Opinion ID: 221481
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: SJCA's Challenges to the Project

Text: SJCA appealed the approval of the Project to the Regional Forester, seeking the ROD's withdrawal. It challenged the Federal Defendants' [a]pproval of surface use associated with gas field development plans and environmental protection measures for [Forest Service] lands, Aplts. Supp. Post-Argument App., Vol. VII at 2023, and their approval of the five SUPOs. The Forest Service denied SJCA's appeal and affirmed the ROD, although it mandated some additional mitigation measures. SJCA then filed suit in federal court challenging the validity of the ROD and the EIS on which it is based. In addition to contending that the Federal Defendants' analysis of the Project failed to meet the procedural requirements of NEPA, it asserted that the Project violates the NFMA because it fails to meet the Forest Plan's requirements for the protection of old-growth ponderosa pine, wildlife habitat in certain management areas, and streams and riparian areas. The district court disagreed and affirmed the approval of the Project. Although it acknowledged flaws in the analysis done in the preparation and writing of the [EIS] and in the matching up of the [P]roject with the requirements of the Forest Plan, it found them to be minor in proportion to the full context of the agency action under review. Aplts. App., Vol. I at 159. SJCA timely appealed.