Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Flint Ridge Dev. Co. v. Scenic Rivers Ass'n of Okla.

Citation: 6 ELR 20528
No. Nos. 75-510, -545, 426 U.S. 776/8 ERC 2137/(U.S., 06/24/1976) Rev'd

In a challenge to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for allowing a disclosure statement required by the Interstate Land Sales Disclosure Act to become effective without first filing an environmental impact statement, the Supreme Court holds that NEPA's impact statement requirement is inapplicable whenever a "clear and unavoidable conflict" between the requirements of NEPA and another statute occurs. Moreover, HUD's action on the disclosure statement is not a "major federal action significantly affecting the human environment" because HUD has no "ability to react to the environmental consequences" of the disclosure. Absent incompleteness in the statement, the Secretary of HUD has no discretion to extend the 30-day time period after which disclosure statements automatically become effective. The court of appeals decision, 5 ELR 20536, is reversed.

Counsel for Plaintiff Scenic Rivers Association of Oklahoma
Andrew T. Dalton, Jr.
2536 East 51st St.
Tulsa OK 74105
(918) 742-0068

Counsel for Defendant-Intervenor Flint Ridge Development Company
Thomas C. Watson
Edwin Kronfeld
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius
1800 M St. NW
Washington DC 20036
(202) 466-2300

F. Paul Thieman, Jr.
Crowe & Thieman
5800 E. Skelly Drive
Tulsa OK 74135
(918) 622-4222

Counsel for Federal Defendant
Robert H. Bork, Solicitor General
Howard E. Shapiro
Department of Justice
Washington DC 20530
(202) 739-2201

Marshall, J. for a unanimous Court.

MR. JUSTICE POWELL took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.