Endangered Species Law & Policy

On March 18, three advocacy organizations and their members filed a lawsuit challenging an offshore wind project against the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The lawsuit alleges that the Biological Opinion (BiOp) issued by NMFS for Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because it fails to adequately analyze the project's impacts on the endangered North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis). … 

On February 29, 2024, the federal District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed a challenge to eleven incidental take authorizations (ITAs) issued for offshore wind projects off the coasts of New York and New Jersey in the case of Save Long Beach Island v. United States Department of Commerce. The challenged ITAs had been issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in 2022 and 2023 pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. § 1361 et seq. The Plaintiffs also challenged five pending applications for ITAs that had not yet been issued at the time they ...

On November 13, two advocacy organizations submitted a notice of intent to sue the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). The notice letter alleges that the September 18, 2023 Biological Opinion (BiOp) issued by NMFS for the Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) project violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA) because it fails to adequately analyze and mitigate the project's impacts on the endangered North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis). … 

On May 17, 2023, the federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted summary judgment in favor of the United States Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and Vineyard Wind and denied summary judgment to the plaintiffs in the case of Nantucket Residents Against Turbines v. U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 21-cv-11390 (Talwani, J.). This is the first federal court decision upholding, on the merits, the federal government’s approval of a commercial-scale offshore wind project. There are three other cases pending that also seek to block the construction ...

In the last few weeks, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has published several major regulatory actions affecting federal avian protections.  The Service has repealed a Trump-era rule that excluded incidental take from liability under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), issued guidance for enforcement of the MBTA against incidental take, and invited comment on a potential MBTA permitting program.  Separately, the Service has invited comment on ways to improve its existing permitting program for the incidental take of eagles (Eagle Permit Program). … 

On January 7, 2021, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) published a final rule limiting the scope of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)’s prohibition on the take of migratory birds. The new rule excludes incidental take, meaning bird mortality that results from an action but is not the purpose of that action. 

This rule is the culmination of Trump Administration efforts that began shortly after it took office to reverse prior agency policy and limit the scope of the MBTA. The rule does not take effect until February 6, 2021 and so may be suspended by the incoming Biden ...

If you were unable to attend our recent webinar, “The New NEPA Regulations: A Practical Guide to What You Need to Know,” please check out the recording of our on-demand webinar, which can be accessed here. Additionally, we invite you to download the compilation of our eAlert series on the NEPA rewrite here.

Nossaman will continue to monitor litigation and other regulatory developments regarding NEPA in 2021 as we transition into a new Administration. Please stay tuned to our blog and subscribe to our mailing lists here in order to receive the latest updates on NEPA and other issues ...

In September 2020, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) enacted new regulations that set forth procedures federal agencies are to utilize when implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Numerous commentaries published on the subject have either adopted a Chicken Little approach (i.e., sky is falling) to describing the changes, or an overly optimistic assessment of their likely implications for proponents of federal actions subjected to environmental review.

In order to understand these changes, please join our Environment and Land Use Group on ...

The Eno Center for Transportation published a two-part article in the Eno Transportation Weekly that focuses on the potential implications of the changes proposed by the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) modifying the regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), with particular emphasis on federal surface transportation programs. 

The article examines whether, at least for surface transportation programs, the changes to the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) proposed revisions are as dramatic as reported.  We posit that ...

On January 10, 2020, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) proposed amendments to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing regulations.  The Proposed Rule would represent the first significant overhaul of CEQ’s NEPA regulations in more than 40 years.

The changes in the Proposed Rule are substantial and numerous. 

While the stated purpose of the changes is to facilitate more effective and timely environmental review of federal agency actions, the practical impact of the proposed changes is far from clear.  Below, we focus on some of the more significant ...