Center for Bio Diversity v. NHTSA (Climate Change Dec 2007)
In this Expert Commentary, Dustin Till of the Marten Law Group examines the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ landmark decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which arose out of challenges to new automobile fuel efficiency standards (also known as CAFE standards) for light trucks and SUVs developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In that case, the court held, for the first time, that federal agencies must assess carbon dioxide emissions and other climate change impacts in environmental review documents prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). After providing background information on the case, Mr. Till analyzes the NEPA issues and the issues surrounding the CAFE standards. He also discusses the impacts of the court’s decision on federal agencies and projects requiring federal approvals or permits, and suggests that these impacts may also extend to state, local, and private development projects that are subject to state environmental review statutes.
“In most [National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)] cases,’’ Mr. Till writes, “the court would remand the matter to the agency to determine whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) should be prepared. [In this case], however, the Ninth Circuit took the unusual step of ordering NHTSA to prepare an EIS assessing carbon dioxide emissions attributable to the new standards, as well as the actual environmental effects associated with climate change. … In light of the Ninth Circuit’s emphatic declaration that the ‘impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change is precisely the kind of cumulative impact analysis that NEPA requires agencies to conduct,’ agencies will be hard pressed to avoid evaluating climate change impacts for a broad range of projects requiring federal approvals or permits, such as energy facilities and transmission lines, casinos, landfills, mines, and transportation projects. The Court’s holding also suggests that simply quantifying emissions and comparing them to a baseline is insufficient.”
See the full text of the commentary at Marten Law Group on Center for Bio Diversity v. NHTSA