50 C.F.R. § 402.03
Applicability
Section 7 and the requirements of this part apply to all actions in which there is discretionary Federal involvement or control.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 77
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Nat'l Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 551 U.S. 644 (2007).
Nat'l Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 551 U.S. 644 (2007). “" 50 CFR § 402.03 . B 1 In February 2002, Arizona officials applied for EPA authorization to administer that State's NPDES program.”
Karuk Tribe v. United States Forest Serv., 681 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2012). “644, 666 (2007) (quoting 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 ). The Supreme Court explained that this limi- tation harmonizes the ESA consultation requirement with other statutory mandates that leave an agency no discretion to consider the protection of listed species.”
Turtle Island Restoration Network v. United States Dep't of Com., 878 F.3d 725 (9th Cir. 2017). “§ 1536 (a)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 . 13 To “jeopardize” means “to engage in an action that reasonably would be expected, directly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival and recovery of a listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction,…”
Cottonwood Env't Law Ctr. v. United States Forest Serv., 789 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2015). “50 C.F.R. § 402.03 (“Section 7 and the requirements of this part apply to all actions in which there is discretionary Federal involvement or control.”
Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Bureau of Reclamation, 601 F.3d 1096 (10th Cir. 2010). “Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA provides, "[e]ach Federal agency shall, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary, insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency.”
Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 524 F.3d 917 (9th Cir. 2008). “” 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 (emphasis added). Thus, where there is such discretionary involvement or control, the agency planning the action, usually known as the “action agency,” must consult with the consulting agency.”
Strahan v. Linnon, 967 F. Supp. 581 (D. Mass. 1997). “50 C.F.R. § 402.03 In Count XX, the plaintiff asserts a facial challenge to the validity of 50 C.”
Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Keys, 333 F.3d 1109 (10th Cir. 2003). “BOR tethers this argument to 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 , which states, “Section 7 and the requirements of this Part apply to all actions in which there is discretionary Federal involvement or control.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council v. Norton, 236 F. Supp. 3d 1198 (E.D. Cal. 2017). “This Court’s previous interpretation of Article 3(i) as not constituting “discretionary Federal involvement or control” for purposes of 50 CFR § 402.03 was not called into question by the Ninth Circuit’s en banc opinion in this case.”
Coalition for a Sustainable Delta v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 812 F. Supp. 2d 1089 (E.D. Cal. 2011). “§ 1536 (a)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 402.14 . The ESA’s implementing regulations provide that “Section 7 and the requirements of this part apply to all actions in which there is discretionary Federal involvement or control.”
Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 257 F. Supp. 2d 53 (D.D.C. 2003). “Regulations issued under § 7(a)(2) require consultations for “all actions in which there is discretionary Federal involvement or control,” 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 , and govern the consultation process.”
Karuk Tribe v. United States Forest Serv., 640 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2011). “” 50 C.F.R. § 402.03 (emphasis added): see also Nat'l Ass’n of Home Builders v.”
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.