Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Environmental Defense Fund v. Coastside Water Dist.

Citation: 2 ELR 20593
No. No. 1 Civil 31455, 27 Cal. App. 3d 695/4 ERC 1573/104 Cal. Rptr. 197, (Cal. Ct. App., 09/12/1972) Requiring supplemental EIR

A court has the authority and the duty to consider the adequacy of an environmental impact report prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and may enjoin a project until the report covering it is deemed adequate by the court. The strong statement of public policy in the Act, the demand therein for a report, and the lack of grant of power to local planning agencies to make binding decisions on the sufficiency of the reports lead to the conclusion that it is a judicial function to consider the sufficiency of a filed EIR as an informative document, though not to pass on the validity of the conclusions expressed in the EIR.The EIR filed for the Coastside County Water District project, designed to increase the supply of water to an area along the California coast, is insufficient in two respects: First, it does not clearly disclose the integrated nature of the project, but deals only vaguely with one part of it. Second, the EIR fails to mention the objections of qualified experts.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Thomas J. Graff Regional Counsel
Environmental Defense Fund
2728 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, California 94704

Counsel for Defendants
Thomas M. Jenkins
John J. Vlahos
David J. Miller
Hanson, Bridgett, Marcus & Jenkins
Citizens Building
One Kearny Street
San Francisco, California 94108

Counsel for Intervenor, State of California
Evelle J. Younger Attorney General
Donatus Januta Deputy Attorney General
6000 State Building
San Francisco, California