ELR Citation: ELR 20165
No(s). 93-332-BR (D. Or. Sep 15, 1993)

The court holds that the General Services Administration (GSA) did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for its proposal to build a federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon. GSA prepared an environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for the project. The court first holds that plaintiffs have standing, because they claim injuries allegedly resulting from violations of NEPA's procedural requirements that might be shown to be interrelated with natural or physical impacts flowing from a major federal action. The court dismisses defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under NEPA, because plaintiffs conceivably could prove that the economic and social effects they allege will result from construction of the courthouse are interrelated casually with natural physical effects on the environment and present a potentially significant environmental impact not adequately addressed by the EA or FONSI. The court holds that the city of Portland has waived its right to litigate issues relating to increased automobile congestion, city noise, alteration of the "city-scape," and destruction of a building eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, because it failed to object during GSA's scoping process and preparation of the EA. The court notes that if the city had not waived its right to litigate these issues, the court would have deferred to GSA.

Turning to defendants' motion for summary judgment, the court holds that no genuine issues of material fact exist, and that plaintiffs have not identified any environmental interest with which their interest in low-income housing and the alleviation of homelessness is interrelated. Homelessness and reduction in low-income housing resulting from construction of the courthouse, issues that plaintiffs contend GSA should have addressed in an EIS, are not natural or physical effects on the environment covered by NEPA. Those consequences of demolition, such as noise, dust, disposal of debris, that are natural or physical effects on the environment, have been considered adequately in GSA's ESA. Also, GSA identified and took the requisite "hard look" at the environmental consequences of the proposed federal courthouse, and it acted within its discretion in rejecting low-income housing and homelessness as bases on which to require preparation of an EIS.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
James Coon
Royce, Swanson, Thomas & Coon
621 SW Morrison St., Ste. 900, Portland OR 97205
(503) 228-5222

Counsel for Defendants
Thomas Lee, Ass't U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney's Office
888 SW Fifth Ave., Ste. 1000, Portland OR 97204
(503) 727-1000