`
`
`
`TODD KIM
`Assistant Attorney General
`SETH M. BARSKY, Section Chief
`MEREDITH L. FLAX, Assistant Section Chief
`COBY HOWELL, Senior Trial Attorney
`MICHAEL R. EITEL, Senior Trial Attorney
`U.S. Department of Justice
`Environment & Natural Resources Division
`Wildlife & Marine Resources Section
`1000 S.W. Third Avenue
`Portland, OR 97204
`Phone: (503) 727-1023
`Fax: (503) 727-1117
`Email: coby.howell@usdoj.gov
`
`Attorneys for Federal Defendants
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Oakland)
`
`
`
`CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
`DIVERSITY, ET AL.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`HAALAND, ET AL.,
`
`
`
`Federal Defendants.
`
`
`Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206-JST
`FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’
`MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY
`REMAND; RESPONSE TO
`PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS FOR
`SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND
`MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
`AND AUTHORITIES
`
`
`Date: TBD
`Time: TBD
`Place: Courtroom 6, 2nd Floor
`Judge: The Honorable Jon S. Tigar
`
`
`
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 2 of 40
`
`
`
`TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, as soon as possible, Federal Defendants will
`
`move this Court for voluntary remand in the above-captioned case. This motion will
`
`be made before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar, United States District Judge, Oakland
`
`Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California 94612.
`
`Federal Defendants move the Court for an order remanding, without vacatur,
`
`the following final rules: 84 Fed. Reg. 44753 (Aug. 27, 2019), 84 Fed. Reg. 45020
`
`(Aug. 27, 2019), and 84 Fed. Reg. 44976 (Aug. 27, 2019). Federal Defendants
`
`respectfully submit this motion in response to Plaintiffs’ motions for summary
`
`judgment.
`
`This motion is based on the accompanying Memorandum of Points and
`
`Authorities and the Third Declaration of Gary D. Frazer (“Third Frazer Decl.”) and
`
`Fourth Declaration of Samuel D. Rauch III (“Fourth Rauch Decl.”).
`
`
`
`Counsel for the parties have conferred on this motion. All Plaintiffs have
`
`indicated that they will oppose this motion. All Intervenor-Defendants have
`
`indicated that they will reserve their position until they have an opportunity to
`
`review the motion.
`
`Federal Defendants are filing this motion in all three related cases, but the
`
`motion and brief are substantively identical in each case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 3 of 40
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`PAGE
`
`MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORTIES ................................................... 1
`
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
`
`I. STATUTORY AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND .......................................... 3
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`The Section 4 Revisions ................................................................................... 4
`
`The Section 4(d) Revisions ............................................................................... 9
`
`The Section 7(a)(2) Revisions ......................................................................... 12
`
`II.
`
`PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND...................................................................... 16
`
`A.
`
`Rule 12 Responsive Pleadings ....................................................................... 16
`
`B. Motions to Stay ............................................................................................... 16
`
`C. Motions for Summary Judgment ................................................................... 18
`
`STANDARD OF REVIEW .......................................................................................... 19
`
`I. THE COURT SHOULD REMAND THE 2019 ESA RULES WITHOUT
`
`VACATUR. ................................................................................................................... 20
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Voluntary Remand is Appropriate. ............................................................... 20
`
`The Court Should Not Vacate the 2019 ESA Rules. ..................................... 26
`
`CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 30
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`i
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 4 of 40
`
`
`
`CASES
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PAGE
`
`
`
`Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Allen,
`No. 04-1813-JO, 2009 WL 2015407 (D. Or. July 1, 2009) ...................................... 21
`
`
`Allied-Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regul. Comm'n,
`988 F.2d 146 (D.C. Cir. 1993) .............................................................................20, 28
`
`
`Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Haaland, 19-cv-06812 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 21, 2019) ........... 2
`
`ASSE Int’l v. Kerry,
`182 F. Supp. 3d 1059 (C.D. Cal. 2016) .................................................................... 21
`
`
`Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for a Great Or.,
`515 U.S. 687 (1995) .................................................................................................... 4
`
`
`Cal. Cmtys. Against Toxics v. EPA,
`688 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2012) ......................................................................... 20, 22, 27
`
`
`Cent. Power & Light Co. v. United States,
`634 F.2d 137 (5th Cir. 1980) .................................................................................... 21
`
`
`Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland,
