Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil and Environmental Engineering (1)
- Energy Policy (1)
- Energy and Utilities Law (1)
- Engineering (1)
- Environmental Health and Protection (1)
-
- Environmental Policy (1)
- Environmental Sciences (1)
- Hydraulic Engineering (1)
- Natural Resource Economics (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Natural Resources Management and Policy (1)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (1)
- Physical Sciences and Mathematics (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration (1)
- Science and Technology Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Notes From The Directional Drilling Workshop, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center
Notes From The Directional Drilling Workshop, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center
Workshop on Directional Drilling in the Rocky Mountain Region (November 13)
20 pages
"These notes were taken by one of our law students attending the workshop. They are not a verbatim transcript and they were not supplied by, and may not have been reviewed by, the speakers. There may be errors or gaps in the notes and for these we apologize in advance. Where the speaker provided an abstract of their talk, these are included and noted as such."
Defining The Project Purpose Under Nepa: Promoting Consideration Of Viable Eis Alternatives, Jason J. Czarnezki
Defining The Project Purpose Under Nepa: Promoting Consideration Of Viable Eis Alternatives, Jason J. Czarnezki
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This Comment examines how courts should construe EIS project goals under NEPA. Part I provides the basic foundation for EIS alternative analysis by outlining NEPA's goals, framework, and legal development. Part II identifies and discusses two conflicting positions in current case law supporting narrow versus general goal formulations in project purpose evaluation. To resolve this conflict, Part III suggests that courts should reject the narrow formulation in evaluating a project's purpose and objectively inquire into the effect and purpose of the agency's action.