Uinta Railroad Up for Review as Supreme Court Term Begins

Court analysts say a decision on the proposed Uinta Basin railway, coming next year, could have a major impact on the energy industry.

Uinta Railroad Up for Review as Supreme Court Term Begins

The Uinta battle started when a local group, the Seven County Coalition, attempted to build a new 88-mile railway out of the basin to improve crude egress. Railcars are the best option for transporting the Uinta’s waxy crude, which is too thick for typical pipelines. (Source: Shutterstock)

The U.S. Supreme Court begins its fall term on Oct. 7, and its decision on a proposed railway out of the Uinta Basin in Utah could have massive implications for energy infrastructure.

At issue is the environmental impact assessment energy companies must perform when building infrastructure. As the Supreme Court’s brief on the case puts it, the question is if the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) should require “an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.”

In other words, should an environmental impact statement include only the pollution directly caused by a project, or also the pollution caused by the project both upstream and downstream?

YOU’VE REACHED YOUR FREE STORY LIMIT.

Sign Up to Continue Reading for Free.

Gain access to limited free articles, energy news and analysis, exclusive interviews, and newsletters.

No credit card required. You agree to our Privacy Policy.

Comments

Add new comment

This conversation is moderated according to Hart Energy community rules. Please read the rules before joining the discussion. If you’re experiencing any technical problems, please contact our customer care team.

Rich Text Editor, Comment field
原文链接/HartEnergy

Uinta Railroad Up for Review as Supreme Court Term Begins

Court analysts say a decision on the proposed Uinta Basin railway, coming next year, could have a major impact on the energy industry.

The U.S. Supreme Court begins its fall term on Oct. 7, and its decision on a proposed railway out of the Uinta Basin in Utah could have massive implications for energy infrastructure.

At issue is the environmental impact assessment energy companies must perform when building infrastructure. As the Supreme Court’s brief on the case puts it, the question is if the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) should require “an agency to study environmental impacts beyond the proximate effects of the action over which the agency has regulatory authority.”

In other words, should an environmental impact statement include only the pollution directly caused by a project, or also the pollution caused by the project both upstream and downstream?

YOU’VE REACHED YOUR FREE STORY LIMIT.

Sign Up to Continue Reading for Free.

Gain access to limited free articles, energy news and analysis, exclusive interviews, and newsletters.

No credit card required. You agree to our Privacy Policy.

Comments

Add new comment

This conversation is moderated according to Hart Energy community rules. Please read the rules before joining the discussion. If you’re experiencing any technical problems, please contact our customer care team.

Rich Text Editor, Comment field