Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill

The relevant background is as follows: The Tennessee Valley Authority, a federal corporation, began constructing the Tellico Dam with appropriated funds in 1967. Tellico was designed to help develop an economically underutilized region of the United States and provide electricity for 20,000 homes. Although Congress had appropriated money for Tellico every year since 1967, construction was halted as a consequence of litigation over a- three-inch, tannish-colored perch: the snail darter. The snail darter was a newly discovered species living in the Little Tennessee River, where the dam was being constructed. There were an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 snail darters. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), 87 Stat. 884, 16 U.S.C. § 1531-et seq., authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to declare species of animal life "endangered" and to identify the "critical habitat" of these creatures. When a species or its habitat is so listed, the Act requires other governmental departments to "tak[e] such action necessary to insure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by them do not jeopardize the continued existence of such endangered species and threatened species or result in the destruction or modification of habitat of such species which is determined by the Secretary, after consultation as appropriate with the affected States, to be critical." 16 U.S.C. § 1536. On October 8, 1975, the Secretary of the Interior listed the snail darter as an endangered species. The Secretary found that the snail darter appears to live only in the Little Tennessee River and that "[t]he roposed impoundment of water behind the proposed Tellico Dam would result in total destruction of the snail darter's habitat." Notwithstanding the near completion of the dam, the Secretary issued a declaration aimed at halting construction of the dam. In 1976, a lasuit was filed seeking to enjoin the completion of the Tellico Dam. The district court denied the injuncion, noting that $53 million would be lost, that the Endangered Species Act was passed seven years after construction on the darn had begun, and that Congress had continued appropriations for Tellico, with full awareness of the snail darter problem. Noting that plaintiff's position would require "a court to halt irnpoundment of water behind a fully completed darn if an endangered species were discovered in the river on the day before such impoundment was scheduled to take place, " the court could not "conceive that Congress intended such a result." Id., at 763. The Court of Appeals reversed and directed the issuance of a permanent injunction. In 1975 and 1976, the TVA had testified before Appropriations Subcommittees that the Endangered Species Act did not apply to a project under construction at the time of the Act's enactment. Each year, Congress approved the TVA's budget, which included funds for completion of the Tellico Dam. In 1977, after the issuance of the permantent injunction, TVA officials testified before Appropriations ubcommittees in the House and Senate. The agency noted the injunction's existence and yet requested further appropriations for the dam. Both Appropriations Committees recommended the full amount requested for completion of the Tellico Dam. A 1977 House Report stated: "It is the Committee's view that the Endangered Species Act was not intended to halt projects such as these in their advanced stage of completion, and [the Committee] strongly recommends that these projects not be stopped because of misuse of the Act. " ‘ The House Appropriations Committee recommended a special appropriation of $2 million to facilitate relocation of the snail darter and other endangered species that threatened to stop TVA projects. Similar events occurred in the Senate. TVA's budget, including funds for completion of Tellico and relocation of the snail darter, was enacted into law on August 7, 1977.