ELR Citation: 52 ELR 20062
No(s). 19-3629 (RC) (D.D.C. May 24, 2022) (Contreras, J.)

A district court granted in part and denied in part summary judgment for environmental groups in a challenge to the National Park Service's (NPS') policy directive instructing park superintendents to allow e-bikes in areas where traditional bikes were used, and subsequent rule amending NPS regulations to address e-bikes. The groups brought claims under the APA, NEPA, Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA), and Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The court found that the rule did not violate the APA because NPS addressed key concerns raised during the comment period; that while the directive violated the FVRA, the rule was "an independently reached new decision on the same substantive topic," and thus not an improper ratification of the directive; and that the e-bike group was an advisory committee within the meaning of FACA, but the connection between the Act and the rule was too tenuous. It did, however, find the directive's application of a categorical exclusion was inappropriate, and that the rule's reliance on the fact that NEPA analysis had already been "required" by the directive was a "false justification for a continuing NEPA violation." It granted summary judgment for the groups with respect to the NEPA claim, denied summary judgment as to the other claims, and remanded without vacatur to NPS.