Supreme Court Reviews NEPA Scope in Utah Railway Permitting Case

The Facts -

Supreme Court to Decide on Environmental Considerations for Proposed Utah Railway

The debate over environmental accountability in large infrastructure projects has reached the Supreme Court, where justices will determine the extent to which federal environmental reviews should assess indirect impacts. At the center of this legal battle is the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado case, implicating the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the context of a proposed railway project in Utah.

The proposed 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway could potentially quadruple oil production in the Uinta Basin by connecting its oil fields to the national rail network and delivering crude to refineries on the Gulf Coast. A key issue raised in the Supreme Court involves whether upstream and downstream environmental repercussions are relevant in federal assessments. The railway developers and Utah counties argue that such indirect impacts lie beyond the purview of NEPA reviews.

Background

In 2021, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) approved the rail line after producing a comprehensive 3,600-page environmental impact statement in accordance with NEPA. The STB's evaluation included potential effects on water resources, air quality, and local economies, among other factors. Despite this, environmental groups filed lawsuits, contending that the agency's analysis failed to address risks of accidents far from the site and emissions in "environmental justice communities" on the Gulf Coast.

A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel supported the plaintiffs, asserting that the STB must assess indirect impacts, even if they are challenging to predict or outside the agency's control. The ruling also cited violations of the Endangered Species Act and the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act by the STB. The ruling has sparked concerns about the limits of NEPA's reach.

Court Rulings Regarding NEPA

The Supreme Court has a precedent of limiting the scope of NEPA reviews, such as in the 2004 Department of Transportation v. Public Citizen case, where it decided that agencies should only consider impacts that are directly related to their statutory authority. Additionally, in 2020, the Court permitted the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, although legal delays eventually led to the project's cancellation. Such litigation processes can take an average of 4.2 years, adding to the time required to secure federal permits and potentially stalling economic developments.

Other examples include a Montana coal mine permit being struck down over failure to consider climate impacts in Asia, and a Nebraska electric transmission line being stalled for a decade due to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife permit issue. These instances highlight the contentious nature of NEPA's application and its impact on project timelines.

---
Read More USA Works News