` 19-cv-5206 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2019) ....................................................................... 2
`
`California v. Haaland, 19-cv-6013 (N.D. Cal., Sept. 25, 2019) .................................. 2
`
`Cottonwood Env’t L. Ctr. v. Bernhardt,
`No. CV 18-12-BU-SEH, 2020 WL 7263551 (D. Mont. Dec. 10, 2020) .................... 21
`
`
`FCC v. Fox Television Stations,
`556 U.S. 502 (2009) .................................................................................................. 19
`
`
`Fed. Power Comm’n v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.,
`423 U.S. 326 (1976) .............................................................................................26, 27
`
`
`Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Lorion,
`470 U.S. 729 (1985) .................................................................................................. 26
`
`
`Ford Motor Co. v. Nat’l Lab. Rels. Bd.,
`305 U.S. 364 (1939) .............................................................................................20, 21
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`ii
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 5 of 40
`
`
`
`
`Idaho Farm Bureau Fed’n v. Babbitt,
`58 F.3d 1392 (9th Cir. 1995) .................................................................................... 27
`
`
`In re Clean Water Act Rulemaking,
`No. C 20-04636 WHA, 2021 WL 4924844 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2021) .................22, 27
`
`
`Nat’l Cable & Telecomms. Ass’n v. Brand X Internet Servs.,
`545 U.S. 967 (2005) .................................................................................................. 20
`
`
`John v. Sec’y of the Interior,
`No. 3:14-CV-00247-LRH-VP, 2015 WL 505526 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 2015) .................. 22
`
`
`Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.,
`398 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2005) .................................................................................. 30
`
`
`Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,
`463 U.S. 29 (1983) .................................................................................................... 19
`
`
`Neighbors Against Bison Slaughter v. Nat'l Park Serv.,
`No. CV 19-128-BLG-SPW, 2021 WL 717094 (D. Mont. Feb. 5, 2021) .................... 22
`
`
`Pascua Yaqui Tribe v. United States Env't Prot. Agency,
`No. CV-20-00266-TUC-RM, 2021 WL 3855977 (D. Ariz. Aug. 30, 2021) ............... 27
`
`
`Pollinator Stewardship Council v. EPA,
`806 F.3d 520 (9th Cir. 2015) .................................................................................... 28
`
`
`SKF USA, Inc. v. United States,
`254 F.3d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 2001) ...........................................................................20, 22
`
`
`Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs,
`282 F. Supp. 3d 91 (D.D.C. 2017) ............................................................................ 28
`
`
`Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for a Great Or. v. Babbitt,
`1 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1993) .....................................................................................10, 11
`
`
`Trout Unlimited v. Lohn,
`559 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009) .................................................................................... 11
`
`
`
`Nat. Res. Def. Council v. U.S. Dep’t. of Interior,
`275 F. Supp. 2d 1136 (C.D. Cal. 2002) .................................................................... 27
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`iii
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 6 of 40
`
`
`
`Western Oil & Gas Ass’n v. EPA,
`633 F.2d 803 (9th Cir. 1980) .................................................................................... 27
`
`
`Weyerhaeuser Co. v. FWS,
`139 S. Ct. 361 (2018) .............................................................................................. 6, 9
`
`STATUTES
`5 U.S.C. § 551(4)-(5) .................................................................................................... 29
`16 U.S.C. § 1531(b) ........................................................................................................ 3
`16 U.S.C. § 1532 ............................................................................................................ 8
`16 U.S.C. § 1532(5)(A) ................................................................................................... 5
`16 U.S.C. § 1532(20) .................................................................................................. 7, 8
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1) ................................................................................................ 5, 8
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3)(A) ........................................................................................5, 6, 8
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(1)(A) ............................................................................................... 7
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2) .................................................................................................... 6
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(d) ...................................................................................................... 10
`16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2) .................................................................................................. 12
`16 U.S.C. § 1536(b)(3)(A) ............................................................................................. 14
`16 U.S.C. § 1540(f) ......................................................................................................... 4
