PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
1. Was the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) Biological Opinion for the Coastal
Virginia Offshore Wind Project (Dominion Wind Project) and its determination of No Jeopardy
arbitrary and capricious and, a clear error in judgment, in violation of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) because the agency disregarded all known and available information about
the aggregate impacts of the Dominion Wind Project and the other 29 planned offshore wind
projects on the North Atlantic Right Whale?
2. Do NMFS’ regulations, which allow the agency to ignore some cumulative impacts on
endangered species in its Section 7 analysis, fall short of NMFS’ obligations under the plain
language of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)?
3. Do Plaintiffs have standing under the Endangered Species Act to pursue their claims?
Read the full support for CFACT’s motion for summary judgment
Or skip ahead to the conclusion:
CFACT asks this Court to hold that the CFACT Plaintiffs have standing to bring their claims and to grant this motion for summary judgment, holding that BOEM’s issuance of the Construction and Operations Plan, based on an unlawful Biological Opinion, and approval of the Dominion Wind Project, because of NMFS’ and BOEM’s failures to consider all known and available information about the cumulative impacts of the 29 other planned wind turbine projects on the highly endangered North Atlantic Right Whale, was arbitrary and capricious and unlawful in violation of the Endangered Species Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.