42 U.S.C. § 4333
Conformity of administrative procedures to national environmental policy
All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purposes and provisions of this chapter and shall propose to the President not later than
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases, 1972–2008 · leading case: United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP), 412 U.S. 669 (1973).
United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP), 412 U.S. 669 (1973). “" 42 U. S. C. § 4333 . It would be anomalous if Congress had provided at one and the same time that federal agencies, which have the primary responsibility for the implementation of NEPA, [19] must comply with present law and ask for any necessary new legislation, but that the…”
Friends of Mammoth v. Bd. of Supervisors, 502 P.2d 1049 (Cal. 1972). “Resources Code, § 21107 and 42 U.S.C. § 4333 . [5] Section 21100 requires that the following shall be included "in any report on any project they propose to carry out .”
Leschi Improvement Council v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 525 P.2d 774 (Wash. 1974). “050, provides that specific statutory obligations shall not be affected by the act, and 43.21C.060 declares that the policies and goals set forth in that chapter are supplementary to those set forth in existing authorizations of all branches of government of the state.”
Sierra Club v. James M. Sigler, Etc., Pelican Terminal Co. & Galveston Wharves, Intervenors-Appellees, 695 F.2d 957 (5th Cir. 1983). “4, as they must be, see 42 U.S.C. § 4333 ; 40 C.F.R. § 1500.2 . Thus, under the laws and regulations governing the Corps, the EIS and other NEPA requirements are but factors in the decision-making process; the EIS is not itself a decision document.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Rogers C. B. Morton, in His Off. Capacity as Sec'y of the Dep't of Interior, 458 F.2d 827 (D.C. Cir. 1972). “42 U.S.C. § 4333 provides: All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which…”
Eastlake Cmty. Council v. Roanoke Assocs., Inc., 513 P.2d 36 (Wash. 1973). “040 and 42 U.S.C. § 4333 RCW 43.21C.050 and 42 U.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 389 F. Supp. 689 (D.D.C. 1974). “NEPA § 103, 42 U.S.C. § 4333 , provides: “All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies…”
State of Mich. v. City of Allen Park, 501 F. Supp. 1007 (E.D. Mich. 1980). “Each federal agency is required to promulgate procedures for compliance with NEPA, NEPA § 103, 42 U.S.C. § 4333 , and is responsible for determining whether an EIS is required for a particular action.”
Coalition for the Env't v. John A. Volpe, Coalition for the Env't v. Linclay Dev. Corp., 504 F.2d 156 (8th Cir. 1974). “All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory au-tliority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance…”
Chihuahuan Grasslands All. v. Norton, 507 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (D.N.M. 2007). “In Count One of the Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that the BLM violated NEPA by proceeding with the Nutt Grasslands Lease Sale without first completing an EA or EIS, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 4333 (2)(C), 40 C.F.R. §§ 1508.”
Gulf Oil Corp. v. The Honorable Rogers C. B. Morton, Sec'y of the Interior of the United States of Am., 493 F.2d 141 (9th Cir. 1974). “See § 103 and § 102(2) (C), 42 U.S.C. § 4333 and § 4332(2) (C). It would be a strange rule of law to insist that the Secretary’s right hand ignore what his left hand is doing.”
Milo Cmty. Hosp., Etc. v. Caspar W. Weinberger, 525 F.2d 144 (1st Cir. 1975). “At no time, on appeal, did the hospital attempt to invoke 42 U.S.C. § 4333 , requiring internal agency review of policy and procedures in the light of NEPA.”
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.