In Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colo.; No. 23-975, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal agencies conducting environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) should take a more limited view of the impacts a project has on the environment.
The case centered on an environmental impact statement (EIS) for 88 miles of railroad track in Utah. The Court of Appeals had ruled that the EIS was insufficient because it failed to evaluate remote environmental impacts that were out of the agency’s control. In this instance, the EIS allegedly failed to adequately address the impact of the new track on Gulf Coast communities that refine fuel the new trains might use.
AGC’s coalition amicus brief urged the Supreme Court to reverse the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. AGC believed that this case was particularly significant for the construction industry, as the potential ripple effects of the D.C. Circuit’s ruling could set a dangerous precedent, forcing agencies to evaluate environmental impacts far beyond their regulatory scope, creating unnecessary hurdles for construction projects across the country.
Following oral arguments on April 23, the court ruled 8-0 that NEPA does not require such expansive review. For more information or to discuss how this ruling might impact your project, please contact Spencer Phillips.