Grand Canyon Trust v. Federal Aviation Administration
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
290 F.3d 339 (2002)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (defendant) approved the construction of a replacement, larger airport for St. George, Utah, to be built near Zion National Park. Pursuant to the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), the FAA prepared an environmental assessment (EA) evaluating the environmental impact of the proposed project. The EA included a detailed, expert assessment of the incremental impact of the replacement airport on noise levels in Zion as compared to the existing airport. The FAA did not consider the noise impacts on Zion collectively with the noise from flights from other airports, from air tours in and over Zion, or from the planned expansion of other nearby regional airports. Based on the EA, the FAA concluded that the noise impacts on Zion from the replacement airport would be insignificant and that a full environmental-impact statement (EIS) was not required. The Grand Canyon Trust (the trust) (plaintiff) petitioned for a review of the FAA’s decision, arguing that the FAA failed to fulfill NEPA requirements because the EA only considered the incremental noise impact of the replacement airport as compared to the old airport and did not consider the cumulative noise impact on Zion’s natural quiet. The FAA countered, arguing it did not need to consider the cumulative impact on Zion’s natural quiet and that the noise impact of the project was insignificant because air-traffic noise would increase over time even without the construction of the replacement airport.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rogers, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
