Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
statement of meeting the nation's energy crisis. The EIS was narrow in scope,
and focused just on oil and gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico. The Natural
Resources Defense Council, a national environmental advocacy group sued
because the range of alternatives was too narrow. The court agreed with the
Natural Resources Defense Council that alternatives such as developing oil
shale, tar sands, eliminating oil import quotas, and geothermal resources
were appropriate under the broad purpose and need statement. If the
Department of the Interior had been more concise and identified developing
fossil fuel resources in the Gulf of Mexico, such alternatives would not have
been required and the EIS might have been adequate.
3.2.2.3
Isaak Walton League of America
v. Marsh , 655 F.2d 346 (D.C. Cir 1981)
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposed an underlying need at an exist-
ing lock and dam system, for: (1) more capacity at the system, (2) greater
water transportation capacity in the waterways system containing the lock
and dam, and (3) greater safety at the lock and dam. This was a federal action
with potential environmental impacts and an EIS was prepared. The EIS was
challenged by the Isaak Walton League, a national environmental advocacy
organization, because the proposed action was to replace the lock and dam
without consideration of the alternatives: a railroad system to carry cargo,
rehabilitation of the existing system, or management of congestion at the
existing system. The court ruled in the U.S. Army Corps' favor because the
U.S. Army Corps had narrowly defined the purpose and need, which was
their prerogative, and the alternatives identified by the intervener did not
satisfy the stated needs of increased capacity and safety.
3.2.2.4
Methow Valley Citizens Council v. Regional Forester,
833 F.2d 810 (9th Cir. 1987); Reversed Robertson v. Methow Valley
Citizens Council 490 U.S. 109 S.Ct. 1835, 104 L.Ed.2d 351 (1989)
A ski resort in Washington state's North Cascades was proposed by the U.S.
Forest Service on Forest Service land. This was a federal action with poten-
tially significant environmental impacts and thus required an EIS, which
was challenged by a citizens' group. The EIS was upheld in the district court
but the plaintiffs appealed and the Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit agreed to
hear the NEPA-related challenges.
Only one site for the ski resort was analyzed in the EIS, yet the stated pur-
pose and need were for “winter sports opportunity.” The Court of Appeals
ruled that with such a broad purpose and need statement, evaluation of only
one site and only as a downhill ski resort was not a reasonable range of
alternatives. The challenging party offered evidence of other suitable sites
that would readily satisfy the broad need for winter sports opportunities,
yet these were not evaluated in the EIS. Also as suggested by stakeholders,
Search WWH ::




Custom Search