C.F.R. » Title 50 » CHAPTER IV—JOINT REGULATIONS (UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE); ENDANGERED SPECIES COMMITTEE REGULATIONS › SUBCHAPTER A › PART 402—INTERAGENCY COOPERATION—ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED › Subpart B—Consultation Procedures

50 C.F.R. § 402.15

Responsibilities of Federal agency following issuance of a biological opinion

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

(a) Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service's biological opinion.

(b) If a jeopardy biological opinion is issued, the Federal agency shall notify the Service of its final decision on the action.

(c) If the Federal agency determines that it cannot comply with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) after consultation with the Service, it may apply for an exemption. Procedures for exemption applications by Federal agencies and others are found in 50 CFR part 451.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 47 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water v. Nat. Resources Def. Coun, 747 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water v. Nat. Resources Def. Coun, 747 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 6× “” 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a). If, after consultation, the agency determines that it cannot comply with § 7(a)(2), it may apply for an exemption, which can only be authorized by the Endangered Species Committee, an ad hoc panel composed of executive branch members and at least one…”
Weyerhaeuser Co. v. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., 586 U.S. 9 (2018). “The first population nonetheless remains the only stable one and by far the largest.”
Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 (1997). “See 50 CFR § 402.15 (a) (1995) (“Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service’s biological opinion”).”
Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a); see 16 U.S.C. § 1536 (b)(4).”
Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 990 F. Supp. 2d 9 (D.D.C. 2013). “See 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a) (2013) (“Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service’s biological opinion.”
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Auth. v. Salazar, 686 F. Supp. 2d 1026 (E.D. Cal. 2009). · cites it 2× “50 C.F.R. 402.15(a) states: [ ] Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service’s biological opinion.”
Shafer & Freeman Lakes Env't Conservation Corp. v. FERC, 992 F.3d 1071 (D.C. Cir. 2021). “” See 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a). The Supreme Court has observed that, while the Biological Opinion “theoretically serves an advisory function, in reality it has a powerful coercive effect on the action agency.”
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Rumsfeld, 198 F. Supp. 2d 1139 (D. Ariz. 2002). “” 50 C.F.R. 402.15(a). The Ninth Circuit has explained that “[consulting with the Service alone does not satisfy an agency’s duty under the Endangered Species Act.”
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. EPA, 56 F.4th 55 (D.C. Cir. 2022). “§ 1536 (b)(4); 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 . B. Factual and procedural background From 2013 to 2014, pesticide manufacturers Bayer CropScience LP, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, and Corteva Agriscience LLC (previously Dow AgroSciences LLC) applied to EPA to register pesticides containing…”
Reservation Ranch v. United States, 39 Fed. Cl. 696 (Fed. Cl. 1997). · cites it 2× “§ 1536 (a)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a). Within a week of the owl’s listing, the Forest Service requested that the FWS prepare a biological opinion on the POC sale.”
Westlands Water Dist. v. US Dept. of Interior, 850 F. Supp. 1388 (E.D. Cal. 1994). “50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a) states: (a) Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service’s biological opinion.”
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Auth. v. Salazar, 760 F. Supp. 2d 855 (E.D. Cal. 2010). “” 50 C.F.R. § 402.15 (a). In making that determination, a federal action agency “may not rely solely on a FWS biological opinion to establish conclusively its compliance with its substantive obligations under section 7(a)(2).”
Show all 47 citing cases →
— 50 C.F.R. § 402.15(a) — 5 cases
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Auth. v. Salazar, 686 F. Supp. 2d 1026 (E.D. Cal. 2009). “50 C.F.R. 402.15(a) states: [ ] Following the issuance of a biological opinion, the Federal agency shall determine whether and in what manner to proceed with the action in light of its section 7 obligations and the Service’s biological opinion.”
Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Rumsfeld, 198 F. Supp. 2d 1139 (D. Ariz. 2002). “” 50 C.F.R. 402.15(a). The Ninth Circuit has explained that “[consulting with the Service alone does not satisfy an agency’s duty under the Endangered Species Act.”
Consol. Salmonid Cases, 688 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
Consol. Delta Smelt Cases, 717 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
Latasha Rouse v. Matthew Fader (4th Cir. 2026).
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.