ELR Citation: 50 ELR 20216
No(s). 3:20CV00045 (W.D. Va. Sep 11, 2020) (Jones, J.)

A district court denied environmental groups' motion to preliminarily enjoin or stay a rule issued by CEQ revising the regulations for federal agencies to follow in implementing NEPA. The groups argued that the rule was inconsistent with NEPA because, among other things, it improperly removed the requirements that agencies consider cumulative and indirect impacts on the environment and evaluate all reasonable alternatives, CEQ failed to adequately consider relevant factors during the rulemaking process, and the agency failed to provide a plausible explanation for its changes. CEQ contended the groups' claims failed for lack of ripeness and standing, arguing that they could not establish irreparable injury without subsequent agency action, that the agency's interpretations of the Act were entitled to deference, and that the rulemaking process adhered to the APA because CEQ properly assessed the environmental impacts of the rule and provided reasonable explanations for the revisions. The court found that while the groups may ultimately succeed in the suit, they failed to make a clear showing at this point that they were likely to succeed on the merits. It therefore denied their motion to preliminarily enjoin or stay the rule.