Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a claim arising under Federal law seeking judicial review of any authorization issued by a Federal agency for a covered project shall be barred unless—

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a claim arising under Federal law seeking judicial review of any authorization issued by a Federal agency for a covered project shall be barred unless—

(A) the action is filed not later than 2 years after the date of publication in the Federal Register of the final record of decision or approval or denial of a permit, unless a shorter time is specified in the Federal law under which judicial review is allowed; and

(B) in the case of an action pertaining to an environmental review conducted under NEPA— (i) the action is filed by a party that submitted a comment during the environmental review; and (ii) any commenter filed a sufficiently detailed comment so as to put the lead agency on notice of the issue on which the party seeks judicial review, or the lead agency did not provide a reasonable opportunity for such a comment on that issue.

The head of a lead agency or participating agency shall consider new information received after the close of a comment period if the information satisfies the requirements under regulations implementing NEPA.

(A) In general The head of a lead agency or participating agency shall consider new information received after the close of a comment period if the information satisfies the requirements under regulations implementing NEPA.

(B) Separate action If Federal law requires the preparation of a supplemental environmental impact statement or other supplemental environmental document, the preparation of such document shall be considered a separate final agency action and the deadline for filing a claim for judicial review of the agency action shall be 2 years after the date on which a notice announcing the final agency action is published in the Federal Register, unless a shorter time is specified in the Federal law under which judicial review is allowed.

(3) Rule of construction Nothing in this subsection creates a right to judicial review or places any limit on filing a claim that a person has violated the terms of an authorization.

In addition to considering any other applicable equitable factors, in any action seeking a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against an agency or a project sponsor in connection with review or authorization of a covered project, the court shall—

(1) consider the potential effects on public health, safety, and the environment, and the potential for significant negative effects on jobs resulting from an order or injunction; and

(2) not presume that the harms described in paragraph (1) are reparable.

Except as provided in subsection (a), nothing in this subchapter affects the reviewability of any final Federal agency action in a court of competent jurisdiction.

Nothing in this subchapter—

(1) supersedes, amends, or modifies any Federal statute or affects the responsibility of any Federal officer to comply with or enforce any statute; or

(2) creates a presumption that a covered project will be approved or favorably reviewed by any agency.

Nothing in this section preempts, limits, or interferes with—

(1) any practice of seeking, considering, or responding to public comment; or

(2) any power, jurisdiction, responsibility, or authority that a Federal, State, or local governmental agency, metropolitan planning organization, Indian tribe, or project sponsor has with respect to carrying out a project or any other provisions of law applicable to any project, plan, or program.

(Pub. L. 114–94, div. D, title XLI, § 41007, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1758.)