Making NEPA Work: Rebuilding the World Trade Center

Date01 July 2009
Author
39 ELR 10636 EnviRonmEntaL Law REpoRtER 7-2009
Making NEPA Work: Rebuilding
the World Trade Center
by Stephen L. Kass
Stephen L. Kass is a partner in the New York oce of Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP.
While environmental lawyers recognize that there
is no contradiction between meaningful environ-
mental review and timely completion of impor-
tant public projects, there has been widespread concern
that compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA),1 and in particu lar NEPA’s requirement for an
environmental impact statement (EIS), will frustrate or even
derail the major infrastructure project s that are central to
President Barack Oba ma’s stimulus program and the nation’s
economic recovery. However, one well-known project for
which we served as environmental counsel—t he redevelop-
ment of New York’s World Trade Center (W TC) site follow-
ing the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks—demonstrates
that it is fea sible to complete even a highly complex envi-
ronmental review, including a comprehensive EIS, within a
one-year period that matches, or even precedes, the project’s
construction schedule.
As the attached NEPA compliance schedule shows, the
lead agency for the WTC’s NEPA review was actually a
New York State agency (the Lower Manhattan Development
Corporation (LMDC)) wearing a “federa l” hat as a grant
recipient from the Department of Housing and Urban Devel-
opment (HUD) under the Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) program, which makes the recipient respon-
sible for both NEPA reviews and the historic preservation
requirements of §106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act (NHPA). Because New York also has its own EIS and
historic preservation statutes, LMDC was actually operating
under four separate environmental review statutes (NEPA,
NHPA, the State Environmental Qua lity Review Act, a nd
the State Historic Preservation Act), as well as the project
planning requirements of the New York State Urban Devel-
opment Corporation Act and the condemnation require-
ments of New York ’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law.
1. 42 U.S.C. §§4321-4370f, ELR S. §§2-209.
Despite this array of federal and state statutory require-
ments and the intense worldwide interest in the W TC
redevelopment pla n, LMDC managed to carry out fully
coordinated NEPA and §106 reviews with other cooperat-
ing agencies (both federal and state), complete public scop-
ing, prepare a comprehensive draft EIS, hold well-attended
public hearings, respond to thousands of oral, written, and
e-mail public comments, prepare an expanded nal EIS,
negotiate a §106 Programmatic Agreement with state and
federal preservation ocers, and issue a Record of Decision
(ROD) (as well as the corresponding state EIS ndings) in 13
months from the start of involved agency discussions.
As the attached schedule shows, even a highly complex
and controversial environmental review, such as the WTC
redevelopment, can be completed in a reasonable time in
full compliance with NEPA and a broad array of ot her fed-
eral and state laws, so long as t he lead federal agency is
committed to that end, has full support from cooperating
and involved agencies, involves the public from the outset,
and al locates t he required resource s to the technic al, lega l,
and management dema nds of the EIS and related envi ron-
mental reviews.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT