Persons living respectively three miles and one-and-one-half miles from the site of a proposed 1,700 acre residential, commercial, and light industrial development and who have merely driven over the area or trespassed on the land once or twice a month do not have standing to raise the issue whether...

The decision of the court below (see 1 ELR 20389) is affirmed by the Seventh Circuit, thus permitting construction of an expressway in Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Counsel for PlaintiffsRichard C. Ver WieheLebamoff, Ver Wiehe & Snow1310 Anthony Wayne Bank BuildingFort Wayne, IN 46802
Counsel for Defen...

Title 6-A of the Environmental Control Act of 1970 (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1970 Supplement, Chap. 111 1/2, §1025a), authorizing state regulation and control of atomic radiation from nuclear power generating facilities, is found unconstitutional, as preempted by congressional action. Northern States Power ...

The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §§1857 et seq.) does not require either the defendant United States Navy, or the individual defendants, to comply with Rule 10 of the Rules and Regulations of the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District to the extent that said Rule 10 requires defendants to a...

The determination of the navigability of a body of water, so as to bring it within the scope of Title 33 U.S.C. §403, is established by the use of the body of water in its natural state or with reasonable improvement by small vessels traveling in interstate and foreign commerce. The defendants, by ...

In this opinion, the court denied all motions to amend the judgment of July 7, 1972 (2 ELR 20446), enjoining construction of relocated Connecticut Route 7 until preparation of an environmental impact statement. The court ruled that plaintiff was not entitled to attorney fees since 28 U.S.C. §2412 p...

In a suit by the city of Chicago seeking to require defendants to equip all new and old vehicles operating in Chicago with tamper-proof emission control devices, the district court's dismissal, 1 ELR 20408, is affirmed. Federal legislation is held to preempt enforcement of emissions standards for ca...

The Corps of Engineers, in fulfilling its NEPA responsibilities pursuant to issuing a construction permit under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and issuing a discharge permit under Section 13 of that Act, cannot first decide to consider the environmental impacts of both permits toge...

Under California's legislation patterned on NEPA (Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.) the city and county of San Francisco does not have to file an environmental impact report on the Yerba Buena Center.
Counsel for PlaintiffEugene A. BrodskyJarvis, Miller & Brodsky123 Second StreetSan Fran...

Park Service must comply with NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 in continuing construction in the C & O Canal National Park and in construction affecting the nearby Potomac River.
Counsel for PlaintiffsOscar S. Gray1225 19th Street, NWW...