`16 U.S.C. § 1538(a) ...................................................................................................... 10
`16 U.S.C. § 1538(a)(1)(A)-(G) ...................................................................................... 10
`16 U.S.C. § 1604 .......................................................................................................... 16
`43 U.S.C. § 1712 .......................................................................................................... 16
`
`FEDERAL REGULATIONS
`
`50 C.F.R. § 17.31(a) (1978) .......................................................................................... 10
`50 C.F.R. § parts 17, 402, 424 ....................................................................................... 4
`50 C.F.R. § 17.31 .......................................................................................................... 11
`50 C.F.R. § 402............................................................................................................. 13
`50 C.F.R. § 402.13(a) ..............................................................................................13, 14
`50 C.F.R. § 402.13 ............................................................................................. 13, 14, 15
`50 C.F.R § 402.02 .............................................................................................. 14, 15, 25
`50 C.F.R § part 402 ....................................................................................................... 1
`50 C.F.R. § 402.14 ........................................................................................................ 14
`50 C.F.R. § 402.14(a) ................................................................................................... 13
`50 C.F.R. § 402.14(c) .................................................................................................... 15
`50 C.F.R. § 402.14(g) ................................................................................................... 14
`50 C.F.R. § 402.14(l) .................................................................................................... 15
`50 C.F.R. § 402.16 ...................................................................................................14, 16
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`iv
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 7 of 40
`
`
`
`50 C.F.R. § 402.16(b) ................................................................................................... 16
`50 C.F.R. § 402.17 ...................................................................................................14, 25
`50 C.F.R. § 424.11 .......................................................................................................... 6
`50 C.F.R. § 424.11(b) (2018) .................................................................................... 7, 24
`50 C.F.R. § 424.11(d) ................................................................................................. 7, 8
`50 C.F.R. § 424.11(e) ..................................................................................................... 8
`50 C.F.R. § 424.12(a)(1)(ii) ............................................................................................ 8
`
`
`Other Authorities
`45 Fed. Reg. 13010 (Feb. 27, 1980) ............................................................................... 1
`49 Fed. Reg. 38900 (Oct. 1, 1984) ................................................................................. 1
`51 Fed. Reg. 19926 (June 3, 1986) .............................................................................. 13
`70 Fed. Reg. 37160, 37195 (June 28, 2005) ................................................................ 11
`81 Fed. Reg. 7214 (Feb. 11, 2016) ................................................................................. 1
`81 Fed. Reg. 7414 (Feb. 11, 2016) ................................................................................. 1
`83 Fed. Reg. 35193 ........................................................................................................ 4
`83 Fed. Reg 35196. ........................................................................................................ 8
`84 Fed. Reg. 44753 (Aug. 27, 2019) ..................................................................... 1, 4, 12
`86 Fed. Reg. 7037 (Jan. 20, 2021) ........................................................................ passim
`81 Fed. Reg. 7414 (Feb. 11, 2016) ................................................................................. 1
`83 Fed. Reg. 35174 ............................................................................................. 4, 12, 14
`84 Fed. Reg. 44976 (Aug. 27, 2019) ................................................................. 1, 4, 6, 14
`84 Fed. Reg. 45020 (Aug. 27, 2019) ..................................................................... passim
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`v
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 8 of 40
`
`
`
`
`
`MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORTIES
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`More than 30 years ago, the Secretaries of the Departments of the Interior
`
`and Commerce (“Secretaries”), acting through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
`
`(“FWS”) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) (collectively,
`
`“Services”) promulgated comprehensive regulations interpreting and implementing
`
`the Endangered Species Act (“ESA” or “Act”). 1 On August 27, 2019, in three
`
`separate rulemakings, the Services issued the currently at-issue revisions to the
`
`regulations implementing portions of Sections 4, 4(d), and 7(a)(2) of the ESA. See
`
`84 Fed. Reg. 45020 (“Section 4 Rule”); 84 Fed. Reg. 44753 (“Section 4(d) Rule”); 84
`
`Fed. Reg. 44976 (“Section 7(a)(2) Rule”). The three revised regulations became
`
`effective in late 2019.
