US Supreme Court may limit environmental reviews in Utah rail battle By Reuters

Written by Andrew Chung and John Kruzel

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled on Tuesday to consider how far federal agencies should go in reviewing the environmental impact of projects they regulate in a dispute over a proposed railroad in Utah that has been challenged by environmental groups and the Colorado District.

The court will hear arguments in an appeal by a coalition of seven Utah counties of a lower court decision that halted the project and faulted an environmental impact statement issued by a federal body called the Surface Transportation Board in approving the railroad.

The counties are seeking to build an 88-mile (142 km) rail line in northeastern Utah to connect the sparsely populated Uinta Basin area to the existing freight rail network that will be used primarily for wax transportation.

The case tests the scope of environmental impact studies that federal agencies must conduct under a US law called the National Environmental Policy Act, which was passed in 1970 to prevent environmental damage from major projects.

Companies and environmental groups are closely monitoring the potential impact this issue could have on infrastructure and energy projects.

The Surface Transportation Board, which has regulatory authority over new rail lines, issued an environmental impact statement and approved the coalition’s proposal in 2021.

The dispute centers on the scope of environmental reviews under the relevant law, which requires agencies to examine the “reasonably foreseeable” impacts of a project. Very extensive environmental reviews can add years to the regulatory timeline, compromising the viability of a project and future infrastructure development, according to companies and business groups.

The Center for Biological Diversity and other environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the board’s decision to allow the project, as did Eagle County, Colorado, stating that the project would increase train traffic in its area and double traffic on the existing rail line along the Colorado River.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of the competitors in 2023, concluding that the environmental review did not adequately analyze the impacts of increased oil production in the basin as well as downstream, where the oil would be refined.

Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration supported the rail coalition in the case, as did the state of Utah, and urged the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s ruling.

The law in question, as well as relevant regulations and Supreme Court precedent, “stipulate that the agency is not required to consider every environmental harm that the agency can reasonably anticipate,” the Justice Department said in a memo.

The department added that in approving the railway, the board “drew a reasonable line in declining to conduct a more detailed analysis of the upstream and downstream impacts of oil and gas development.”

Colorado has backed the project’s rivals, with the state saying in a Supreme Court filing that its economy depends on outdoor recreation, and that the rail project “increases the risk of leaks, spills, or railcar accidents directly adjacent to the river’s headwaters.” Colorado River.” Fourteen other states also supported challengers in the case.

Eight of the nine justices will hear arguments in the case. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch withdrew on December 4, a move that came after some Democratic lawmakers urged him to withdraw from the case because businessman Philip Anschutz, the justice’s former legal client, had a “direct financial interest in the outcome.”

A ruling in this case is expected by the end of June.