Ves 10 The relevance of this decision for agency NEPA procedures is primarily one of ensuring that the reference to "alternatives" is interpreted con- \. In « sistently with applicable judicial opinions. most cases a judicial interpretation of a statutory term does not require an amendment of related documents employing the term. Presumably the term will _ be applied and interpreted by an agency in accordance ~ with governing judicial decisions. However, in view of the importance of the Morton decision and in view of the conflicting practices of some agencies prior to the decision, it seems preferable to expand the reference to "alternatives" in agency NEPA procedures at least to the extent of indicating that all reasonable alternatives will be evaluated, even though they may not all lie within “the. -agency‘s: control. _Such a. aS - "—I“¥evision: would,Dot‘add-in anyway to “an.‘agency's Zig T/gurrent iegal responsibilities;vand-‘might.ensure - ips -that officialspréparing the statements“keep” in mind the proper scope of alternatives they must consider. : ~-s+ — Recommendation #4: Agencies should indicate that all reasonable alternatives and their environmental impacts are to be discussed, including those not within the authorityof cr the agency. Examples of specific types of alternatives that should be considered in connection with specific kinds of actions should be given where possible. Such examples should include, where relevant: (1) the alternative of taking no action; (2) alternatives requiring actions of a significantly different nature which would provide similar benefits with different environmental impacts (e.g., a fossil fuel v. a nuclear power plant);