ELR Citation: ELR 20294
No(s). C-72-1057-CBR (N.D. Cal. Mar 16, 1973)

The final supplementary environmental impact statement for the New Melones Dam Project, in conjunction with the previously filed statement, complies fully with the requirements of NEPA, and the request for a preliminary injunction against construction is denied. The impact statement need not cover issues satisfactorily covered in the previous statement, and the court retains jurisdiction to require a future impact statement concerning operational plans. NEPA does not mandate a delay in the present statement until a comprehensive study of the Central Valley Project is undertaken and completed. Plaintiffs' other allegations of procedural inadequacy against the statement are actually substantive objections to the merits of the Dam project itself, which Congress and not the court must review. However, even if the substantive inadequacies were reviewed by the court under the arbitrary and capricious and abuse of discretion standard, plaintiffs would still fail.

For earlier opinions of the district court see 2 ELR 20604 and 2 ELR 20735. See also Comment, 3 ELR 10062 (May 1973).

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Michael W. Palmer
Thomas J. Graff
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
2728 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94704

Counsel for Intervenors
See 2 ELR 20735

Counsel for Defendants
David E. Golay Assistant U.S. Attorney
450 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102