Why there are legal ‘friends’ who want the Uinta railway

Two organizations in support of a controversial railway project that connects the remote Uinta Basin and its vast natural resources to the National Railway line lent their legal support to push toward a favorable U.S. Supreme Court decision.

The American Forestry Resource Council and Western Energy Alliance submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of the petitioners in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition and Uinta Basin Railway, LLC v. Eagle County, Colorado et al.

The foundation led by counsel Ivan London and Grady J. Block prepared and filed the petition on behalf of the two associations, whose forestry products and oil and natural gas members operate on federal lands and are affected by how the federal government conducts National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, analyses. They accuse anti-development groups with using NEPA litigation as a way to delay or halt projects.

“We are really interested in this case because it is the first time in two decades that the Supreme Court has taken up the scope of NEPA. The Supreme Court so rarely takes up a NEPA case it becomes an opportunity to address those issues,” said Kathleen Sgamma, president and chief executive officer of the Western Energy Alliance, serving independent oil and gas producers in the West — including Utah.

“NEPA is a tool to analyze impacts within its authority — greenhouse gasses they have no control. It is a way of using NEPA as a weapon to stop projects,” she said.

Sara Ghafouri, American Forestry Resource Council general counsel, added: “This case presents an opportunity for the court to enforce critical limits on NEPA’s scope and prevent further weaponization of the statute, and to reinforce congressional intent that the responsible development of America’s natural resources is the public interest.”

A proposed freight train fraught with controversy

Since the Uinta Basin Railway project was first pursued as a big-ticket money item under the umbrella of the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, its main commodity has been controversy.

The 85-mile line that is proposed to begin in oil-rich Duchesne County would connect to the National Railway system and provide an alternative to transport oil out of the basin other than the only other economically feasible way — over U.S. 6 to the refineries in Salt Lake and Davis counties.

That route has its its own problems with heavy-duty diesel truck emissions, rollovers, tanker truck spills that block traffic at best or despoil water and the environment at worst.

But critics see the railway as another desperate attempt for Utah to cling to fossil fuels as part of it energy portfolio and as a tradition that has long outlived its time.

Conservation groups say state law was violated when the Utah Community Impact Fund Board granted nearly $28 million in public money to fund the planned railway to ship oil from the Uinta Basin to other states.

The Center for Biological Diversity and Living Rivers filed the lawsuit in federal court in Salt Lake City asserting the movement of money to the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition to facilitate development of the railway was unlawful. The coalition is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear certain aspects of the case following a lower court decision.

As reported in The Colorado Sun, Colorado’s elected officials have been in an uproar given the amount of crude that would pass through their state — as much as 5 billion gallons a year — along a route that in part traces the Colorado River corridor. Eagle County, Colorado, in fact, teamed up with environmental groups in litigation to derail the project.