Environmental Law—The Requirement for an Impact Statement: A Suggested Framework for Analysis—Loveless v. Yantis, 82 Wn. 2d 754, 513 P.2d 1023 (1973); Eastlake Community Council v. Roanoke Associates, Inc., 82 Wn. 2d 475, 513 P.2d 36 (1973); Stempel v. Department of Water Resources, 82 Wn. 2d 109, 508 P.2d 166 (1973); Juanita Bay Valley Community Association v. City of Kirkland, 9 Wn. App. 59, 510 P.2d 1140 (1973)

Authors

John D. Alkire

Abstract

The EIS requirement is the most precise of SEPA's procedural commands. The EIS itself must be a formal, tangible document. Its contents should reflect intelligent, plenary environmental analysis on the part of responsible government officials. The EIS serves as both the showpiece of the developer and as a target for those opposing the project. It is, in final form, no less than an environmental transcript, providing a critical portion of the record for administrative decisionmaking and judicial review. Hence, because of its visibility and required specificity, and the importance of its role in decision-making, the EIS requirement has come to occupy center stage in SEPA's grand design, and the legal questions surrounding the need for EIS preparation have captured the attention of all concerned with SEPA.

First Page

939

Recommended Citation

John D. Alkire, Recent Developments, Environmental Law—The Requirement for an Impact Statement: A Suggested Framework for Analysis—Loveless v. Yantis, 82 Wn. 2d 754, 513 P.2d 1023 (1973); Eastlake Community Council v. Roanoke Associates, Inc., 82 Wn. 2d 475, 513 P.2d 36 (1973); Stempel v. Department of Water Resources, 82 Wn. 2d 109, 508 P.2d 166 (1973); Juanita Bay Valley Community Association v. City of Kirkland, 9 Wn. App. 59, 510 P.2d 1140 (1973), 49 Wash. L. Rev. 939 (1974).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol49/iss3/6