Reasonable "Alternatives" to the Proposed Action. The recent decision in NRDC v. Morton, supra, discussed the "full disclosure" requirement in relation to the requirement that agencies consider the "alternatives" to the proposed action. See also EDF v. Corps of Engineers, 2 ERC 1260, 1269 (E.D. Ark. 1971) (discussing respects in which consideration of alternatives in proposed dam project was legally deficient). The most significant-aspect of the Morton. decision is: the court's conclusion that all alternatives reasonably available to the Government as a whole must be discussed - even if some of those alternatives are outside the control of the agency preparing the statement. Discussion of such alternatives is required in order to guide the decision at hand as well as to inform the public of the issues and to guide the_decisionsOF.2 ~sEysthePresidentand-congréss. —= wee Se -_ ae 7 Wt TomeBeet Sa rt eetatae = ~ ee wer _ 7 ine EE * Foe] . = we.ce TT re eee . an a te Fe permaee Lewes. - —. --"The» court:‘incthistcage Mag careful-Rowever, ato emphasize that it was not requiring the impossible. "A rule of reason is implicit in this aspect of the. law, as it is in the requirement that the agency provide a statement concerning the opposing views that are responsible." 3 ERC at 1561 (citing Committee for Nuclear Respensibilityv, Ine. v. Seaborg, 3 ERC. 1126, -1128- 29 (D.C. Cir. 1971) )-.~ What- NEPA requires is “information sufficient to permit a reasoned choice of alternatives so far as environ- mental aspects are concerned.” 3 ERC at 1563. Detailed discussion is not required of alternatives that “are deemed only remote and speculative possi- bilities, in view of basic changes required in statutes and policies of other agencies." 3 ERC at 1564. And the agencies need not indulge in "'erystal ball' inquiry" in assessing the effects of alternatives. The agency will have taken the “hard look" required by NEPA if it has discussed the reasonably foreseeable effects with a thorough- ness commensurate with their severity and the significance of the action.