ELR Citation: ELR 20845
No(s). 71-644 (N.D. Ala. Sep 11, 1973)

The court grants summary judgment against the U.S. Soil Conservation Service and enjoins a stream channelization project in Alabama because the agency failed to file an adequate environmental impact statement. The EIS filed by the Service did not set forth the physical characteristics of the project, nor adequately examine benefit and cost factors, nor describe and consider available alternatives. In addition, the agency employed arbitrarily unrealistic interest rate and project life figures when computing costs and benefits, and the court has a duty to review such substantive agency decisions that affect the cost-benefit ratio, especially where, as here, that ratio is near unity. The Service also failed to follow its own departmental regulations, which state that a stream channel project may be implemented only if it has "minor or no known adverse effect on the environment" and a clearly favorable cost-benefit ratio, since the EIS lists six adverse environmental effects that are not minor and the ratio is clearly not favorable.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Robert R. Reid
Allan Poppleton
Bradley, Arrant, Rose & White
1500 Brown-Marx Building
Birmingham, AL 35203

Counsel for Defendants
William C. Sherrer U.S. Attorney
William D. Mallard Asst. U.S. Attorney
Room 276
Federal Courthouse
Birmingham, AL 35203

George F. Wooten
Dixon, Wooten & Boyett
223 West North Street
Talladega, AL 35160