This note will discuss the necessity of judicial review of administrative decisions which are made after the evaluation of an EIS. The note concludes that the relatively broad standard chosen by the court is appropriate for the review of administrative decisions made under SEPA
In State ex rel. Cosmopolis Consol. School Dist. No. 99 v. Bruno, a school district having no high s...
This Note considers the question of whether NEPA requires an EIS in cases of official refusal to exe...
The specific purposes of this Article are twofold: first, an analysis of the SMA is set forth and th...
To enable citizens opposing projects and proponents defending projects to predict more accurately th...
The EIS requirement is the most precise of SEPA\u27s procedural commands. The EIS itself must be a f...
In this note, the reasoning behind the court\u27s decision will be examined and it will be urged tha...
The scope of judicial review of administrative action in the state of Washington is a subject to be ...
This Note examines the confused array of judicial approaches for reviewing agency findings of no sig...
As the Washington State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA)\u27approaches its fourteenth birthda...
Washington enacted the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) in 1971, which required that considerat...
In Northcoast Environmental Center v. Glickman, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cir...
This article focuses on Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) as part of the Federal National Enviro...
The court\u27s rulings on the laches defense and the negative threshold determination represent sign...
The courts decided 47 cases under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in 202...
This Comment seeks to answer the question raised by West Main II and Cougar Mountain of what procedu...
In State ex rel. Cosmopolis Consol. School Dist. No. 99 v. Bruno, a school district having no high s...
This Note considers the question of whether NEPA requires an EIS in cases of official refusal to exe...
The specific purposes of this Article are twofold: first, an analysis of the SMA is set forth and th...
To enable citizens opposing projects and proponents defending projects to predict more accurately th...
The EIS requirement is the most precise of SEPA\u27s procedural commands. The EIS itself must be a f...
In this note, the reasoning behind the court\u27s decision will be examined and it will be urged tha...
The scope of judicial review of administrative action in the state of Washington is a subject to be ...
This Note examines the confused array of judicial approaches for reviewing agency findings of no sig...
As the Washington State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA)\u27approaches its fourteenth birthda...
Washington enacted the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) in 1971, which required that considerat...
In Northcoast Environmental Center v. Glickman, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cir...
This article focuses on Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) as part of the Federal National Enviro...
The court\u27s rulings on the laches defense and the negative threshold determination represent sign...
The courts decided 47 cases under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in 202...
This Comment seeks to answer the question raised by West Main II and Cougar Mountain of what procedu...
In State ex rel. Cosmopolis Consol. School Dist. No. 99 v. Bruno, a school district having no high s...
This Note considers the question of whether NEPA requires an EIS in cases of official refusal to exe...
The specific purposes of this Article are twofold: first, an analysis of the SMA is set forth and th...