ELR Citation: ELR 20051
No(s). 72-44-1 (S.D. Iowa Aug 4, 1972)

Because construction of one segment of highway can determine the placement of another, a 14-mile project that was divided into two segments for federal approval requires a single impact statement under NEPA. An impact statement must be broad enough to cover the area over which construction may be dictated by construction of another segment in a different area. Nonetheless, the court refuses to require an impact statement on the state highway plan (1,900 miles), or on the 272-mile portion of the plan covering the two segments in question. The court finds that neither the state plan nor the larger portion is a major federal action. No federal funds or approval are yet involved; and it would be "impossible" to prepare an impact statement on such indefinite proposals. Finally, the court refuses to give effect to FHwA Memorandum of November 24, 1970, which sets an arbitrary event (design approval) after which an impact statement is not required for projects initiated prior to NEPA.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Robert B. Scism
Robert Jenks
Scalise, Scism, Gentry, Brick & Brick
Fleming Building
Des Moines, IA 50309

Counsel for Defendants
Richard C. Turner
Attorney General for State of Iowa
State Capitol
Des Moines, IA 50319

Allen L. Donielson U.S. Attorney
113 U.S. Court House
Des Moines, IA 50319

David W. Wells Chief Counsel
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 7th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20590