Department of Transportation et al. v. Public Citizen et al. Pays/Territoire États-Unis d'Amérique Type de cour Nationale - cour supérieure Date Jui 7, 2004 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal Supreme Court of the United States Siège de la cour Washington D.C. Juge Thomas Numéro de référence 541 U.S. 752 (2004) Langue Anglais Sujet Air et atmosphère, Environnement gén. Mot clé EIA Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Autorisation/permis Émissions Résumé In 2001, the US- President declared his intention to lift a moratorium prohibiting Mexican motor carriers from obtaining operating authority within the United States once new regulations were prepared by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to grant operating authority to them. According to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), federal agencies had to perform an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) of policies that were likely to have significant effects on the environment. When proposing its new rules, FMCSA, however, only issued a more limited Environmental Assessment (EA). This was possible only if an agency was of the view that its policies would not have significant effects on the environment. The EA did not consider the environmental impact that might be caused by the increased presence of Mexican trucks in the United States. The respondents sought judicial review of the proposed rules. They contended that the impact of a large number of Mexican trucks admitted into the United States would have been significant enough to warrant an EIS. The Court held that the FMCSA lacked discretion to prevent cross-border operations of the Mexican trucks once the regulations were passed. Thus it would not be in a position to act on the findings of an EIS even if it had conducted one. Furthermore, the trucks’ emissions were not directly caused by the Federal action because they would not occur at the same time or place as the promulgation of the regulations. They were also not indirectly caused because FMCSA could not practicably control or maintain control over the emissions. Therefore it had not been necessary to consider the environmental impact of the motor carriers. Texte intégral getcase.pl Références Cites Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et al. Jurisprudence | Nationale - cour supérieure | États-Unis d'Amérique | Avr 3, 1978 Mot clé: Radiation, Substances dangereuses, Pollution radioactive, EIA, Autorisation/permis, Énergie nucléaire, Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Source: UNEP, InforMEA