Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE)

Quotes from the judge’s order (emphasis added):

The challenged lease term for the expanded Rice’s whale area only arose in a July 2023 district court filing and then appeared in the FNOS for Lease Sale 261 on August 25, 2023—one month before the statutory deadline for the sale. BOEM failed to follow its own procedures by making significant changes to the FNOS, thereby depriving both affected states and the public the opportunity for meaningful review and comment. The procedural error is particularly grave here, because of both the compressed timeline and BOEM’s inexplicable about-face on the scientific record it had previously developed. (p.19)

The challenged provisions inserted into these leases at the eleventh hour, and the acreage withdrawal, are based only on an unexplained change in position by BOEM on a single study a few months after that supplemental EIS. The process followed here looks more like a weaponization of the Endangered Species Act than the collaborative, reasoned approach prescribed by the applicable laws and regulations. (p.22).

According to an affidavit from Shell’s commercial manager, the new restrictions on vessel traffic apply to an area of the northern Gulf that separates Shell’s existing offshore leases from the onshore infrastructure that supports them. Shell Offshore Inc., No. 2:23-cv-1167, at doc. 4, att. 2, ¶¶ 23–27. (p. 23).

Given the shaky justification offered by BOEM, the court cannot find that the challenged provisions are so necessary that withholding them even on a preliminary basis will outweigh the risk of irreparable economic harm shown by plaintiffs. Additionally, “there is generally no public interest in the perpetuation of unlawful agency action.” (p. 26)