l)(A). The district court, in denying fees, determined 

that Sierra Club was a "prevailing party" under the EAJA, but that 

the position taken by the United States in opposition to the issue 

Sierra Club prevailed on was "substantially justified" for EAJA 

purposes. 

On appeal, Sierra Club argues that it prevailed in its 

litigation to a much greater extent than the district court gave 

it credit for and that the United States' opposition to the issues 

it prevailed on was not substantially justified. Even assuming 

the Sierra Club's success in this action may have been understated 

by the district court, whatever successes Sierra Club achieved 

turned on application of the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 

1976 (FLPMA) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) to Garfield County's proposed improvements of the Burr 

Trail_._ In the majority's view, -,the issues -under those statutes 

involved very close questions for the most part. Consequently, we 

2 

Appellate Case: 89-4060 Document: 010110038702 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 2 
agree with the district court that the litigating positions taken 

by the United States with respect to the FLPMA and the NEPA were 

substantially justified within the meaning of the EAJA. See 

Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 566 n.2 (1988)(a position is 

substantially justified under the EAJA "if it has a reasonable 

basis in law and fact"). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the United States District Court 

for the District of Utah is AFFIRMED. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

3 

Appellate Case: 89-4060 Document: 010110038702 Date Filed: 07/18/1990 Page: 3