Environmental impact assessment laws are an area of particular expertise, and clients across the country count on us to help navigate federal environmental review proceedings under the National Environmental Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, and other statutes, as well as counterpart state environmental laws such as the California Environmental Quality Act.
Unlike most law firms, our clients include a full range of stakeholders: local and state agencies; private project proponents; Indian tribes and tribal businesses; territorial governments; non-governmental organizations; and sectoral coalitions. We have successfully guided some of the nation’s largest and most complex transportation and infrastructure projects through environmental review and permitting processes. And our attorneys have also helped secure important protections for ecological and historic resources of national importance, including matters of first impression in both the D.C. and Ninth Circuits. Our team understands the importance of tailoring our counsel to the specific perspectives, interests, and responsibilities of each of our clients, and the breadth and depth of our experience allows us to provide the specialized advice necessary for informed, timely, and strategic decision-making.
Consistent with that approach, we help clients address potential impacts to a full range of ecological, historic, and social resources, in contexts ranging from urban centers to wilderness. Our substantive expertise extends across environmental media, and including air quality, water, noise, historic and cultural resources, threatened and endangered species, environmental justice, wetlands, coastal resources, and climate, among others.
Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. Semonite, 916 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2019). NEPA and NHPA litigation challenging Army Corps of Engineers projects on Virginia’s James River, including the first successful NHPA Section 110(f) claim in the 40-year history of the statute.
Zepplin v. FHWA, 305 F. Supp. 3d 1189 (D. Colo. 2018); Sierra Club v. FHWA, 2018 US Dist. Lexis 56243 (D. Colo. 2018). Defended $1.2 billion I-70 highway improvement project against NEPA challenge; defeated preliminary injunction motion and secured dismissal of NEPA claims.
City of Phoenix v. Huerta, 869 F.3d 963 (D.C. Cir. 2017). Represented the City of Phoenix in successful NEPA, NHPA, and Section 4(f) challenge to FAA flight procedures.
Coalition to Make Art Smart v. FTA, 843 F.3d 886 (10th Cir. 2016). Defended approval of Albuquerque Bus Rapid Transit project on Route 66 against NEPA and NHPA claims, including defeating multiple requests for emergency injunctive relief in both the district court and the Tenth Circuit.
Rags Over the Ark. River, Inc. v. BLM, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 324 (D. Colo. Jan. 2, 2015) Successful defense of permitting for controversial landscape-scale public art project on BLM land.
River Runners for Wilderness v. Martin, 574 F.3d 723 (9th Cir. 2009): Represented outdoor recreation association in successful defense of permit allocation and management prescriptions for the Colorado River through Grand Canyon National Park