42 U.S.C. § 12001

Finding, purpose, and general authority

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Finding

The Congress finds that it is in the national security and economic interest of the United States to foster greater efficiency in the use of available energy supplies and greater use of renewable energy technologies.

(b) PurposeIt is the purpose of this chapter to authorize the Secretary of Energy, acting in accordance with section 13541 of this title, to pursue an aggressive national program of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies in order to ensure a stable and secure future energy supply by—(1) achieving as soon as practicable cost competitive use of those technologies without need of Federal financial incentives;(2) establishing long-term Federal research goals and multiyear funding levels;(3) directing the Secretary to undertake initiatives to improve the ability of the private sector to commercialize in the near term renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies; and(4) fostering collaborative efforts involving the private sector through government support of a program of demonstration and commercial application projects.(c) General authorityThe Secretary, acting in accordance with section 13541 of this title, is authorized and directed to—(1) pursue a program of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application with the private sector, to achieve the purpose of this chapter, including the goals established under section 12003 of this title; and(2) undertake demonstration and commercial application projects as provided in section 12005 of this title.(Pub. L. 101–218, § 2, Dec. 11, 1989, 103 Stat. 1859; Pub. L. 102–486, title XII, § 1202(d)(1)–(3), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 2959, 2960.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsecs. (b) and (c)(1), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 101–218, Dec. 11, 1989, 103 Stat. 1859, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note below and Tables.

Amendments

1992—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 102–486, § 1202(d)(1), substituted “section 13541 of this title” for “authority contained in the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5901–5920) and other law applicable to the Secretary” and “demonstration, and commercial application” for “and demonstration”.

Subsec. (b)(4). Pub. L. 102–486, § 1202(d)(2), substituted “efforts” for “research and development efforts” and “demonstration and commercial application projects” for “joint ventures”.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102–486, § 1202(d)(3), substituted “section 13541 of this title, is authorized and directed to—” and pars. (1) and (2) for “the authority contained in the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5901–5920) and other law applicable to the Secretary—

“(1) is authorized and directed to—

“(A) pursue a program of research, development, and demonstration, including the use of joint ventures with the private sector, to achieve the purpose of this chapter, including the goals established under section 12003 of this title; and

“(B) undertake joint ventures as provided in section 12005 of this title; and

“(2) is authorized to undertake, from time to time, joint ventures in technology areas other than those set forth in section 12005(c) of this title, subject to the conditions set forth in section 12005(b) of this title.”

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Pub. L. 101–218, § 1, Dec. 11, 1989, 103 Stat. 1859, provided: “That this Act [enacting this chapter and amending sections 6276 and 8243 of this title, section 2857 of Title 10, Armed Forces, and section 2194 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse] may be referred to as the ‘Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Technology Competitiveness Act of 1989’.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2024 · leading case: Henderson v. Int'l Union, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (D. Kan. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Henderson v. Int'l Union, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (D. Kan. 2003). “§ 1981 ; and her disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq. This matter is before the court on defendants UAW and Local 31’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc.”

Connell v. City of New York, 230 F. Supp. 2d 432 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq. (“ADA”). On July 9, 2001, defendants 2 *433 moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint and on January 8, 2002, defendants’ motion was granted in part and plaintiffs Title VII claims and ADA discrimination claims…”

Gough v. E. Maine Dev. Corp., 172 F. Supp. 2d 221 (D. Me. 2001). “Counts II and III allege that EMDC violated her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq., and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.”

Hansen v. Sioux By-Prods., 988 F. Supp. 1255 (N.D. Iowa 1997). “Procedural Background Plaintiff Leroy Hansen filed this lawsuit in the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County on October 15, 1996, alleging that he was terminated from his employment in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq., and Iowa…”

Rafti v. Dep't of Human Servs., 2020 IL App (2d) 190983 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “220(a)(2) (2012)), arguing that these terms “should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the terms ‘competitive integrate employment’ and [to be] ‘qualified’ for” as set out in the Federal Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( 42 U.”

Jackson v. Analysts Int'l Corp., 956 F. Supp. 1568 (D. Kan. 1997). “(“YTS”) violated his rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq. Plaintiff claims that he is disabled and that defendants fired him because of his disability.”

Easton v. Coll. of Lake Cnty., 584 F. Supp. 2d 1069 (N.D. Ill. 2008). “Although the Plaintiffs Complaint references 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq., it is assumed that this is a typographical error, because it is clear from the complaint that the action is brought under the ADA, 42 U.”

Hill v. McHenry, 211 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (D. Kan. 2002). “In its previous ruling, the court dismissed plaintiffs claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 , et seq. 5 . To establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge under Kansas law, a plaintiff must produce evidence demonstrating: (1) that the…”

Niland v. Town of Middleburg, 36 Va. Cir. 48 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1995). “1-725), (3) the Americans with Disabilities Act ( 42 U.S.C. § 12001 et seq.), (4) the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Act (Virginia Code § 65.”

Scutt v. State of Hawaii Unemployment Ins. Div. (D. Haw. 2020). “§ 2000e-5, and discrimination claims pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 , et seq., against Defendant UID.”

Jeffries v. Foodland (D. Haw. 2020). “5 The FAC appears to allege a claim pursuant to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12001 , et seq. and a state law defamation claim.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

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.