Case Law Details
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC
Project Description:
The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), predecessor agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, granted the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power, Corporation’s request for an operating license for the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vermont. The AEC prepared an EIS for the licensing request. After issuing the license, the AEC conducted a study to consider the environmental effects associated with the uranium fuel cycle used in reactors such as the one proposed for the Vermont Yankee facility. Based on that study, the AEC issued a final rule addressing how environmental impacts of the fuel cycle should be considered in licensing proceedings. The AEC determined that, because the study of the fuel cycle determined that the environmental impacts were insignificant, there was no need to reconsider the Vermont Yankee license.
435 U.S. 519
435 U.S. 519
U.S. Supreme Court
04/03/1978
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Licencing
Other
Case Summary
Plaintiffs challenged the decision to grant the license, claiming that the AEC’s decision to grant the license inadequately considered impacts of the uranium fuel cycle. The court of appeals, while finding that the AEC had employed all procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the rulemaking was insufficient. The court of appeals overturned the rule. Because the AEC’s decision to grant the license for the Vermont Yankee facility was based, in part, on the “faulty” rulemaking proceeding, the court also overturned the AEC’s decision to grant the operating license. Vermont Yankee Power Corporation requested review of the decision by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the court of appeals
Key Holdings
Admininstrative Procedure Act
The Supreme Court held that “absent constitutional constraints or extremely compelling circumstances the administrative agencies should be free to fashion their own rules of procedure and to pursue methods of inquiry capable of permitting them to discharge their multitudinous duties.”
File Attachment
Download the decision