Federal environmental litigation in 1977: National Environmental Policy Act

Journal Article · Sun Jan 01 04:00:00 EST 1978 · Harvard Env. Law Review; (United States)

OSTI ID:5377998

Claff, C; Douglas, J; Keller, K; More, J

Court cases of note during 1977 that tested the boundaries and strength of NEPA 69 are reviewed. NEPA 69's environmental impact statement requirement, defined by the phrase ''''major federal action significantly affecting the environment,'' has been challenged in several cases involving arguably non-major actions, non-federal actions, or even lack of action. Exemption provisions from NEPA 69's EIS requirement have also been challenged. Few exemptions have been granted for implied statutory conflicts; in some cases where exigent circumstances called for quick action, with a clear statutory duty to so act, exemptions were granted. The continuing question of whether the EIS requirement applies to major federal actions whose effects are felt only outside the borders of the U.S. was examined in several cases during 1977. Most decisions suggested that NEPA 69 was not intended to apply extraterritorially. Many cases addressed the question of whether plaintiffs have standing to seek judicial review of an agency's action. Cases testing the ''''injury in fact'' and the zone of interests requirements for standing are reviewed. (numerous references)

• Research Organization: Harvard Univ Law School
• OSTI ID: 5377998
• Journal Information: Harvard Env. Law Review; (United States), Journal Name: Harvard Env. Law Review; (United States) Vol. 2
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
290300* -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Environment
Health
& Safety
DOCUMENT TYPES
IMPLEMENTATION
LAWS
LAWSUITS
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
POLLUTION LAWS
REVIEWS