NEPA Complaint Filed: Brent Spence Corridor Project

Announcement of NEPA Complaint

After considering the devastating future and current environmental impacts of the Project, including the disproportionate negative health effects on minority communities from increased air pollution, noise pollution, and flooding, along with the removal of wetlands and forests, and destruction of habitat for endangered species, the Greater Cincinnati Coalition for Transit and Sustainable Development, along with Civic Cincinnati, Ride the Cov, and Queen City Bike, have filed a lawsuit in federal court under the National Environmental Policy Act. The lawsuit, filed October 15, seeks a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be provided for the expansion project.

Click here to access the filed NEPA Complaint on the BSB Corridor Project

Background

In 1969, Congress enacted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  The heart of NEPA is the environmental impact statement (EIS) the statute requires on all major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.  The impact statement must discuss the environmental effects of the federal action it covers and any alternatives to that action.  Sometimes, instead of preparing an EIS, an agency will start by preparing an environmental assessment (EA), the purpose of which is to determine whether or not an EIS is necessary regarding the action – that is, whether the action presents the potential for causing any significant environmental impacts.  If the answer to that question is “no,” then the agency can issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and it does not prepare an EIS.

In May of this year, the Federal Highway Administration issued a FONSI for the Brent Spence Bridge Corridor Project, stating that the project would not result in any significant environmental impacts, and that an EIS regarding the project would not be prepared.  As a result, the “hard look” that an EIS would have required regarding the need for an expansion from 8 traffic lanes to 16 lanes crossing the Ohio River is not being taken.  Similarly, the “hard look” that an EIS would have required regarding consideration and comparison of the project with reasonable alternatives is not taking place.

An EA can never substitute for preparation of an EIS, if the proposed action could significantly affect the environment.  It is the agency’s burden to provide “convincing reasons” why an impact statement is not necessary.  First, did the agency take a “hard look” at the problem, as opposed to bald conclusions, unaided by preliminary investigation?  Second, did the agency identify the relevant areas of environmental concern? Third, as to problems studied and identified, does the agency make a convincing case that the impact is insignificant?

Impacts listed in the SEA

The Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) made in May cites numerous impacts, including:

• 51 acres of land permanently converted to transportation use

• 16 traffic lanes crossing the Ohio River, compared to the present 8 lanes

• About 2.5 acres of impacts to parks, plus temporary impacts

• 24 commercial relocations

• About 2.5 acres of wetlands permanently impacted

• 2 acres of permanent stream impacts

• 90 acres of forested habitat impacts, including on foraging/maternity areas for threatened and endangered bat species

• The Project is likely to adversely affect the Indiana bat

• Increased greenhouse gas emissions will result from increased vehicle miles 

• Increased ozone pollution will result from increased traffic, and Kenton County is currently in nonattainment for ozone

• Increased soot and fine particulate air pollution (PM2.5) will result from increased traffic, and the concentration of  PM2.5 in the area is currently higher than the recently established health standard for PM2.5

• Increased traffic noise will adversely impact over 400 “receptors” who will not be protected by sound barriers because doing so is more costly than the Defendants deem reasonable. 

• Increased stormwater quality and quantity problems will occur in an urban area that already suffers from flooding, basement backups, and sewer system overflows.

• There will be adverse impacts on Lewisburg  Historic District and Longworth Hall Historic Building

How you can help

We want to bring people together from around the city, and especially those communities most affected,  and say that we deserve a better solution to the Brent Spence Corridor! Today we are asking folks to sign up and become part of our campaign that puts People Over Pavement.

Donate or volunteer to spread awareness on the issue and further support our mission.