C.F.R. » Title 23 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER H—RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ENVIRONMENT › PART 771—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND RELATED PROCEDURES

23 C.F.R. § 771.101

Purpose

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This part prescribes the policies and procedures of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). Together these regulations set forth all FHWA, FRA, FTA, and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements under NEPA for the processing of highway, public transportation, and railroad actions. This part also sets forth procedures to comply with 23 U.S.C. 109(h), 128, 138, 139, 203(e), 326, and 327; 49 U.S.C. 303, 24201, 5323(c) and 5323(q); Public Law 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, section 1301 as applicable; and Public Law 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, section 1304.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1982–2018 · leading case: Defenders of Wildlife v. North Carolina Dep't of Transp., 762 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Defenders of Wildlife v. North Carolina Dep't of Transp., 762 F.3d 374 (4th Cir. 2014). “See 23 C.F.R. § 771.101 . 13 . The term "Section 4(f)” refers to this provision’s original location in the Department of Transportation Act of 1966.”
Sw. Williamson Cnty. Cmty. Ass'n v. Slater, 243 F.3d 270 (6th Cir. 2001). “Typically, a project is considered a major federal action when it is funded with federal money. This case, however, requires us to determine at what point a state-funded project is transformed into a major federal action by virtue of multiple federal agencies’ invoNement in the…”
Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. Jacoby, 9 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (D. Or. 1998). · cites it 2× “23 C.F.R. §§ 771.101 , 107(b), (d), 109(a)(1).”
Galloway v. Arkansas State High. & Transp. Dep't, 885 S.W.2d 17 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 2× “§ 128 , and pertinent regulations, 23 C.F.R. §§ 771.101 — 137. Specifically, the trial court held that no public hearing was required for the Highway 64 project.”
Shudde Fath v. Texas Dept. of Transportatio, 924 F.3d 132 (5th Cir. 2018). “23 C.F.R. § 771.101 . Agencies generally should not "segment," or "divide artificially a major Federal action into smaller components to escape the application of NEPA to some of its segments.”
Sierra Club v. United States Dep't of Transp., 310 F. Supp. 2d 1168 (D. Nev. 2004). “23 C.F.R. § 771.101 . Those regulations require FHWA to perform § 109(h) analyses as part of the NEPA process.”
Pennsylvania Protect Our Water & Env't Resources, Inc. v. Appalachian Reg'l Comm'n, 574 F. Supp. 1203 (M.D. Pa. 1982). “See 23 C.F.R. § 771.101 et seq. 7 . Defendants argue that the alternative was in fact unreasonable and thus need not have been discussed in the alternatives-considered section of the FEIS pursuant to 42 U.”
Untitled Texas Attorney Gen. Opinion, No. KP-0194 (Tex. Att'y Gen. July 2, 2018). “See 23 C.F.R. § 771.101 (stating that the purpose of the regulation to "prescribe[] the policies and procedures of the Federal Highway Administration .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.