The court holds that a final environmental impact statement (EIS) for a Texas state highway complies with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (DHPT) prepared a draft EIS that addressed seven alternative route locations and a ...

The court holds that plaintiff does not have standing to sue for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent a timber sale and harvest on a 40-acre tract in a national forest where his only contact with that land was one visit. Furthermore, the plaintiff would have lost on the merits of his Natio...

The court holds that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) to review the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) decision to list the Boarhead Farms, Pennsylvania, site on the National Priorities List (NPL) and to conduct a remedial investigation/...

The court holds that alteration of a facility location does not automatically revoke a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, but the permit is revocable if the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) determines that alteration of the location is material to the mainten...

The court holds that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) acted within its discretion when it issued an administrative order under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) requiring a company to install stainless steel groundwater monitoring wells, wher...

The court holds that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) decision not to initiate rulemaking to retroactively amend the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for passenger cars made in model years (MYs) 1984 and 1985 was within its discretion and consistent with ...

The court holds that the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act's (SMCRA's) prohibition of surface mining constitutes a taking of plaintiffs' right to mine coal, and that plaintiffs are entitled to just compensation of $60 million. The court first holds that SMCRA's prohibitions totally eliminat...

The court holds that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) does not preempt the provisions of the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (also known as Proposition 65) requiring businesses to give warnings of exposure to known toxic chemicals. FIFRA expres...

The court enjoins further construction of a multi-phase road project, since citizens of Santa Fe, New Mexico, established a likelihood of success in their claim that the city improperly segmented the project to avoid compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Santa Fe, serving as ...

In dismissing a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the court holds that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has authority under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) to adopt a policy prohibiting instream treatment ponds and fills and to object to draft natio...