Town of Barnstable v. Federal Aviation Administration
398 U.S. App. D.C. 94
| D.C. Cir. | 2011Background
- Cape Wind proposes 130 offshore wind turbines, 440 feet tall, in Nantucket Sound; project would be first offshore wind farm in the U.S.
- FAA conducted procedures under 14 C.F.R. § 77; issued 130 Determinations of No Hazard conditioned on mitigation.
- Interior Department leased the area to Cape Wind and incorporated FAA mitigation into the lease, conditioning construction on FAA final hazard determination.
- Petitioners Barnstable and Alliance challenge FAA determinations as unlawful, misread regulations, and unsafe for aviation.
- Interior’s lease links to FAA findings, suggesting Interior would reconsider if FAA finds an unmitigable hazard; FAA’s determinations are advisory but tied to lease conditions.
- Court grants petitions, holds petitioners have standing and FAA misread its handbook; vacates and remands the determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge FAA determinations | Barnstable/Alliance allege injury from aviation risk | FAA asserts lack of causation/redressability | Standing shown; injury traceable and redressable |
| FAA misapplied handbook; adequacy of explanation | FAA failed to adequately explain adverse effects | Handbook criteria were satisfied or non-binding | FAA misread § 6-3-3 and § 6-3-8; not adequately explained their result |
| Merits under 49 U.S.C. § 44718(b) compliance | FAA ignored significant aviation risk | Determinations otherwise compliant | Record shows misapplication; remand to reassess hazards |
Key Cases Cited
- Sierra Club v. EPA, 292 F.3d 895 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (standing to challenge agency action; deference to agency findings)
- City of Waukesha v. EPA, 320 F.3d 228 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (standing and merits considerations when agency actions are preliminary)
- Utah v. Evans, 536 U.S. 452 (Supreme Court 2002) (standing; redressability require substantial probability)
- National Parks Conservation Ass'n v. Manson, 414 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (agency report's effect on state decision; standing despite advisory role)
- Public Citizen v. FAA, 988 F.2d 186 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (require reasoned explanation for agency determinations)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing; injury, causation, redressability)
- Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 (1997) (standing with potential agency disregard of challenged action)
- BFI Waste Systems v. FAA, 293 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (agency determinations with advisory effects still reviewable)