Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Continued Action on Transp. & Env't v. Adams

Citation: 9 ELR 20648
No. No. 78-133, (D.D.C., 08/10/1979)

The court issues a statement of the factual bases and legal rationales for previous orders granting defendants' motions to dismiss an action alleging that the transportation plans and planning process for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area violate several federal laws. The court first rules that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction under § 304 of the Clean Air Act to consider plaintiffs' allegations because there is no claim that defendants have violated an emission standard or limitation. In addition, plaintiffs lack standing to obtain judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act because their allegation of injury concerns harms undifferentiated from those borne by the public generally. These speculative injuries in the form of general environmental deterioration are not clearly traceable to the challenged transportation control plan, nor has it been shown that if plaintiffs prevail in this lawsuit they will be protected from such environmental degradation. Finally, the court rules that defendants' long-range transportation plan is not a proposal for major federal action under § 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act and that preparation of an environmental impact statement was thus not required in conjunction with its adoption.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
David G. Burwell
National Wildlife Federation
1412 16th St. NW, Washington DC 20036
(202) 797-6800

Counsel for Defendants
John A. Terry, Ass't U.S. Attorney
Room 3600-E, U.S. Courthouse
3d & Constitution Ave. NW, Washington DC 20001
(202) 633-4964