Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v.

United States Atomic  The preparation of the EIS must be more

Energy Commission than simply a pro forma ritual.
449 F.2d 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1971) o Therefore, the Appellate Court found that AEC
 The US AEC (forerunner of the Department of Energy) was procedural rules did not comply with Congressional
encouraging utilities to build nuclear power plants. Baltimore policy as enunciated in NEPA.
Gas and Electric decided to build one in rural Maryland.  This case established that NEPA has judicially enforceable
 Two years after construction began, the Federal government duties.
passed the National Environmental Policy o At this point, NEPA was new, and the concept that
Act (aka NEPA) 42 U.S.C. §§4321-4370. individual people could use it to get the judiciary to
o NEPA §102(2)(C) requires preparation of tell the executive branch what to do was a pretty
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). radical idea.
 AEC issued a regulation requiring permit applicants to
prepare EISs. However, they felt that they did not have to
consider the conclusions of the report unless parties raised
specific challenges to it during the licensing process.
o Basically, AEC was treating the EIS as just more
paperwork. The EIS needed to be prepared and
filed, but it was not considered within AEC's
licensing board process to decide whether to issue a
permit or not.
 No one at AEC would look at the EIS unless
an environmental issue was raised by a
party to the proceeding.
o Technically, NEPA only requires you to consider the
likely environmental effects of your activities. It
doesn't say what you should do once you've
considered the problem.
 A local environmental group (CCCC) sued AEC, arguing that
AEC's regulations violated NEPA because they did not
require AEC to independently assess environmental impacts.
 The Appellate Court found for CCCC and remanded back to
AEC for further rulemaking to improve their regulations.
o The Appellate Court noted that NEPA
§102(2)(E) requires that all Federal agencies must
considered NEPA "to the fullest extent possible."
o The Appellate Court found that compliance "to the
fullest extent possible" demands that environmental
issues be considered at every important stage of the
decision-making process.