ELR Citation: ELR 20808
No(s). CV 96-6423 ABC (CWx) (C.D. Cal. Dec 23, 1996)

The court holds that an electric utility company lacks standing under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to challenge a U.S. Forest Service environmental impact statement approving a competing company's construction of a crude oil pipeline. The court first holds that the evidence clearly shows that the utility's interests in this claim are primarily economic. Further, these economic interests are of such magnitude as to render its claims in conflict with a general public interest in the environment. To allow a direct competitor, under the banner of an environmental champion, to raise an interminable series of legal challenges to a project approved by federal and state agencies would be so marginally related to and inconsistent with the purposes implicit in NEPA that it cannot reasonably be assumed that Congress intended to permit the utility's suit. Further, due to the utility's extreme economic conflict with litigation in the public interest, it does not qualify as a reliable private attorney general. Rather, the utility is a direct competitor of the construction project and could reap enormous economic benefits from alterations in the Forest Service decision. Allowing the utility to proceed would therefore be more likely to frustrate than to further the objectives of NEPA. The court rejects the utility's proposed alternative bases for standing, including "paradigm" standing, standing due to economic injury directly linked to environmental harm, and "procedural" standing. None of these arguments or the cases cited in support of them exempt the utility from meeting the standards articulated in Clarke v. Securities Industry Ass'n, 479 U.S. 388 (1987), which the court has applied. Finally, although the utility alleges that because another plaintiff has standing, the court may decline to contest the utility's standing, the utility has not provided any reason that the court should decline to consider the utility's standing.

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Christopher G. Caldwell
Hedges & Caldwell
606 S. Olive St., Ste. 500, Los Angeles CA 90014
(213) 629-9040

Counsel for Defendants
John Rubiner, Ass't Attorney General
Attorney General's Office
300 S. Spring St., Los Angeles CA 90013
(213) 897-2000