THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA Lighthouse Resources Inc.; Lighthouse Case No. -CV-______ Products, LLC; LHR Infrastructure, LLC; LHR Coal, LLC; and Millennium Bulk Terminals-Longview, LLC, COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiffs, v. Jay Inslee, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Washington; Maia Bellon, in her official capacity as Director of the Washington Department of Ecology; and Hilary S. Franz, in her official capacity as Commissioner of Public Lands, Defendants. INTRODUCTION . From the framing of the Constitution, the federal government has enjoyed supreme authority to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. . In giving the federal government this authority, the Constitution necessarily prohibits individual states from discriminating against, or unreasonably burdening the free flow of, such commerce. . Plaintiff Lighthouse Resources Inc. and its subsidiaries are filing this action because the Defendants are actively preventing coal mined in other states from moving in foreign and interstate commerce. 1 . In particular, the Defendants have unreasonably delayed and denied a number of permits and approvals for a port facility that would enable the export of coal to U.S. allies and trading partners in Asia. . Those Asian trading partners want the United States to help them meet their coal demands. They have specifically identified coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana as having ideal characteristics, including for the next generation of high efficiency, low emissions coal-fired power plants. . The United States, which possesses the largest coal reserves in the world, wants to supply coal to its Asian allies, and is aggressively pursuing a national policy that facilitates coal exports to Asia. . Lighthouse Resources Inc. (Lighthouse) and its subsidiaries are working to meet Asian coal demand. They have already contracted for delivery of coal to customers in Asia. But Lighthouse cannot address Asian demand or fulfill its contracts with Asian customers unless additional economic coal export capacity opens on the West Coast. . To address this capacity deficit, one of Lighthouse’s subsidiaries is proposing a new coal export facility at the existing Millennium Bulk Terminal in Longview, Washington. That facility would directly generate numerous jobs, grow tax revenues for state and local governments, attract further investment, and support thousands of additional jobs throughout the country. . The Defendants oppose coal exports on policy grounds. So they have unreasonably delayed and denied a number of permits and approvals needed to construct 2 the proposed new coal export facility at the Millennium Bulk Terminal. And they have ceased processing other pending permits for the proposed facility, without basis in law. . The Defendants’ delays and denials are not consistent with normal permitting procedures. They have, among other things, improperly expanded the scope of their environmental review, arbitrarily and capriciously declined to approve a sublease, and illegally refused to grant a Clean Water Act section water quality certification based on alleged effects that are exclusively within federal jurisdiction. . The Defendants’ actions have both the intent and effect of discriminating against and unduly burdening foreign and interstate commerce, in violation of the United States Constitution’s dormant commerce clause, the federal ICC Termination Act, and the federal Ports and Waterways Safety Act. JURISDICTION AND VENUE . This Court has jurisdiction under U.S.C. §§ and and U.S.C. § because this controversy arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and involves the deprivation, under state law, of rights and privileges secured by the United States Constitution and acts of Congress. . This Court also has jurisdiction pursuant to its inherent equitable powers to enforce federal law and to enjoin state actions that are preempted by federal law. . The requested relief is proper under U.S.C. §§ and . . Venue is proper under U.S.C. § (b)( ) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this district. 3 PARTIES . Lighthouse is a privately held company headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. Lighthouse’s wholly owned subsidiary companies include the parent company of entities owning or leasing coal mining rights, and operating two coal mines (one in Montana and one in Wyoming); the parent company of entities that have proposed to develop port facilities in Oregon and Washington to export coal from Wyoming, Montana, Utah, and Colorado, including the company that has proposed an export terminal in Longview, Washington; and an entity that contracts with rail carriers, ports, and customers in Asian markets for delivery of coal and is currently seeking additional port capacity to export coal through terminals with economic access to foreign markets.1 . LHR Coal, LLC (LHR Coal) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lighthouse. LHR Coal, through its subsidiaries, is in the business of owning and operating upstream production and mining assets, including coal mines. LHR Coal’s subsidiaries own or lease coal mining rights, coal loading and rail infrastructure, and operate existing coal mines in Montana and Wyoming. . LHR Infrastructure, LLC (LHR Infrastructure) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lighthouse. LHR Infrastructure, through its subsidiaries, is in the business of identifying and developing infrastructure projects, including coal export facilities, to connect downstream demand to upstream supply. LHR Infrastructure’s subsidiaries own or lease 1 Lighthouse was previously known as Ambre Energy North America, Inc. In , Ambre Energy North America, Inc. separated from its Australian parent company, Ambre Energy Limited, when it recapitalized. Ambre Energy North America, Inc. announced that it had changed its name to Lighthouse Resources, Inc. in April . 4 assets to develop marine terminals for transloading bulk products, including coal, from rail to marine vessels. . Millennium Bulk Terminals-Longview, LLC (MBT Longview) is a wholly owned subsidiary of LHR Infrastructure and operates an existing bulk product marine terminal in Longview, Washington. MBT Longview has proposed a coal export terminal at that site to receive coal from Lighthouse and other third party customers for loading and shipment to customers in northeast Asia, presently including Japan and South Korea. . Lighthouse Products, LLC (LHP) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lighthouse. LHP markets, sells, and delivers products to its customers. It is in the business of supplying Lighthouse products to meet downstream demand. LHP delivers coal mined by LHR Coal subsidiaries in Montana and Wyoming to Asian customers at the point of sale, which is usually free-on-board (FOB) an ocean-going vessel at a coal export terminal on the Pacific Coast. . Jay Inslee is the current governor of the state of Washington, an office he assumed in January . He is being sued in his official capacity. . Maia Bellon is the current director of the Washington Department of Ecology. She has served in that role since she was appointed by Governor Inslee in February . She is being sued in her official capacity. . Hilary S. Franz is the current Washington Commissioner of Public Lands. She was elected to that position in November and sworn in on January , . She is being sued in her official capacity. 5 FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. Asian demand for coal . The top five coal-importing countries in the world are located in Asia. Together these countries accounted for % of global coal imports in . . Japan and South Korea, both of which are among the world’s top five coal importers, have each signed the Paris Accords. . Despite having the largest coal reserves in the world, the United States has historically supplied less than five percent of Asia’s demand for imported thermal coal. The United States accordingly has pursued a policy of facilitating coal exports to Asia. . Japan in particular has limited domestic energy resources.2 Following the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, Japan imports more than % of its primary energy. . Japan is installing new, clean coal plant technologies to meet environmental targets.3 Overall, “Japanese companies plan to develop about additional coal power plants, adding more than GW of capacity in the next decade.”4 . Japan has specifically identified Powder River Basin (PRB) coal from the United States as having the quality characteristics that are desirable for Japan’s next generation of high efficiency, low emissions coal-fired power plants.5 2 Limited land mass limits Japan’s options. The Footprint of Energy: Land of U.S. Electricity Production, STRATA (June ), https://www.strata.org/pdf/ /footprints-full.pdf. 3 See METI, Clean Coal Technology in Japan (Sept. 6, 2017), http://www.jcoal.or.jp/event/upload/15.%20Clean%20Coal%20Technology%20in%20Japan.pdf. 4 Japan: Overview, U.S. ENERGY INFO. ADMIN. (Feb. , ), https://www.eia.gov/beta/international/analysis.cfm?iso=JPN. 5 Yoshiyuki Wakabayashi, Clean Coal Technologies for IGCC Power Plants,MITSUBISHI HITACHI POWER SYSTEMS (Sept. , ), 6 . South Korea—the world’s ninth-largest energy consumer in —lacks domestic energy reserves, making it one of the top energy importers in the world. . In recent years, South Korea has also scaled