Montana

Montana failed to consider pollution from new power plant, but Supreme Court won't stop it • Daily Montanan

Published

1 year ago

January 4, 2025

Montana failed to consider pollution from new power plant, but Supreme Court won't stop it • Daily Montanan

In a years-long fight to stop a power plant near Laurel from releasing the pollution equivalent of 167,000 cars per year, the Montana Supreme Court decided unanimously that both the state’s Department of Environmental Quality as well as NorthWestern Energy had skirted the state’s environmental law by refusing to acknowledge or take action on the greenhouse gases released by the power plant. But the decision will do little to stop the already-operational power plant.

The ruling will now force the DEQ to go back and fully analyze the pollution impacts of the 18 methane-combustion generators, and report the effects that greenhouse gases and industrial lighting will have on the environment.

However, the Montana Supreme Court orders will do nothing to stop or change the operations — at least not immediately — or halt any of the pollution the two environmental groups proved will happen.

Owing to a unique set of circumstances and unconstitutional laws passed by the Montana Legislature and struck down later, the Montana Supreme Court said that because the DEQ was following the law at the time, and because the environmental groups did not ask the district court judge to halt the operational permit for the Laurel Generation Station, it will be allowed to operate under its current permit, even though the justices acknowledged that state government, including the DEQ and the governor, have a constitutionally mandated obligation to protect the environment from harm.

The ruling was cheered by NorthWestern Energy, the state largest public utility company, as it noted the plant was running to provide energy to customers in the state’s largest county even as the forecast called for as much as 10 inches of snow during the weekend.

“Today’s Montana Supreme Court’s decision reinstating the Yellowstone County Generating Station permit will help ensure reliable energy service and keep bills as low as possible for our customers. This is good news for Montanans already relying on the critical, cost-saving capacity of the 175-megawatt Yellowstone County Generating Station, including for power during this first winter storm of 2025,” said NWE spokeswoman Jo Dee Black.

The successful environmental groups cheered the ruling as a reinforcement of the Montana Constitutional mandate that requires a “clean and healthful environment,” but noted the ruling will have little effect on the substantial air pollution that neither NorthWestern or DEQ denies the plant will produce.

“We are pleased that the Montana Supreme Court has ruled that Montanans deserve to know the full harm that the 770,000 tons of annual climate pollution NorthWestern Energy’s power plant will impose on our farmers, ranchers, economy, and health,” said Edward Barta, chair of Northern Plains Resource Council, one of the two groups that brought the lawsuit. “However, we are disappointed that NorthWestern’s dangerous plant is allowed to continue operations without any accountability for the state ignoring our constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. It’s time for DEQ to take its job seriously so that everyday Montanans are not sacrificing their health and livelihoods for one corporation’s profits.”

The Sierra Club was the other organization that challenged the Laurel Generation Station.

The Supreme Court order, authored by Justice Beth Baker, said that despite the Legislature’s attempt to gut the Montana Environmental Policy Act, it can’t avoid the constitution’s mandate. Furthermore, it said that even though the plant is operational, the DEQ must go through and analyze, and even possibly require mitigation in the future.

What was not in dispute is the amount of greenhouse gases and other pollutants the Laurel Generation State will produce, and the court outlined those:

75 tons of Particulate Matter 10
28 tons of Particulate Matter 2.5
222 tons per year of nitrogen oxides
246 tons per year of carbon monoxide
215 tons per year of volatile organic compounds
14 tons per year of sulfur dioxide
93 tons of hazardous air pollutants
The equivalent of 769,706 of carbon dioxide

The Montana Supreme Court also said that while the Montana Environmental Policy Act does not allow the DEQ to necessarily stop the construction of a power plant like the one in Laurel, it said that a thorough analysis of its effects must be studied and disclosed to the public. Moreover, depending on the results of those analyses, the DEQ could require changes to design or apply other parts of state law to stop or mitigate pollution:

“The district court observed — and DEQ does not disagree — that the agency ‘did not take any sort of look at the impacts’ of the Laurel Generation Station’s greenhouse gas emissions within Montana. A review under the Montana Environmental Policy Act must, among other things, identify ‘any adverse effects on Montana’s environment that cannot be avoided if the proposal is implemented.’ One purpose of the environmental assessment is to ‘avert potential environmental harms through informed decision making.’ As we have observed, ‘MEPA’s procedural mechanisms help bring the Montana Constitution’s lofty goals into reality by enabling fully informed and considered decision making, thereby minimizing the risk of irreversible mistakes depriving Montanans of a clean and healthful environment … The state does not have a ‘free pass to pollute the Montana environment just because the rest of the world insists on doing so.’”

The Supreme Court also said that the DEQ or other state officials cannot rely solely on federal standards for pollution because of the state’s constitutional requirement of a clean and healthful environment.

“Federal standards tell the people of Montana little or nothing about any potential impact of the greenhouse gas emissions of the Laurel Generation State specifically, and do not satisfy the Montana Environmental Policy Act’s role in fulling ‘the strongest environmental protection provision found in any state constitution,’” the ruling said.

