ELR Citation: ELR 20725
No(s). 8062 (E.D. Tenn. Jul 24, 1973)

The court rules that NEPA does not require an impact statement for each coal contract and approves the impact statement for TVA's program of coal procurement. The court finds that the opportunity to comment on a draft impact statement is not an administrative remedy that plaintiffs must exhaust prior to bringing suit; nevertheless, the court says that the total absence of comment on the subject of the sociological impact of strip-mining contributes to the court's decision to sustain the impact statement despite failure to deal with this subject. Measuring the alternatives suggested by the plaintiffs against the standard that NEPA requires discussion of "reasonable alternatives which were available to TVA at the time the impact statement was prepared," the court rules that:

(1) phasing out strip-mining is not presently a reasonable alternative, considering TVA's need for coal at competitive prices;

(2) mining techniques that were not mentioned in any comments on the statement are not among the available alternatives which must be discussed;

(3) discouraging the use of electric power through advertising or a change in rates is not the type of alternative to invalidate an impact statement.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Richard M. Hall
15 West 44th Street
New York, NY 10036

William A. Butler
1525 18th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036

Charles Susano
1200 Hamilton Bank Building
Knoxville, TN 37902

Counsel for Defendant
Robert H. Marquis General Counsel
Tennessee Valley Authority
Knoxville, TN 37902