详情

原文传递 Case Study of 4(f) Litigation/Rulings. Research rept. (Final).

题名：	Case Study of 4(f) Litigation/Rulings. Research rept. (Final).
作者：	O'Connell-L.; Hopwood-T.
关键词：	Environmental-law; Kentucky-; State-highway-departments; Litigation-.;Preservation-; Decision-making; Assessments-; Wetlands-; Documentation-; Mitigation-; Manuals-; Funds-; Implementation-; Case-studies; Parks-; Historic-sites; Legislation-; Project-planning; Evaluation-; Literature-reviews.
摘要：	Section 4(f) is the most restrictive of all the environmental laws addressed by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (hereinafter referred to as the 'Cabinet) in implementing federally funded projects. Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (set forth in Title 49 of the U.S. code (U.S.C.), Section 1653(f) and subsequent related and amending legislation (Title 23, U.S.C. Section 138 and title 49 U.S.C. Section 303, respectively)) has as its goals the preservation of publicly owned parks and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites. To address issues related to Section 4(f), an SPR study, KYSPR 01-225 'Case Study of 4(f) Litigation/Rulings was initiated. Two study objectives were approved by the Study Advisory Committee. Those were: (1) Conduct a literature review of recent/significant 4(f) litigation; (2) Based upon this review and a literature review of related documents, identify the actions the Cabinet should consider to provide complete, effective 4(f) documentation, promote stakeholder/official consensus on 4(f) decisions, and preclude/limit the potential for litigation.
报告类型：	科技报告