Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Pizitz, Inc. v. Volpe

Citation: 2 ELR 20379
No. No. 72-1995, 467 F.2d 208/4 ERC 1401/(5th Cir., 07/11/1972) Aff'd per curiam

On appeal from the Middle District of Alabama, held, that NEPA is not applicable to highway construction changes which had been contemplated in a design which complied with all required standards when originally approved. The court also finds no merit in plaintiffs' contention that federal officials could not accept an impact statement prepared by the state highway department. For the decision below, see 2 ELR 20378.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Dieter J. Schrader
Schrader & Schwenn
Suite 400
State National Bank Building
Huntsville, Alabama 35804

Counsel for Federal Defendants
Ira DeMent, U.S. Attorney
Kenneth E. Vines, Assistant U.S. Attorney
P.O. Box 197
Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Counsel for State Defendants
Lucian L. Smith, Jr.
Alabama State Highway Department
11 South Union Street
Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Before TUTTLE, COLEMAN and CLARK, Circuit Judges.