It also said that even if the state DEQ will not stop a proposed project like the Laurel Generation Station, that it has an obligation to “identify impacts and acknowledge their significance.”

The court’s opinion also faulted the DEQ for failing to address or respond to hundreds of comments raising concerns about the environmental impact of the plant, noting that the vast majority of the public response to the project was negative, and criticized the department’s silence on the subject of air pollution.

As part of the case, the Supreme Court also found that the DEQ had properly considered the noise impacts of the plant, and reversed District Court Judge Michael Moses’ portion of the ruling, which said the agency had not properly considered it. However, the state’s highest court affirmed that the DEQ did not conduct an adequate review of the possible light pollution from the plant, and its effects on the property owners around it.

The justices ordered the DEQ to conduct an analysis, which could mean the NWE would have to change some lighting around the plant, which sits approximately 300 feet from the banks of the Yellowstone River and nearby the CHS refinery.

Advertisement

One dissenting opinion … sort of

Justice Laurie McKinnon along with Justice Ingrid Gustafson, agreed with the fellow justices, making it unanimous that the Supreme Court found that the state had failed to conduct a proper review under the Montana Environmental Policy Act, and acknowledged the impacts the power plant could have on the environment.

However, they dissented in part, saying that the court’s rationale and findings were undermined by its conclusion to let the plant continue ahead with operations, despite the fact that none of the parties disputed the pollution it would create.

“Alarmingly, and in contravention of clear precedent, the remedy the court chooses to do is nothing. The court allows the Laurel Generation Station to continue with its environmental harm and remands so that public may be informed of what it already knew — the consequential impact on its community from LGS’s emission of greenhouse gases,” the dissent said. “The only relief that can ensure the public is not irreparably harmed is to prevent the Laurel Generation Station from becoming operational until adequate Montana Environmental Policy Act review is completed. Our decision is empty and will be meaningless to the Montanans who want and believe the plant should be evaluated for its greenhouse gases before it becomes operational.”

LGS plant SupCo 010325

Source link

Click to comment

Montana

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

Published

3 hours ago

March 11, 2026

Press Room

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

State

Zip Code

Country

Source link

Montana

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

Published

16 hours ago

March 10, 2026

Press Room

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

HELENA — On Monday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the City of Helena claiming the municipality is not in compliance with the state’s law banning “sanctuary cities.” The letter comes just under a month after the State of Montana launched an investigation into a city resolution on Helena Police policy and Helena’s involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

In the letter, Knudsen laid out the ways he believes the city’s resolution violated state law. The attorney general gave Helena 15 days to respond or reverse the policy. If the city does not comply, his office will pursue legal action.

“Helena’s resolution appears to contain blatant violations of this law,” wrote Knudsen.

MTN News

On January 26, 2026, the City of Helena adopted a resolution clarifying when and how the Helena Police Department will cooperate with federal immigration officials. The vote was 4 to 1. The Helena commission seats and the mayor are elected in non-partisan races.

In the letter, Knudsen alleges the resolution established “a broad sanctuary city policy” that seeks to protect every illegal immigrant, regardless of whether the individual had committed a serious crime or not. The state further claims the resolution gives illegal immigrants “special privileges” in plea deals and establishes a “free-for-all policy” where a police officer can request the unmasking of Department of Homeland Security and ICE officers.

Knudsen has requested that the City of Helena, in their response, specifically describe in detail how the resolution complies with Montana law, provide emails and correspondence from city staff and the commission regarding the resolution.

Helena City manager Alana Lake told MTN in a statement: “The City of Helena is aware of the issues being raised by the Attorney General’s Office and is reviewing the matter. While we cannot discuss the details of a potential legal issue, the City is committed to transparency and compliance with the law. The City takes these matters seriously and will continue to cooperate with the appropriate authorities while remaining focused on serving our community.”

Passed in 2021, Montana House Bill 200 prohibits a state agency or local government from implementing any policy that prevents employees or departments from communicating with federal agencies regarding immigration or citizenship status for lawful purposes. It also states governments must comply with immigration detainer requests if they are lawfully made.

HB 200 was backed by Republicans and passed with only Republican votes. Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the legislation into law on March 31, 2021.

Passage of the resolution by the Helena City Commission has drawn ire from conservative voices in Montana politics and on the national level.

The resolution said the commission supported the Helena Police Department avoiding “committing its resources to federal action for which it has no authority,” such as entering into an agreement with the federal government to directly enforce immigration laws. Under federal law, immigration enforcement is conducted by federal agencies under the Department of Homeland Security. However, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local governments can voluntarily enter into 287 (g) agreements with the federal government that allow them to enforce immigration laws.

The commission further supported HPD’s policy not to stop, detain, or arrest a person solely on suspected violations of immigration law, including assisting other agencies in an arrest based solely on immigration law.

DEEPER LOOK: Helena has seen a growing debate over ICE and local police involvement

In the resolution, the commission also supported an HPD officer, using their own discretion, requesting the identification and unmasking of a Department of Homeland Security Officer if the HPD officer “feels it will not be interfering with the actions of federal officers exercising their jurisdiction.”

