Oregon mining company fails to stop construction of federal power line

The Malheur Mining Company said the transmission line goes straight through its mining claims that sit atop a known gold deposit valued at over half a billion dollars.PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) — A federal judge on Thursday denied an Oregon mining company’s effort to temporarily block a utility company’s ongoing construction of a federally funded power line.“Under this record, I don’t find there’s irreparable harm by not stopping the building of the power line,” said U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, ruling from the bench.The Idaho Power Company began construction on a 300-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line project in late 2024 under the authorization of the Bureau of Land Management. The line will span from Boardman, Oregon, to Hemingway, Idaho, and was first initiated back in 2007.Malheur Mining Company sued the power company and the Bureau of Land Management in July, and in September asked the court for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to stop construction. The mining company contends the line interferes with its staked and active mining claims in Malheur County in southeast Oregon.The mining company said it has spent decades and invested millions to secure and maintain its mining claims and argued the power company is flagrantly violating the terms and conditions of its mineral rights by constructing concrete footings on the land above those claims.“We’re talking about fixed, massive infrastructure that, once built, will be there for many, many years,” said Steve O’Dell, attorney with Marten Law representing the mining company.Immergut, a Donald Trump appointee, questioned whether the mining company had a legal right.“Do you get to stop the whole power grid from being built?” Immergut asked.“It is not MMC’s position that this line should be stopped in its tracks,” O’Dell said. “All we’re seeking to do is work with this court … to find a route that will enable this line to be electrified by the end of 2027, or certainly 2028 … that protects our mining claims.”The mining company acquired the claims in the 1980s, though it has not developed them — which it argued is standard for mineral claims.“It’s within MMC’s rights to be able to hold onto it and decide when to, and if to, develop it,” O’Dell said.Under the Mining Law of 1872, a mining claim isn’t valid until a discovery has been made. Idaho Power argued that, under existing case law, the mining company failed to prove the minerals are capable of being extracted, removed and marketed at a profit.“The capital that goes into these mining projects is amazing,” said Erica Malmen, attorney with Ashurst Perkins Coie representing Idaho Power.The power company also argued that even if Malheur Mining Company had a discovery claim, it does not have exclusive right to the surface, as the Bureau of Land Management owns the land and the minerals until they are extracted.Construction on the power line is ongoing. Idaho Power said approximately 70 miles of wires have been strung, and it expects the line to be energized by late 2027.The power company said the infrastructure impacts only about five acres of the mining company’s 20 acres of claims. Plus, the power company argued if the mining company was serious about developing the claims, it would be further along in the process.As it stands, the mining company has submitted its notice of intent to the Bureau of Land Management. It also has yet to submit an application to the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, a process that often takes years to approve.The mining company argued it is not uncommon for mining claims on public lands to remain undeveloped for decades.“There’s nothing untoward about that,” O’Dell said. “To say we don’t have sufficient data is a difficult pill to swallow.”The two companies told the court they attempted to settle the dispute out of court and agree on an alternate route line, but could not come to a resolution.“Idaho Power put forth a very good faith effort to try to resolve with MMC, but it became clear it would be a never-ending game,” Malmen said, explaining that the mining company staked new claims along suggested alternate routes or proposed routes on unviable land. “Here, the public interest sways in favor of continuance of this regional infrastructure problem that needs to be solved.”The mining company accused Idaho Power of rushing construction before the court could consider its claims.“We don’t think it’s in the public interest for the rule of law to be flouted like this,” O’Dell said.But Immergut agreed with the power company, denying Malheur Mining’s motion for a temporary restraining order.“I think the stronger public interest is in the power lines being built,” Immergut said.Immergut urged the parties to reconsider settlement negotiations.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads