Concerned Citizens on I-190 v. Secretary of Transp.
Citation: 11 ELR 20087
No. Nos. 80-1497, -1498, 641 F.2d 1/15 ERC 2113/(1st Cir., 02/09/1981)
Affirming the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction to halt further construction of a portion of Interstate 190 in Massachusetts, the First Circuit Court of Appeals rules that the environmental impact statement (EIS) adequately discussed the potential dangers to Boston's drinking water supply posed by the construction. The court holds that the EIS explicitly discussed the highway construction's impact on water quality, taking into account the source and magnitude of danger, as well as possible mitigation measures. Furthermore, due to the highly speculative nature of future growth patterns, the EIS satisfactorily discussed the highway's impact on secondary development. The court also holds that a supplemental EIS is not necessary where additional mitigation measures are later implemented which actually reduce the project's overall adverse impacts. Applying a rule of reason, the court next finds no reversible error in the lower court's holding that the public hearings sufficiently recognized and discussed the environmental effects of the proposed construction. The court concludes that the lower court properly rejected appellants' claim that appellee erred in determining that the project did not involve publicly owned recreation lands.
Counsel for Appellants
David F. Cavers Jr., Katherine Hendricks, Stephen D. Anderson
Palmer & Dodge
One Beacon St., Boston MA 02108
Counsel for Appellee
Charles K. Mone, Ass't U.S. Attorney; Edward F. Harrington, U.S. Attorney
1107 John W. McCormack P.O. & Cthse., Boston MA 02109
Francis X. Bellotti, Attorney General; Edward F. Vena, Special Ass't Attorney General
One Ashburton Pl., Boston MA 02108
Before Coffin, Bownes, and Hoffman,* JJ.