`
`Seventeen States, the District of Columbia, and the City of New York (“State
`
`Plaintiffs”), the Center for Biological Diversity and other non-governmental
`
`organizations (“CBD Plaintiffs”), and the Animal Legal Defense Fund (“ALDF”)
`
`(collectively, “Plaintiffs”) challenge each of these revised regulations in three
`
`separate suits alleging violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”),
`
`
`1 The Services periodically revised portions of the regulations, such as amendments
`to the Sections 4 and 7 regulations in 2016. See, e.g., 81 Fed. Reg. 7214 (Feb. 11,
`2016) (amending 50 C.F.R. Part 402); 81 Fed. Reg. 7414 (Feb. 11, 2016) (amending
`50 C.F.R. Part 424). But, in the main, the earlier regulations have remained the
`operative regulations for 30-plus years. See also, 45 Fed. Reg. 13010 (Feb. 27,
`1980); 49 Fed. Reg. 38900 (Oct. 1, 1984).
`
`
`1
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 9 of 40
`
`
`
`National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), and ESA.2 All three Plaintiffs
`
`generally contend they are harmed because the 2019 ESA Rules allegedly
`
`undermine the conservation purposes of the ESA.
`
`Pursuant to Executive Order 13990 signed by President Biden on January
`
`20, 2021 (titled “Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment
`
`and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis”), the White House directed the
`
`Services to evaluate and, where appropriate, revise or rescind environmental and
`
`public health-related regulations that issued during the prior four years that
`
`conflicted with national objectives set forth in the Order. 86 Fed. Reg. 7037 (Jan.
`
`20, 2021). In a publication accompanying that Executive Order, the White House
`
`specifically directed the Services to review the 2019 ESA Rules challenged in this
`
`case. As a result of the Services’ review of these regulations, on June 4, 2021, FWS
`
`announced its intent to rescind the Section 4(d) Rule and the Services announced
`
`their intent to revise the Section 4 and Section 7 Rules.
`
`Based in part on the Services’ intent to rescind and revise the 2019 ESA
`
`Rules, on August 13, 2021, Federal Defendants moved this Court for a stay of
`
`proceedings to allow the Services to complete their rulemaking processes in
`
`
`2 This Court has related the three cases: Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland,
`19-cv-5206 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2019); California v. Haaland, 19-cv-6013 (N.D. Cal.,
`Sept. 25, 2019); Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Haaland, 19-cv-06812 (N.D. Cal., Oct.
`21, 2019). Federal Defendants are filing an identical motion and memorandum in
`all three cases. For purposes of this memorandum, the cases are referred to
`collectively in the singular tense. The Court has also related California v. Haaland,
`21-cv-00440-JST (N.D. Cal.), which challenges the 2020 Critical Habitat Rules. The
`Court previously granted the parties’ stipulated stay of proceedings in that case.
`
`2
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 10 of 40
`
`
`
`accordance with the APA. The Court denied Federal Defendants’ motions on
`
`October 7, 2021, finding a possibility of harm to Plaintiffs from continued
`
`implementation of the 2019 ESA Rules. Soon after, Plaintiffs re-filed their motions
`
`for summary judgment.
`
`Because Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment, Defendants now move the
`
`Court to remand the 2019 ESA Rules without vacatur. This voluntary remand
`
`request responds to Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment by addressing the
`
`proper relief the Court should grant in this case. The requested equitable relief is
`
`legally and factually warranted, narrowly tailored, and resolves Plaintiffs’ claims;
`
`thus, there is no need for the Court to reach the merits of the arguments in this
`
`case. As discussed below, the Court should grant Federal Defendants’ motion for
`
`remand and deny Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment.
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`I.
`
`STATUTORY AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND
`
`Congress enacted the ESA in 1973 “to provide a means whereby the
`
`ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be
`
`conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species
`
`and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the
`
`purposes of [certain] treaties and conventions . . . .” 16 U.S.C. § 1531(b). To achieve
`
`these purposes, Congress set out broad procedural and substantive requirements in
`
`various sections of the Act and provided the Secretaries with rulemaking authority
`
`to implement those requirements. 16 U.S.C. § 1540(f); Babbitt v. Sweet Home
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`3
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 11 of 40
`
`
`
`Chapter of Cmtys. for a Great Or., 515 U.S. 687, 708 (1995) (“When it enacted the
`
`ESA, Congress delegated broad administrative and interpretive power to the
`
`Secretar[ies].”).
