ELR Citation: ELR 20571
No(s). 73-C-9-R (W.D. Va. Apr 2, 1973)

Projects authorized under the Flood Control Act of 1946 must meet the cost-benefit criteria specified for that Act by Congress, but need not meet the more stringent demands of NEPA. The "NEPA cost-benefit ratio" is to be used only to enable the court and other decisionmakers to determine whether all environmental factors of a project have received adequate consideration. The court holds that the Corps of Engineers was not in error in deciding to proceed with construction of a dam, but acted in good faith on the basis of sufficient information. The court requires, however, a supplementary impact statement setting out more fully the rationale of the Corps' decision. Plaintiff environmentalists' motion for a permanent injunction against construction of the dam is denied.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Stanley E. Sacks
Girard C. Larkin
Sacks, Sacks and Tavss
405 F&M National Bank Bldg.
Norfolk, VA 23510

Counsel for Plaintiff-Intervenors
Gladys Kessler
Berlin, Roisman & Kessler
1712 N Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036

Counsel for Defendants
Sumner Brown
Department of the Army
Norfolk District, Corps of Engineers
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510

Paul R. Thomson, Jr. Assistant U.S. Attorney
Western District of Virginia
Roanoke, VA