Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. Hopper
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
827 F.3d 1077 (2016)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Cape Wind, a wind-energy company, sought to construct wind turbines (Cape Wind project) off the coast of Massachusetts. In 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 transferred primary regulatory authority of offshore renewable-energy projects to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (the bureau) (defendant). Accordingly, the bureau assumed authority over the Cape Wind project. The bureau reviewed a draft environmental-impact statement issued by another federal agency regarding the project and decided that it would prepare its own environmental-impact statement. In 2006, while the Cape Wind project was under review by the bureau, emails from the bureau geologist overseeing the geological section of the environmental-impact statement indicated that Cape Wind had not adequately addressed geological hazards related to the project and that the geological surveys conducted by Cape Wind were not sufficient to support approval of the project. In 2007, the bureau geologist again raised concerns over the adequacy of the geophysical data for the project. In 2009, the bureau published its final environmental-impact statement and later issued a lease for the Cape Wind project. The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, and others (environmental groups) (plaintiffs) sued the bureau, alleging that the bureau violated NEPA. The environmental groups claimed that the 2009 environmental-impact statement was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to assess the geological hazards adequately and relied on inadequate geological surveys. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the bureau and dismissed the case. The environmental groups appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Randolph, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.