ELR Citation: 41 ELR 20169
No(s). 09-35551 (9th Cir. May 4, 2011)

The Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision that the Federal Highway Administration's (FHwA's) EIS for a new ferry terminal and highway project through a national forest in Alaska violated NEPA. Improving ferry services using existing resources is a reasonable alternative for improving transportation in the area. The FHwA therefore violated NEPA when it failed to consider this alternative in the final EIS. The FHwA's justifications for not considering the proposed alternative—that it would potentially reduce services elsewhere and increase costs—were arbitrary because all of the alternatives that were considered in the EIS posed the same risks. Any of the "build" alternatives considered in detail in the EIS, including Alaska's preferred alternative to build a new road and terminal, would increase costs for the state and could have the ripple effect of reducing service elsewhere. By failing to examine a viable and reasonable alternative to the proposed project, and by not providing an adequate justification for its omission, the EIS failed to comply with NEPA.