Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond isn’t the only one to go to court against the proposed $4 billion aluminum smelter at Inola.
Four residents near the smelter filed a federal lawsuit on Friday in a bid to stop the U.S. Energy Department from funding the Oklahoma Primary Aluminum smelter project at the Port of Inola. The four, who live in Rogers County, claim in their legal filing that the Energy Department never carried out a site-specific environmental review that is required before supporting the project.
The suit was filed in the Northern District of Oklahoma and named Energy Secretary Chris Wright and the Department of Energy as defendants. Drummond’s lawsuit was filed last month in Rogers County District Court before it was moved by the defendants to federal court in Tulsa. The Attorney General recently filed a motion asking to have the lawsuit returned to Rogers County Court.
The $4 billion smelter, which developers say would produce more than 750,000 metric tons of aluminum annually, has been promoted by federal and state officials as a major economic development and national security win for Oklahoma. It’s being developed by Oklahoma Primary Aluminum, a joint venture 60% owned by Emirates Global Aluminum of the United Arab Emirates and 40% owned by Century Aluminum.
In a weekend report, The Oklahoman identified the four who filed suit as Brian Hill, whose home sits about 370 feet from the proposed site, Julie Sanders, who lives about 1.6 miles away, Timothy Brown, who lives about 1.8 miles away, and Samuel Bethea, whose property and cabin sit less than half a mile from the plant footprint.
Their lawsuit attempts to require the federal agency to complete a sitespecific environmental review before any public funding is made toward construction. The suit also contends that construction and operation of the smelter would expose them “to increased noise, lighting, truck traffic, exhaust, dust, industrial emissions, accident risks and potential effects on water resources.”
As The Oklahoman reported, the lawsuit challenges the timing and scope of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) review under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing the agency approved and continued supporting the project before it knew, or should have known, where the plant would be built and what it would actually look like. It alleges that “Phase 1 and construction of the smelter were connected parts of one proposed action,” and “the authorized site selection, design, equipment, procurement and infrastructure work existed to advance the construction project and had no substantial purpose or independent utility apart from that project.”
Plaintiffs allege that DOE never conducted or published a NEPA review specific to the Inola site reflecting those changes, but instead treated distinct phases of a single connected project as though they required separate, narrower reviews in a practice known in environmental law as “segmentation.”
“DOE made those findings while the project state remained (to be determined), before DOE publicly identified the community, watershed, airshed, neighboring residences, wetlands, wildlife resources, tribal and cultural resources, power system, transportation corridors or other site-specific conditions,” the filing reads.
Emirates Global Aluminum didn’t respond to a request for comment by press deadline Friday, Aug. 28.
Fluoride emissions could be nearly eight times higher than south Missouri smelter, lawsuit states
Plaintiffs are asking the court for both a preliminary and a permanent injunction barring DOE from authorizing, obligating, disbursing, reimbursing or otherwise approving federal funds for later project phases or for what the complaint describes as “irreversible site work,” including land clearing, grading, foundation work, permanent road and utility construction and orders for longlead equipment.
Also outlined in the complaint are environmental concerns tied to the project’s air emissions. Citing an outside expert’s analysis, plaintiff representation alleges that under realistic operating conditions, the smelter’s hydrogen fluoride emissions could exceed 1,000 tons annually.
According to the EPA’s National Emissions Inventory, Magnitude 7 Metals, which plans to restart its primary aluminum smelter in Marston, Missouri, that shut down in 2024 before the end of this year, represents the highest annual emissions in the U.S. at 131 tons per year from existing aluminum plants.
Additionally, the suit raises concerns about particulate matter, water demand, traffic, noise, effects on nearby hay and cattle operations, declining property values and impact on wildlife.
DOE involvement in the project dates to 2024, when the agency selected Century Aluminum for negotiations over federal support. In January 2025, DOE and Century executed a cooperative agreement that outlined a potential federal cost share of up to $500 million. The complaint contends that DOE has continued to make federal support available and has backed site-specific engineering, permitting and early planning work at Inola without having first completed the environmental review the plaintiffs say the law requires.
Oklahoma officials have cited more than $750 million in state and local subsidies tied to the smelter.
The project has support at the executive level in both state and federal government. President Donald Trump has backed the smelter as part of a push to expand manufacturing domestically. Mike Mazzei, who recently defeated Attorney General Gentner Drummond in the Republican runoff for governor, has also voiced support for the project and aligned himself with the administration’s backing.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed Friday are seeking court intervention before a possible groundbreaking later this year. No hearing date has been set as of yet, according to court records.
