| Metropolitan Edison Co. v. PANE | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Argued March 1, 1983 Decided April 19, 1983 |
||||||
| Full case name | Metropolitan Edison Co. v. People Against Nuclear Energy | |||||
| Docket nos. | 81-2399 | |||||
| Prior history | Summary judgment for defendants, 436 F. Supp. 2d 132 (Me. 2006); reversed, 501 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2007); cert. granted, 552 U.S. ___ (2008) | |||||
| Holding | ||||||
| The Court ruled that the NRC did not act improperly in not considering the conditions of PANE. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by unanimous | |||||
| Concurrence | Brennan, joined by unanimous | |||||
| Dissent | None | |||||
| Laws applied | ||||||
| National Environmental Policy Act | ||||||
Metropolitan Edison Co. v. People Against Nuclear Energy, 460 U.S. 766 (1983) was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.
Contents |
After the meltdown of reactor number 2 at Three Mile Island, The People Against Nuclear Energy (PANE) contended that restarting reactor number 1 would cause severe psychological trauma to residents of nearby towns. They filed a suit in the court of appeals, citing National Environmental Policy Act protections of the natural environment. The court agreed.
Whether there are situations in which an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act must consider the effects of a proposed action on psychological health.
The Court ruled that the NRC did not act improperly in not considering the conditions of PANE.
In considering such concerns as warm water released into the Susquehanna River, and the release of low level radiation, the NRC acted properly in considering environmental risks.
Justice Brennan filed a concurring opinion.