A coalition of Utah and Colorado environmental groups claims federal agencies ignored science in reversing a decision to list a Utah plant as a threatened species.

The groups filed suit Tuesday in Federal District Court in Denver to overturn a decision to deny Endangered Species Act protection to a wildflower they say is threatened by energy development in the Uinta Basin.

Graham's penstemon was first considered for protection in 1975 when the Smithsonian Institution drafted the initial list of threatened plants. The plant is part of the snapdragon family and grows only on oil shale outcrops in northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado.

According to Tony Frates, of the Utah Native Plant Society, the group filed a petition to have the plant listed in 2002. Four years later, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to list the plant, but reversed itself 11 months later in the face of opposition from the Bureau of Land Management. Both agencies are part of the Department of Interior.

Through a lawsuit that forced the BLM to release documents relating to the plant's listing, the environmental coalition obtained evidence showing the BLM had created a "No Listing Team" and a "penstemon strike team" to prevent the plant from being listed.

One document, sent to a BLM employee from George Diwachak of the Utah BLM on Feb. 6, 2006, had "Penstemon 'No Listing' Team" in its subject line.

"We have reason to believe that [former U.S. Interior Secretary] Gale Norton was directly involved in instructing the BLM to find reasons not to list this species," said Frates. "That is improper interference. Their job is to evaluate scientific evidence."

The BLM's Mary Wilson said Wednesday the agency does not comment on ongoing litigation.

Laura Romin, assistant field supervisor for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service office in Salt Lake City, said her agency had not seen the lawsuit so she could not comment. But she said the service first issued a proposed listing rule on the penstemon in 2006 based on a court order. The Fish and Wildlife Service then gathered public comment and additional information from the BLM about oil shale development.

"Based on that information, we determined that the species did not need to be listed at that time," she said. "The information we received was that the potential for oil development was out in the future and that we were not sure if it was economically viable."

Tuesday's lawsuit was filed by the Center for Native Ecosystems, the Utah Native Plant Society, Colorado Native Plant Society and Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, which are represented by Earthjustice in Denver.

wharton@sltrib.com