1. In its opinion, the court noted that NEPA demands process, not specific results. What is meant by that phrase?
2. After 9/11, do you think that it is reasonable to impose a requirement that all federal buildings, military bases, and the like have a terrorist attack assessment?
3. In a footnote in the case, the court stated, “We note in particular the DOE’s minimal assessment of earthquake risks despite the presence of known, active faults that run directly under nearby Berkeley/Alameda County, California.” In spite of noting that, the court did not find that the DOE violated its requirement under NEPA to fully inform itself of the risks. What kind of standard of review does that imply the court made for this issue?