Citizens for Responsible Area Growth v. Adams, 477 F. Supp. 994 (D.N.H. 1979) (Temporary injunction granted because of FAA's failure to file an EIS concerning various construction projects at regional airport).Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Adams, 434 F. Supp. 403 (D.C.D.C. 1977) (Preparation of the "National Airport System Plan" did require an environmental impact statement).City of Romulus v. County of Wayne, 392 F. Supp. 578 (E.D.Mich.
(emphasis added).See Environmental Defense Fund v. Adams, 434 F.Supp. 403, 408 (D.D.C. 1977) (programmatic EIS may not be necessary where second tier, site-specific EISs address local and regional impacts). Naturally, we recognize that NEPA applies to a continuing federal action even though the plan to build a broad network of highways was conceived prior to NEPA, so long as considerable implementation remained after the statute's effective date on 1 January 1970. Equally significant, however, is the reality posed by the facts we have recited earlier.
See Mandelker, supra ยง 9:2. Such an impact statement may even be required when several proposals could have a "cumulative or synergistic" impact within a region or when projects are not geographically connected but are related in time or subject matter. Kleppe v. Sierra Club , 427 U.S. 390, 409, 96 S.Ct. 2718, 49 L.Ed.2d 576 (1976) ; seeEnvt'l Def. Fund v. Adams , 434 F. Supp. 403 (D.D.C. 1977) (requiring preparation of PEIS to accompany agency's plan for development of public airports across the United States). The preparation of a PEIS will not relieve an agency from its duty to prepare a later "sites-specific" EIS covered in the prior statement.