ELR Citation: ELR 20056
No(s). 73-1062 (8th Cir. Nov 26, 1973)

The court affirms a lower court's ruling that the EIS for a highway segment meets the requirements of NEPA even though it was initially prepared by the state highway commission. The fact that the statement was reviewed, modified, and adopted as its own by the Federal Highway Administration distinguishes this case from other decisions ruling that delegation by a federal agency of EIS preparation represents an abdication of the agency's responsibility under NEPA. This conclusion is reinforced by Department of Transportation PPM 90-1, which specifically provides for the type of delegation, review, and modification involved in this case. The court also notes that since the segment in question represents the only gap in an otherwise completed interstate highway and must run through farmland that has no particular features of environmental interest, the EIS' discussion of alternatives and their environmental consequences may properly be brief.

A dissent argues that NEPA specifically mandates that FHwA prepare the EIS, and that biased assumptions toward environmental values may be incorporated into the EIS by the state highway commission and defy modification at the later stages of review. For the district court's decision see 3 ELR 20013.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Robert B. Scism
Scalise, Scism, Gentry, Brick & Brick
Ninth Floor, Fleming Building
Des Moines, IA 50309

Counsel for Defendants
Allen L. Donielson U.S. Attorney
Keith E. Uhl Asst. U.S. Attorney
113 U.S. Courthouse
Des Moines, IA 50309

Asher E. Schroeder Asst. Attorney General
State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319