Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Froehlke

No. LR-71-C-199 (E.D. Ark. March 16, 1973)

Federal district court orders on remand from the Eighth Circuit that the Corps of Engineers file a new environmental impact statement with the Council on Environmental Quality and with the district court before work can resume on the Cache River-Bayou DeView Channelization Project. At the request of the plaintiffs the new final environmental impact statement is subject to review to determine its substantive as well as procedural validity under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Richard S. Arnold
Arnold and Arnold
507 Hickory Street
Texarkana, Arkansas 75501

Counsel for Defendant
Glen R. Goodsell
Department of Justice
10th & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Counsel for Intervenors
G. D. Walker
Frierson, Walker & Snellgrove
Frierson Building
P.O. Box 1346
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401

[3 ELR 20519]

Henley, J.

ORDER

NOW, on this 8th day of March, 1973, comes on for hearing the motion of plaintiffs for injunction pursuant to opinion of the Court of Appeals. The Court, having considered said motion, the opposition thereto of defendants, and the opposition thereto of defendants-intervenors, and having heard oral testimony taken in open court, and being well and sufficiently advised in the premises, now makes the following order:

1. Defendants, their agents, servants, officers, and employees, and all other persons acting in concert with them, or any of them, are hereby enjoined and restrained from any further construction work of any kind related to or in connection with that certain public works project known as the Cache River-Bayou DeView Channelization Project. In particular, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, defendants are enjoined and restrained from continuing, or permitting their contractor to continue, the ditching of the lower Cache River presently under contract as "Item 1" of the channelization project; from undertaking, whether alone or in concert with others, any bridge, highway, or railroad reconstructions or relocations in connection with the said project; and from entering into any contract or agreement for the performance of any of the aforesaid work.

2. Defendants may, however, do, or cause their contractor to do, necessary clean-up work involved in terminating the existing ditching contract, including removal of construction debris from the river, removal of equipment from the construction site, and removal of the "plug" or "plugs" that are now impeding the flow of the river in the area of construction.

3. Defendants may also continue with planning in connection with the project, provided that such planning not involve any actual construction or the execution of any contract or agreement for construction.

4. Defendants may also proceed with whatever work is necessary to compile a new environmental impact statement in according with the opinion of the Court of Appeals.

5. The restraints contained in this Order shall continue in effect until defendants shall have filed with the Council on Environmental Quality and with this Court a new final environmental impact statement in accordance with the opinion of the Court of Appeals, and until plaintiffs have had an opportunity, within thirty (30) days of the filing of said statement with this Court, to ask this Court to review the legal sufficiency of such statement. If plaintiffs ask for such review, the restraints contained herein shall continue until, if ever, this Court determines that the new final environmental impact statement is in accordance with law, and that defendants are otherwise in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-47. Further, if plaintiffs ask this Court to review the substantive decision contained in the said new final environmental impact statement, the restraints contained herein shall continue until, if ever, this Court shall have concluded upon making such review that defendants are in compliance with all provisions of the aforesaid National Environmental Policy Act.

6. If unusual or extraordinary circumstances, not reasonably known at this time, should arise, defendants may apply to this Court, upon reasonable notice to plaintiffs, for modification of this Order.