McGlone v. Inaba
Citation: 12 ELR 20338
No. No. 6374, 636 P.2d 158/64 Haw. 27, (Haw., 11/13/1981)
The Supreme Court of Hawaii affirms the lower court's decision upholding the Bureau of Land and Natural Resources' (BLNR's) approval of the construction of underground utilities on the Paiko Lagoon Wildlife Sanctuary and its determination that the proposed activity was exempt from preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the state EIS regulations. Initially, the court rules that the lower court did not err in refusing to allow appellants and their expert witnesses to testify before it since judicial review of an agency decision is confined to the administrative record.In addition, the lower court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants' request to transcribe the testimony given by their expert witnesses at the BLNR hearing and to designate such testimony as part of the record since the request was untimely. Turning to the merits, the court rules that the BLNR's conclusion that the proposed construction would probably not have a significant effect on the sanctuary, and was, therefore, exempt from preparation of an EIS under the EIS regulations, was not clearly erroneous. There was ample evidence to support the BLNR's finding that the effect of the proposed construction of underground utilities on the sanctuary would be minimal and temporary. In addition, the court rules that the record does not clearly support appellants' contention that the secondary impacts of the project will be significant.
Counsel for Appellants
Jack F. Schweigert
Schweigert & Associates
Suite 200, 250 S. Hotel St., Honolulu HI 96813
Boyce R. Brown Jr.
Brown & Bettencourt
130 Merchant St., Honolulu HI 96813
Counsel for Appellees
Izumi & Tanaka
333 S. Queen St., Honolulu HI 96813
Edwin P. Watson, Deputy Attorney General
State Capitol, Honolulu HI 96813
Before RICHARDSON, C.J., and OGATA, MENOR, LUM and NAKAMURA, JJ.