Renew 81 for All v. Federal Highway Administration

The federal district court for the Northern District of New York denied a motion for a preliminary injunction to block the Interstate 81 Viaduct Project in Syracuse. The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish irreparable harm or a likelihood of success on the merits, and also concluded that the balance of hardships and public interest weighed against injunctive relief. Regarding the merits of the plaintiffs’ arguments under the National Environmental Policy Act, the court found, among other things, that the plaintiffs were unlikely to establish that the Federal Highway Administration’s review of greenhouse gas emissions was arbitrary or capricious. The plaintiffs had argued that the environmental impact statement (EIS) “illogically predicted” that greenhouse gas emissions from the selected “Community Grid” alternative would be lower than emissions from other alternatives. The court noted that the EIS’s analysis had considered both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle speed, in conjunction with predicted shifts in traffic, and that the traffic model used for the EIS analysis included all areas where major traffic shifts would be expected.