“This adversarial relationship by local law enforcement toward federal officers itself undermines public safety and forces immigration officers to fear for their safety when they are simply carrying out their lawful duties,” wrote Knudsen.

The resolution further supports the City of Helena’s policy not to consider immigration consequences in a plea agreement with a defendant.

The commission also supports the City of Helena not disclosing any sensitive information about any person – including immigration status, sexual orientation, or social security number – except as required by law.

“This is a restriction that directly conflicts with Montana’s prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions, specifically ‘sending to, receiving from, exchanging with, or maintaining for a federal, state, or local government entity information regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status for a lawful purpose,’” the attorney general wrote.

If a government is found to be violating Montana’s law banning “sanctuary cities”, the state could fine them $10,000 every five days, prevent them from receiving new grants from the state, and have their projects with the state re-prioritized. A government in violation can avoid penalties by becoming compliant with the law within 14 days of being notified of the violation.

Read the full letter from the Montana Attorney General to the City of Helena:

Source link

Montana

Dispatches from the Wild: Montana’s wild inheritance at risk | Explore Big Sky

Published

1 day ago

March 10, 2026

Press Room

Dispatches from the Wild: Montana’s wild inheritance at risk | Explore Big Sky

Steve Pearce and the future of the BLM

By Benjamin Alva Polley EBS COLUMNIST

If you care about hunting elk in crisp October air, floating a clear-running river for cutthroat trout, or simply taking your kids camping beneath a sky unspoiled by drill rigs, you should be outraged that Steve Pearce was ever considered to run the Bureau of Land Management.

The BLM is the largest landlord in the West. It oversees nearly 245 million acres of public land—millions of those acres in and around Montana’s most cherished places. This land is the backbone of our elk and mule deer herds, our sage grouse leks, our pronghorn migration routes and our blue-ribbon trout streams. It’s also the stage on which Montana’s hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation economy plays out.

Putting someone with Steve Pearce’s environmental record in charge of that land is like handing your cabin keys to the arsonist who’s always hated it. In the four months since Pearce was first nominated, it emerged that, if confirmed, he and his wife would divest from more than 1,000 oil and gas leases in Oklahoma to address potential conflicts of interest. While some senators strongly support his “active forest management” approach, he still faces opposition from groups alarmed by his record on public land transfers. On March 4, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 11-9 to advance his nomination, despite concerns from conservation groups.

Pearce’s track record is no mystery. He has consistently sided with extractive industries at the expense of wildlife, habitat and public access. He has supported opening more public lands to oil and gas drilling, weakening bedrock environmental safeguards and undermining science-based management. His votes and public statements have signaled again and again that he sees wild country as an obstacle to be overcome, not a legacy to be stewarded.

For Montana, that posture is an existential threat. Our big-game herds rely on intact winter range and unfragmented migration corridors across BLM lands. Aggressive drilling, poorly planned roads and relaxed reclamation standards shred those habitats. Once you carve up a landscape with pads, pipelines and traffic, you don’t get solitude—or mature bull elk—back with the stroke of a pen.

Anglers should be just as alarmed. Headwater streams and riparian corridors on BLM ground are the life support system for native bull trout, cutthroat and wild trout. A BLM director hostile to environmental safeguards is far more likely to greenlight development that increases sediment, degrades water quality and depletes the cold, clean flows our rivers depend on.

If Pearce takes office, outdoor recreation—and the rural economies built around it—will not be spared. In Montana, hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation pump billions of dollars into local businesses, guiding operations, gear shops and main-street cafes. People travel here precisely because of the open space, healthy herds and functioning ecosystems that BLM lands help sustain. When those landscapes are sacrificed to short-term profit, we don’t just lose scenery; we lose jobs, identity and a way of life.

This is not a partisan issue, especially in Montana. Public lands are one of the few things we truly share: ranchers who graze allotments, tribal communities with cultural ties to these places, hunters and anglers who’ve long defended habitat, and families who just want a place to pitch a tent. A BLM director should be a careful, science-driven steward accountable to all Americans—not a politician with a history of dismissing environmental protections as red tape.

Montanans know what’s at stake. We’ve fought bad ideas before—land transfers, giveaway leases, rollbacks to bedrock conservation laws—and we’ve won when we stood together. Steve Pearce’s nomination should have been dead on arrival. The fact that he was even on the list tells us how vigilant we must remain.

Our outrage must translate into action: calling elected officials, packing public hearings, writing letters and voting as if our public lands are on the line. Truly, they are. The BLM needs a director who sees these landscapes the way Montanans do: as sacred ground, not a balance sheet.

Anything less is a betrayal of the wild inheritance we’re supposed to pass on.

Benjamin Alva Polley is a place-based storyteller. His words have been published in Rolling Stone, Esquire, Field & Stream, The Guardian, Men’s Journal, Outside, Popular Science, Sierra, and WWF, among other notable outlets, and are available on his website.