AquAlliance v. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

The federal district court for the Eastern District of California concluded that federal claims challenging a project allowing sellers upstream of the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta (Delta) to transfer water to buyers south of the Delta from 2020 through 2024 were moot. The court previously <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/aqualliance-v-us-bureau-reclamation/">held</a> that review of an earlier iteration of the project did not comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, including because it failed to consider the impacts of climate change on the project, and also found violations of the Endangered Species Act and the California Quality Act (CEQA). In the challenge to the 2020–2024 program, the court agreed with the federal defendants that it could no longer grant permanent injunctive relief because the project had concluded. The court further concluded that no exceptions to mootness applied. First, the court found that there was no indication that the environmental impact statement—despite any “continued validity” as a CEQA document—would have preclusive effect on future federal action. Second, the court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish that the exception for actions capable of repetition yet evading review would apply. Although the plaintiffs argued that the defendants “repeatedly failed to adequately assess climate change impacts,” the court found that the climate change issues raised here were not the same or substantially similar to the issues raised in the earlier litigation. The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal.