Advertisement

May 20, 2013

Federal Court Approves Plan to Drill Off Alaska's North Shore

On May 25, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued adecision upholding the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) approval of Shell Oil Company’s plan for exploratory drilling in Alaska’s Chukchi Sea. Two Alaskan Inupiat groups and ten environmental groups, including Greenpeace and the Sierra Club, brought the appeal challenging BOEM’s August 2011 approval of the drilling plans. The environmental groups claimed that BOEM erred in approving the plan because (1) the plan did not adequately inform BOEM about its oil spill response plan, and (2) the seven-paragraph description of the well-capping stack and the containment systems was incomplete. However, the court deferred to BOEM’s technical expertise in evaluating the adequacy of the oil spill response plan and found that BOEM had complied with applicable statutes and regulations in approving the plan.

The court’s deference to BOEM’s approval of well-capping technology is significant because it opens a gateway through which other drilling efforts in the Arctic can get approval. Well-capping, the same technology that BP used in containing the Deepwater Horizon spill, had never before been approved for use in Alaska or in Arctic drilling conditions. The opinion also marks a victory for Shell, which has been trying to get approval for the exploratory drilling project since 2005, when Shell purchased a lease portion in Alaska’s continental shelf from the Minerals Management Service.

Other appeals are still pending in the Ninth Circuit, including one challenging the approval of federal air quality permits for the project. Unless that litigation disrupts the project, the Chukchi Sea drilling operations will commence early next month.

From Chelsae Johansen, summer associate, of GT Tampa:

©2013 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Caleb J. Holmes is an associate in Greenberg Traurig's Litigation and Environmental Groups.

215.988.7877

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.