Sierra Club v. United
States Army Corps of Engineers case brief
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
701 F.2d 1011 (2d Cir
1983)
CASE SYNOPSIS: Defendant
Army Corps of Engineers and defendant Federal Highway Administration
appealed the judgment of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, which enjoined further construction of
a highway project because of violations of the National Environmental
Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Rivers and Harbors
Appropriations Act of 1899. Plaintiff Sierra Club and affiliates
cross appealed.
FACTS: Plaintiff Sierra Club and affiliates challenged the federal approval of a Hudson River landfill project in connection with a proposed highway. Plaintiffs contended that defendant Army Corps of Engineers (corps) and defendant Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) made inadequate investigations and disclosures concerning the environmental impact of the project. The court found that defendants failed to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C.S. § 4332(2)(C), which required full disclosure of the environmental impact on fishery resources. Thus, the court agreed with the district court's decision to set aside the landfill permit until an adequate environmental impact statement (EIS) was made and assessed by the Council on Environmental Quality. The district court's ruling that defendant corps also violated the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.S. § 1344, was also supported by the record. However, the court reversed the Rivers and Harbors Act claims, 33 U.S.C.S. § 403 (1976), because a private right of action was not available. The court recommended that defendants prepare a supplemental EIS for the fisheries issue only, to be reviewed administratively.
CONCLUSION: The court held that defendant Federal Highway Administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and that defendant Army Corps of Engineers violated the NEPA and the Clean Water Act. Defendants were ordered to reconsider the environmental impact of the proposed landfill on fisheries and prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement.
FACTS: Plaintiff Sierra Club and affiliates challenged the federal approval of a Hudson River landfill project in connection with a proposed highway. Plaintiffs contended that defendant Army Corps of Engineers (corps) and defendant Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) made inadequate investigations and disclosures concerning the environmental impact of the project. The court found that defendants failed to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C.S. § 4332(2)(C), which required full disclosure of the environmental impact on fishery resources. Thus, the court agreed with the district court's decision to set aside the landfill permit until an adequate environmental impact statement (EIS) was made and assessed by the Council on Environmental Quality. The district court's ruling that defendant corps also violated the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.S. § 1344, was also supported by the record. However, the court reversed the Rivers and Harbors Act claims, 33 U.S.C.S. § 403 (1976), because a private right of action was not available. The court recommended that defendants prepare a supplemental EIS for the fisheries issue only, to be reviewed administratively.
CONCLUSION: The court held that defendant Federal Highway Administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and that defendant Army Corps of Engineers violated the NEPA and the Clean Water Act. Defendants were ordered to reconsider the environmental impact of the proposed landfill on fisheries and prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment