Segregation of Lands for Renewable Energy Use
DeVry University
MGMT520
Legal, Political, and Ethical Dimensions of Business
The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, mandates that the Department of the Interior (DOI) agency the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to managed public land resources for a variety of uses, “such as energy development, livestock grazing, recreation, and timber harvesting, while protecting a wide array of natural, cultural, and historical resources.” (Management, 2012) According to the existing regulations, lands proposed for exchange or sale can be closed to the filing of mining claims. The BLM was tasks to issuing a regulation that will facilitate “43 CFR part 2800, Rights-of-Way (ROW) Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C.1701 et seq.) FLPMA, to allow temporary segregation of public land from operation of public land laws including the mining laws, within the applications for lands with wind and solar energy development potential.” (Segregation of Land Renewable Energy, 1994)
On April 26, 2011 (76 FR 23230), the BLM proposed to amended was completed, the agency’s segregation regulations allowed temporary segregation of lands from operation of the public Land Law and the Mining Law of 1872. This regulation effected public lands that are included in a ROW application and potential land identified by the BLM for Solar Energy generation (SEG) uses. The BLM provided that purpose of such segregation were to promote the orderly administration of the public lands. The land will be segregated for a period up to two years from the date of publication of the notice. Lands under this rule will not be subject to valid existing rights, but would remain open under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (MLA) and the Material Act of 1947 (Materials Act). Federal Notice Register (FR Doc. 2013-10180) As a member of the public, I am proud of the BLM for the exceptional job that they undertake, in managing the public land for future generation enjoyment. Even though I understand the need for this proposal, at the same time I am not completely in agreement with the intent of the two years segregation. According to the Federal Notice Register (2013-10019) the BLM will consider any comment made within the 60 days period from date of publication April 30, 2011 to June 27, 2011. The BLM manages 245 million acres of lands, which includes withdrawal lands. My concern is that this rule could significantly interfere with lands that are use for recreational purposes such as hiking, off road riding, hunting, shooting etc. The BLM should consider withdrawing sections of lands that are not uses for recreation or mining purposes to be use for renewable energy mandates. These lands can be lands that are available for disposal. Disposable land, per BLM regulations are lands that are identified by the BLM as uneconomical and difficult to manage. (Stuart, 1988) So, why did the BLM not considered using these lands for renewable energy purposes? According to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1964 as stated in the Public Law and Legal Environment of Business a federal agency is require to response to keep the public informed of their organization, procedures and rules. Agencies should provide a timeframe for public participation in the rulemaking process; establish uniform standards for the conduct of formal rulemaking, informal, hybrid and adjudication. Agencies should also and always define the scope of judicial review. (Browne, 2015) If this proposal passes the public has the right to challenge an agency rule showing that it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or in violation of another law. This is usually applied to the informal rulemaking process, which requires that the agency show evidence to support the proposed rule. A second theory to challenge the agency’s regulation is part of the informal rulemaking process which could proved that the agency did not abide by the rules set forth by the APA requirements of public comments, notice of the propose regulations and publication. The third theory that could challenge the agency’s regulation could be that the evidence provided by the agency does not support the agency regulations. According to the judicial review of rule making (Browne, 2015), the fourth theories that could challenge the agency’s regulation is stating that the “regulation is unconstitutional because it was too vague and not limited.” The fifth theories to challenge an agency would be the process of hybrid rulemaking, which requires that the agency “give notice of the propose regulation a set period for public comments, hold a public hearing, and have cost-benefit analysis done by an independent executive agency.” The best way to challenge the regulation set by the DOI agency the BLM will be applied but the used of the hybrid rulemaking theory. I would challenge the fact that the BLM did not show sufficient evidence of a cost-benefit analysis done by an independent party. The propose regulations provide that BLM will identify lands to temporarily segregate from appropriation under public land laws and the mining laws and that such segregations is to promote the orderly administration of the public land. This proposal does not allowed the BLM to segregate lands that is previously under a ROW application. The rules did not explains the method in which these lands will be review or how the BLM will make the final decision on which section of the public land made be uses for renewable energy development. My suggestion is that the BLM consider the use of withdrawals mandates and use disposable lands for renewable energy development.
Works Cited
Browne. (2015). The Legal Environment of Business . In B. A. M. Neil Browne, A critical Thinking Approach (Vol. seventh). Upper Saddle River, new jersey : Pearson.
Energy, S. o.
Management, B. o. (2012, 01 26). The Bureau of Land management who we are, what we do. (B. o. Management, Editor, & D. o. Interior, Producer) Retrieved from www.blm.gov.
Segregation of Land Renewable Energy. (1994, 09 13). (O. o. Register, Producer) Retrieved 03 11, 2015, from Federal Register: www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/04/26/2011-10019/segregation-of-land Stuart, J. M. (1988, September). Opportunity and Challenge the Story of BLM. Retrieved from www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/blm/history/chap1.htm: http://www.nps.gov 