`
`For over 30 years, the Services have interpreted these broad procedural and
`
`substantive requirements principally through joint regulations. See, e.g., 50 C.F.R.
`
`parts 17, 402, 424. During those decades, the Services gained valuable experience
`
`in implementing the Act and their own regulations, and over those years issued
`
`guidance interpreting or clarifying the regulations to facilitate implementation of
`
`the Act.3 To update these regulations, in 2018 the Services issued three separate
`
`proposed rules addressing Sections 4(d), 4, and 7(a)(2) of the Act. 83 Fed. Reg.
`
`35174 (“Section 4(d) proposed rule”); 83 Fed. Reg. 35193 (“Section 4 proposed rule”);
`
`83 Fed. Reg. 35178 (“Section 7(a)(2) proposed rule”). The Services provided notice in
`
`the Federal Register and solicited public comment on the proposed rules. After
`
`considering and addressing these public comments, the Secretaries exercised their
`
`rulemaking authorities and, on August 27, 2019, issued a trio of final rules revising
`
`certain portions of the existing regulations. See 84 Fed. Reg. 45020; 84 Fed. Reg.
`
`44753; 84 Fed. Reg. 44976. The relevant statutory authorities and the revisions to
`
`50 C.F.R. parts 17, 402, and 424, are each addressed below.
`
`A. The Section 4 Revisions
`
`
`
`
`3 See, e.g., FWS, Laws and Policies, Regulations and Policies, available at
`https://www.fws.gov/endangered/laws-policies/regulations-and-policies.html (last
`visited Dec. 9, 2021) (identifying interpretive guidance and policies relating to
`application of Sections 4 and 7 of the ESA).
`
`4
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 12 of 40
`
`
`
`Under ESA Section 4, the Services “shall by regulation” determine “whether
`
`any species is an endangered species or a threatened species” after considering five
`
`statutory factors, the best scientific and commercial data available, and States’ and
`
`foreign governments’ efforts to protect the species. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1), (b)(1)(A).
`
`An “endangered species” is “any species which is in danger of extinction throughout
`
`all or a significant portion of its range.” Id. § 1532(6). A “threatened species” is one
`
`“which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
`
`throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” Id. § 1532(20). If a listed
`
`species no longer meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species, the
`
`Services shall remove the ESA’s protections from the species (delisting). If a species
`
`is delisted, the Services must monitor that species for at least five years. Id. §
`
`1533(g).
`
`Section 4 also generally directs the Services to designate critical habitat for
`
`any species listed as endangered or threatened “to the maximum extent prudent
`
`and determinable.” 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3)(A). “Critical habitat” is defined in
`
`relevant part as:
`
`(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at
`the time it is listed . . . on which are found those physical or biological
`features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and . . . (ii) specific
`areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
`listed . . . upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential
`for the conservation of the species.
`
`16 U.S.C. § 1532(5)(A). The Services must designate critical habitat on the basis of
`
`the “best scientific data available and after taking into consideration the economic
`
`impact, the impact on national security, and any other relevant impact of specifying
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`5
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 13 of 40
`
`
`
`any particular area as critical habitat.” Id. § 1533(b)(2). The Services “may exclude
`
`any area from critical habitat if [they] determine[] that the benefits of such
`
`exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical
`
`habitat, unless [they] determine[] . . . [failure to do so] will result in the extinction of
`
`the species concerned.” Id. A critical habitat designation does not directly limit or
`
`affect the conduct of non-federal actors. Weyerhaeuser Co. v. FWS, 139 S. Ct. 361,
`
`365-66 (2018).
