39 C.F.R. § 775.8

Environmental evaluation guidelines

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

(a) Approach. When dealing with proposals which may have an impact on the human environment, environmental coordinators, planners, decision makers, and other officials responsible for actions, will, as appropriate:

(1) Use a systematic approach that integrates natural and social sciences and environmental design in planning and making decisions.

(2) Identify environmental effects and values in detail, and appraise them in conjunction with economic and technical analyses.

(3) Consider environmental documents at all decision points at which other planning documents are considered. (Plans and decisions are to reflect environmental values. Proposed actions should be assessed as soon as their effects can be meaningfully evaluated, to provide the bases for early decision on whether detailed environmental impact statements must be prepared.)

(4) Study, develop, describe, and evaluate at all decision points, reasonable alternatives to recommended actions which may have a significant effect on the environment.

(b) Proposal requirements. When an environmental impact statement has been prepared, it must accompany the proposal through and be used in the decision-making process. Any other proposal must refer to applicable environmental documents (e.g., determination of categorical exclusion; finding of no significant impact; notice of intent to prepare an impact statement), and relevant comments and responses.

(c) Lead agency arrangements. If the Postal Service and another Federal agency become involved in a lead agency arrangement for the preparation of an environmental impact statement, the Service will cooperate fully.

[44 FR 63525, Nov. 5, 1979. Redesignated at 63 FR 45719, Aug. 27, 1998]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1992–2000 · leading case: City of Waltham v. United States Postal Serv., 786 F. Supp. 105 (D. Mass. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Waltham v. United States Postal Serv., 786 F. Supp. 105 (D. Mass. 1992). “39 C.F.R. § 775.8 (f). In contrast, while the Postal Service is required to make public an Environmental Assessment, it is not required to observe any comment period prior to issuing a FONSI based on any such assessment, nor is there any mandatory comment period for the FONSI…”

Akiak Native Cmty. v. United States Postal Serv., 213 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. 2000). “” 39 C.F.R. § 775.8 (a)(4). Plaintiffs contend that the Environmental *1148 Assessment falls short of this standard in two respects: (1) the Environmental Assessment includes an inadequate evaluation of the “no-action” alternative; and (2) the Environmental Assessment fails to…”

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.