## Facts

- The National Park Service (NPS) managed winter motorized access in Yellowstone National Park, Grand Teton National Park, and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway.
- Beginning in 1997, NPS initiated NEPA review to consider phasing out recreational snowmobiles in the parks.
- In April 2000, before issuance of a final EIS and record of decision (ROD), the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks issued a memorandum directing NPS to prohibit snowmobiles and made public statements strongly criticizing snowmobile use.
- NPS issued a 2000 Final EIS and 2000 ROD selecting an alternative that phased out snowmobiles in favor of snowcoach transportation.
- NPS implemented that choice in a January 2001 final rule providing for elimination of recreational snowmobile use over multiple seasons while allowing snowcoaches.
- After a change in presidential administration, NPS stayed implementation and issued a later EIS/ROD allowing capped snowmobile use with mitigation measures, but a federal district court in the District of Columbia vacated that later decision, which reinstated the 2001 snowmobile phaseout rule.
- Snowmobile manufacturers, user groups, and allied plaintiffs filed suit under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in the District of Wyoming, challenging the 2000 EIS, 2000 ROD, and 2001 rule as violating NEPA.

## Issues

1. Whether NPS complied with NEPA by taking a legally adequate “hard look” at the environmental impacts of substituting snowcoach use for snowmobiles in the 2000 Final EIS and 2000 ROD supporting the 2001 rule.
2. Whether the NEPA process was unlawfully tainted by predetermination because senior Interior officials directed a snowmobile ban before completion of NEPA review.

## Decision

- The court held that the 2000 Final EIS and 2000 ROD failed NEPA’s “hard look” requirement regarding the impacts of increased snowcoach use.
- The court found the decisionmaking process reflected predetermination, undermining NEPA’s requirement of objective environmental review before committing to an outcome.
- The court set aside the 2000 Final EIS, the 2000 ROD, and the 2001 rule as arbitrary and capricious under the APA and inconsistent with NEPA.
- The matter was remanded to the agency for further proceedings consistent with NEPA.

## Legal Principles

- NEPA is primarily procedural: an agency must evaluate and disclose environmental consequences and reasonable alternatives before making an irreversible commitment to a course of action.
- An EIS must provide a reasoned, evidence-based analysis; conclusory assertions and unsupported assumptions about an alternative’s environmental benefits are insufficient.
- Under the APA, agency action may be vacated as arbitrary and capricious where the agency fails to engage in reasoned decisionmaking or does not comply with required NEPA procedures.
- Predetermination violates NEPA when the agency effectively commits to a result before completing NEPA review, rendering the environmental analysis a post hoc justification rather than an objective evaluation.

## Conclusion

The court invalidated NPS’s snowmobile phaseout rule for NEPA violations, concluding that NPS inadequately analyzed the environmental consequences of increased snowcoach use and that senior-level direction to ban snowmobiles before completing NEPA review improperly skewed the decisionmaking process.


Int'l Snowmobile Mfrs. Ass'n v. Norton, 340 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (D. Wyo. 2004)