`
`To aid in implementing these statutory duties, the Services jointly
`
`promulgated regulations setting forth the procedures for adding, removing, or
`
`reclassifying endangered or threatened species, 50 C.F.R. § 424.11, as well as the
`
`criteria for designating critical habitat for listed species, id. § 424.12. On July 25,
`
`2018, the Services proposed five general revisions to the listing and critical habitat
`
`regulations. These revisions entail: (1) the deletion of economic impact language;
`
`(2) the framework for discussing the foreseeable future; (3) factors to consider in
`
`delisting; (4) specific circumstances that support “not prudent” determinations for
`
`critical habitat; and (5) clarifications and revisions to the standards and process for
`
`designating critical habitat in unoccupied areas. 83 Fed. Reg. at 35194-99. The
`
`Services provided proposed regulatory text addressing each of these issues along
`
`with an explanation and solicited public comments on these as well as other
`
`potential areas for change. 83 Fed. Reg. at 35194.
`
`On August 27, 2019, the Services published the Section 4 final rule adopting
`
`many of their proposed revisions. 84 Fed. Reg. 45020. Among the regulatory
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`6
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 14 of 40
`
`
`
`changes, the Services revised the regulatory text governing the listing inquiry by
`
`removing the phrase “without reference to possible economic or other impacts of
`
`such determination” from 50 C.F.R. § 424.11(b) (2018). The Services explained that
`
`this change aligns the regulatory text with the statutory language of 16 U.S.C. §
`
`1533(b)(1)(A) and, in limited circumstances, allows the collection and presentation
`
`of economic information to the public.
`
`Second, the Services codified the framework for assessing “foreseeable future”
`
`as used in 50 C.F.R. § 424.11(d). A threatened species is statutorily defined as “any
`
`species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
`
`future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” 16 U.S.C. § 1532(20)
`
`(emphasis added). Because there is no statutory definition of “foreseeable future,”
`
`the Services historically have determined its meaning on a case-by-case basis using
`
`guidance issued by the Department of the Interior Office of the Solicitor.4 The
`
`Services’ revision codifies the case-by-case approach and provides that, in
`
`undertaking this assessment, “[t]he term foreseeable future extends only so far into
`
`the future as the Services can reasonably determine that both the future threats
`
`and the species’ responses to those threats are likely” and that the Services “need
`
`not identify the foreseeable future in terms of a specific period of time.” 50 C.F.R. §
`
`424.11(d).
`
`
`4 See Department of the Interior, Office of Solicitor’s 2009 “M-opinion” on
`foreseeable future. 84 Fed. Reg. at 45026.
`
`7
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 15 of 40
`
`
`
`Third, the Services clarified the factors and criteria for delisting a species. 50
`
`C.F.R. § 424.11(e). As relevant here, the Services made clear that the standards for
`
`listing and delisting are the same, i.e., the five enumerated statutory factors in 16
`
`U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1). 83 Fed. Reg. at 35196. The Services also made a number of
`
`changes to address previous regulatory language—that species should be delisted
`
`when they no longer meet the definition of an endangered or threatened species. Id.
`
`For example, the term “recovery” was removed as one of the bases for delisting to
`
`convey that the analysis is based on whether the species meets the definition of an
`
`endangered or threatened species in 16 U.S.C. § 1532 (6), (20). 83 Fed. Reg. 35196.
`
`Fourth, with respect to designating critical habitat, the Services revised 50
`
`C.F.R. § 424.12(a)(1) to set forth a non-exhaustive list of circumstances in which the
`
`Services may find it “not prudent” to designate critical habitat, as contemplated in
`
`16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(3)(A) (commonly referred to as “not prudent” determinations),
`
`83 Fed. Reg. at 35196-97. The Services also explained that they will make “not
`
`prudent” determinations clearer and more transparent by basing them on whether
`
`particular circumstances are present, rather than a determination of whether it is
`
`“beneficial” to a species. The Services thus removed the prior regulatory
`
`language—“would not be beneficial to the species”—from 50 C.F.R. §
`
`424.12(a)(1)(ii). 83 Fed. Reg. at 35197; 84 Fed. Reg. at 45040.
`
`Fifth, the Service revised the procedure and criteria for designating
`
`unoccupied critical habitat. 84 Fed. Reg. 45053. The revisions establish a sequence
`
`under which the Services “first evaluate areas occupied by the species” and then
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`8
`Motion for Voluntary Remand, Case. No. 4:19-cv-05206
`
`
`
`Case 4:19-cv-05206-JST Document 146 Filed 12/10/21 Page 16 of 40
`
`
`
`turn to consideration of unoccupied habitat.