The Supreme Court recently heard a significant case affecting the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado. The case concerns the permitting of a railroad project in Utah that would transport oil from the Uintah Basin and potentially quadruple oil production. The 138-mile Uinta Basin Railroad will connect the oil fields of northeastern Utah to the nearly 100-mile national rail system along the Colorado River and reach refineries on the Gulf Coast. According to The Hill, the question is whether and when upstream and downstream environmental impacts should be considered as part of the federal environmental review. The company that operates the railroad and the Utah group appealed the lower court’s decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that these indirect effects are beyond the scope of federal review.
background
This case concerns railroads to support oil exploration and mineral extraction. In 2021, the federal Water Transportation Board (STB) released a 3,600-page environmental impact statement to comply with NEPA and approved the rail line. NEPA requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of projects within their authority. Any major initiative that is managed, regulated, or authorized by the federal government must undergo a NEPA evaluation. This evaluation can span several years and frequently exposes the project to legal challenges.
The STB analyzed the railroad’s potential impacts on local water resources, air quality, protected species, recreation, the local economy, the Ute Indian Tribe, and other factors. But environmental groups are concerned about how rail could affect the risk of accidents on connecting lines hundreds of miles away, as well as emissions from increased oil transportation in “environmental justice communities” on the Gulf Coast. They sued the agency for failing to adequately assess the amount. , among other possible drawbacks.
According to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, “A panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the plaintiffs and ruled that upstream lines and We have told the STB that downstream impacts need to be taken into account.” This includes the impact of oil shipments on Gulf Coast refiners and their contribution to climate change. ” The appeals court’s decision found that the federal STB violated the Endangered Species Act and the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act when it permitted the project.
The editorial board also explained that lower court judges in the D.C. and Ninth Circuits ignored past Supreme Court decisions and imposed arbitrary licensing requirements with no restrictive principles. The STB has no authority over Gulf Coast refiners and cannot prevent climate change.
Court rulings regarding NEPA
The Supreme Court has heard other related cases, most recently in 2004’s Department of Transportation v. the People, holding that government agencies do not have to consider indirect and unforeseen impacts. In this case, the Supreme Court held that government agencies only have “statutory authority” to analyze environmental impacts that have a “reasonably close causal relationship” that could be prevented.
In 2020, the Supreme Court gave the green light for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline permit after nearly seven years of litigation, but the pipeline was scrapped after legal delays significantly increased the cost of the project. NEPA challenges take an average of 4.2 years to litigate, and obtaining a federal permit takes an additional four or more years. These delays hinder investment in new projects and slow U.S. job creation and economic expansion.
A judge has revoked a permit for a coal mine in Montana, saying the federal agency failed to consider the climate impacts of burning coal in Asia. Additionally, a 325-mile transmission line in Nebraska has been on permit hold for 10 years after a lower court invalidated the U.S. Fish and Wildlife permit.
conclusion
The Supreme Court is taking up cases over the scope of federal environmental law (NEPA) regarding railroad tracks for the transportation of oil. In this case, a lower court agreed with an environmental group challenging the government’s approval of a railroad construction permit. This case helps resolve the question of what should be considered when determining potential environmental damage. Congress recognizes that NEPA needs reform, as delays over litigation have halted projects and significantly increased costs, and continues to debate how to make federal permitting easier and faster. are. But until that reform happens, Supreme Court justices need to govern NEPA’s environmental limits so that needed projects can move forward in the United States.
