ELR Citation: ELR 20021
No(s). 06-1776 (D.D.C. Jan 8, 2008)

A district court dismissed an environmental group's claim that the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the Transportation Act in approving an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a new transportation project designed to improve commuting between downtown Cincinnati and its east-lying suburbs. The project called for a new bridge across the Little Miami River. The FHwA did not run afoul of the law by failing to assess a second option—one that involved the expansion of an existing river crossing—in the EIS. The agency made a determination on the basis of accurate information in the record that the second option does not meet the purpose and need of the project, and this determination was not arbitrary or capricious. In addition, the price of gasoline used for the economic modeling of the EIS did not inflate the economic benefits of the project. Nor did its use give insufficient weight to environmental factors. And the FHwA's determination that the planned crossing of the Little Miami River will not constitute a “use” of the river under the Transportation Act was not arbitrary or capricious.