Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Delaware River Port Auth. v. Tiemann

Citation: 6 ELR 20402
No. No. 75-1219, 403 F. Supp. 1117/(D.N.J., 11/12/1975)

In granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in a suit challenging a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) order reducing tolls on interstate bridges owned and operated by the Delaware River Port Authority, the court holds that the Authority lacks standing to raise the claim that the FHWA illegally failed to prepare a NEPA impact statement. Assertion of the rights of third parties through an implicit, generalized claim that the toll reduction will lead to increased urban congestion and pollution is insufficient to confer standing in the absence of a showing of actual injury to the plaintiff. The only possible harm which the Authority might suffer from FHWA's action is decreased revenues from lower tolls, but such an economic injury does not fall within the zone of interests which NEPA seeks to protect. Because plaintiff has not satisfied the two-part standing test (demonstrated injury within zone of interests protected), the court need not consider whether the FHWA toll schedule is a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Alexander Feinberg
Evoy & Feinberg
496 N. King's Highway
Cherry Hill NJ 08034
(609) 667-0050

Roland Morris
Duane, Morris & Heckscher
1600 Land Title Building
Philadelphia PA 19110
(215) 568-6300

Counsel for Defendants
Frederick W. Klepp, Asst. U.S. Attorney
U.S. Courthouse
Newark NJ 07102
(201) 645-2155

Counsel for Intervenor City of Phildelphia
Herbert Smolen, Deputy City Solicitor
City Hall
Philadelphia PA 19107
(215) 686-1776

Brotman, J.

[OPINION OMITTED BY PUBLISHER IN ORIGINAL SOURCE]