New Land Appeals Bill Forces 6-Month Decision Window, Overrides Existing Mining and Oil Deadlines

The Expedited Appeals Review Act (EARA) is all about speed when challenging decisions made by the Department of the Interior (DOI). Basically, if you appeal a DOI decision to the Board of Land Appeals (BOLA), EARA creates a new option to request an “expedited review.” If you use this option, BOLA is forced to issue a final decision within six months of your request. However, there’s a procedural twist: this six-month clock can’t end sooner than 18 months after you initially filed the appeal. The main purpose is to put a hard, fast deadline on administrative review for certain land use and resource decisions.

The 'Hurry Up and Wait' Deadline

This bill sets up a complex, dual deadline. Think of it like this: your appeal must wait at least 18 months from the day you filed it, but once you formally ask for the expedited review, BOLA has only six months to wrap it up. This means if you file your request 15 months into the process, BOLA has until month 21 to decide. If you wait until month 25 to file your request, they still have only six months, meaning the decision is due by month 31. This system is designed to prevent appeals from dragging on indefinitely, giving appellants—like a small energy company waiting on a drilling permit decision or a rancher fighting a grazing rights ruling—a clear end date for their administrative battle. These rules apply to both currently pending appeals and new ones filed after EARA becomes law.

The Nuclear Option: Automatic Court Review

Here’s the part that changes the game: If BOLA misses that new, mandated deadline, the bill automatically treats the original DOI decision as a final agency action. Why does this matter? It means the appellant can immediately skip the administrative process and take the case straight to federal court. Even more significantly, the court won't just review whether BOLA acted reasonably; the court must review the entire case de novo (from scratch). Normally, courts give a lot of deference to agency expertise, but this provision, found in Section 2, Subsection (d), strips that deference away if the agency drags its feet. This is a huge incentive for BOLA to hit the deadline, because missing it means losing control of the case and having the DOI’s original decision potentially overturned by a judge reviewing the facts anew.

Overriding Existing Rules of the Road

EARA doesn't just create a new process; it explicitly bulldozes some existing ones. Section 2, Subsection (e) states that this new six-month/18-month deadline takes priority over any conflicting deadlines found in the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. For companies operating in the oil, gas, and mining sectors, this is a significant procedural win, potentially speeding up the resolution of disputes over royalties or reclamation requirements. The trade-off is that BOLA staff will now have to juggle these new, strict deadlines, which could lead to them prioritizing expedited cases and letting standard appeals pile up even higher. For the everyday person with a non-expedited land use appeal, this could mean even longer wait times.