ELR Citation: ELR 20217
No(s). 00-1230 (7th Cir. Oct 18, 2000)

The court affirms a district court decision that the U.S. Forest Service did not need to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement (EIS) before adopting the policies and procedural rules that excluded certain types of categorical exclusions (CEs) for timber harvests from the National Environmental Policy Act's (NEPA's) EA and EIS requirements. The court first holds that the groups challenging the CE rules have standing to sue and that the challenge is ripe for review. The groups presented detailed information as to how their interests are affected by the CE rule, and they need not wait to challenge a specific project because their grievance is with the overall plan. The court next holds that the Forest Service did not need to conduct a formal EA before promulgating the CEs. The action creating the CEs is more like an implementing procedure than a major federal action of the type requiring an EA or an EIS. The creation of the CEs is an agency procedure. The CEs are not proposed actions, they are categories of actions for which an EA or an EIS has been deemed unnecessary.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Matthew G. Kenna
Kenna & Hickcox
1300 Meadow Rd., Durango CO 81301
(970) 385-6941

Counsel for Defendants
Robert H. Oakley
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Before Bauer and Manion, JJ.