MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969—The Brave New World of Environmental Legislation

2016· article· en· W22498429 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Frank B. Friedman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Epidemiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNational Environmental Policy ActEnvironmental lawStatuteLegislationPolitical scienceLawPublic administrationEnvironmental impact statementEnvironmental policySubject (documents)Legislative historyEnvironmental impact assessmentLibrary scienceEnvironmental planningGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

*Mr. Friedman is an attorney with Atlantic Richfield Company in Denver, Colorado. He has an A.B. degree (1962) and an LL.B. (1965) from Columbia University and was formerly with the U.S. Department of Justice, Appellate Section, Land and Natural Resources Division. *83 Stat. 852, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., (1970). Title I of NEPA has been the portion of the statute subject to litigation. Title II deals with the Council on Environmental Quality, an advisory body created to establish coordination of Federal agencies and develop long term policies. Sections 101, 102, and 104 of NEPA, as applied by administrative agencies and the courts, are the subject of this article. Section 104 will be discussed in conjunction with Calvert Cliffs' Coord. Com. v. United States AEC, 449 F.2d 1109 (D.C. Cir., 1971). For a complete textual analysis of NEPA, see White, Note, A Panoramic View of the National Environmental Policy Act; 16 How. LJ. 116, 125 (1970); see also Sive, Some Thoughts of an Environmental Lawyer in the Wilderness of Administrative Law, 70 Colum. L. Rev. 612 (1970); Hanks & Hanks, An Environmental Bill of Rights: The Citizen Suit and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 24 Rutgers L. Rev. 23 (1970); Peterson, An Analysis of Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 1 Envir. L. Rptr. 50035 (1971); Yannacone, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 1 Envir. Law 8 (1970); Note, The National Environmental Policy Act: A Sheep in Wolfs Clothing?, 37 Brooklyn L. Rev. 139 (1970). 2 One commentator has noted: There is no indication that Congress considered the possibility that the provisions of NEPA would give rise to litigation or that NEPA would be regarded as creating judicially enforceable rights or duties. It is a remarkable fact, therefore, that there have been, in the 26 months after NEPA became law, more than 75 judicial decisions involving NEPA, and that tl^e majority of these decisions have recognized that NEPA has created duties on the part of Federal officials which private litigants have the right to enforce through court actions. Green, The National Environmental Policy Act in the Courts (The Conservation Foundation, Wash. D.C, 1972) at 12.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.146
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.146
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EpidemiologySame topicEnvironmental law and policyFrench-language works237,207