This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Why might we have an environmental review statute such as NEPA when we already have a range of other environmental protection statutes such as the CleanAirAct, the CleanWaterAct, and more? The first post is here. What does NEPA do that these other statutes are not already doing?
These reductions would put EPA back to its resources in 1980, before the implementation of critical new or expanded programs such as Superfund, key controls on hazardous waste, and important programs under the CleanAirAct and the Toxic Substances Control Act. Seif: The Assignment Was Clear - Take The Kick Me!
This framework allows state environmental laws passed pursuant to a federal environmental law, like the CleanWaterAct (“CWA”) or CleanAirAct (“CAA”), to have the force and effect of federal law if the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) approves the state implementation plans.
We share the concerns expressed by former EPA administrators who recently wrote that such cuts would render the agency incapable of protecting Americans from grave threats in our air, water and land. Another credible analysis found the benefits of the CleanAirAct exceeded its costs by more than 30 to one.
Led by new public concern about the consequences of industrialization, landmark environmental legislation in the 1970s steadily assured protections for air, water, and wildlands.
The statutes that form the foundation of the program, like the 1972 CleanWaterAct, dont seek to close polluting plants. The 1970 CleanAirAct led to restrictions on lead, particulates, and nitrogen from tailpipes that cleared the air of smog and led to much better vehicles.
laws, including: the CleanAirAct; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) also known as Superfund; the CleanWaterAct; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); and the Safe Water Drinking Act.
Unlike regulatory statutes like the CleanAirAct or CleanWaterAct, the benefits of NEPA (if any) are more diffuse and indirect, since NEPA does not impose any substantive environmental standards on federal projects.
Because the risks posed by superfund sites pale in comparison to the risks posed by air pollution and broader water pollution issues regulated under the CleanWaterAct, I have been and remain deeply skeptical of the Trump administration’s decision to make Superfund EPA’s core mission.
Under section 172 of the CleanAirAct, relaxing a national air quality standard provides limited benefits for industry. The CleanWaterAct contains two anti-backsliding provisions. And BTW: Trump was giving his marching orders to the head of the wrong agency: EPA doesn’t set these standards.
The Ag & Food Law Update > Search Site Navigation About the Center Professional Staff Partners Research by Topic Center Publications Webinar Series State Compilations Farm Bill Resources Ag Law Bibliography Ag Law Glossary Ag Law Reporter General Resources 10 Jul The Feed: Vol.
In 1971 the CleanAirAct was passed and Nixon signed it. In 1972 the CleanWaterAct was passed and Nixon signed it. In 1973 the Endangered Species Act was passed and Nixon signed it. But now, with the benefit of hindsight, I recall that in1969 NEPA was passed and Nixon signed it.
Bartolotta contends the federal Natural Gas Act mandates the federal Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over an appeal which challenges any state agencys action in either approving or denying a permit when the state agency acts on the basis of federal law.
Methane Emissions EPA announced it would reconsider regulations for the oil and gas industry under Section 111 of the CleanAirAct and Subpart W of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. EPA also announced it would reconsider risk management rules that cover oil and natural gas refineries and chemical facilities.
Almost every one of the country’s foundational environmental laws, enacted since 1970, is under attack: Coal-fired power plants are being allowed to increase emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants, a rewrite of a CleanAirAct provision in place since 1990. Similarly, auto tailpipe emissions limits are being relaxed.
The CleanWaterAct (CWA), one of the nation’s most important environmental laws, is 50 years old today. The nation’s rivers, streams, lakes and ocean waters are dramatically cleaner and healthier than they were a half-century ago. (credit: Amazon). ” That obviously did not, and will not, happen.
CleanAirAct. In public health terms, what makes air pollution distinctive is the millions of people exposes to common pollutants such as particulates and smog. CleanWaterAct. This law has done a good job at cleaning up municipal and industrial water pollution.
As an example of a statutory delegation of authority, the Court cites a provision in the CleanWaterAct, 33 U. would interfere with the attainment or maintenance of that water quality. which shall assure” various outcomes, such as the “protection of public health” and “public water supplies.”
For example, regulations under the CleanAirAct and the CleanWaterAct, which often rely on broad and ambiguous statutory mandates, are now vulnerable to unfavorable rulings at the hand of activist judges. This could hinder efforts to implement climate policies at the federal level.
In the previous three years, Congress had passed NEPA, the CleanAirAct, and the CleanWaterAct. Continuing the legislative wave, 1973 saw the passage of the Endangered Species Act (ESA. 1973 was at the crest of the environmental surge that swept the United States half a century ago.
Legal Planet's Richard Frank posted today on the US CleanWaterAct's 50th birthday. Nevertheless, and with the possible exception of the CleanAirAct, no law enacted as part of the outpouring of federal environmental legislation in the 1970’s has proven more successful and transformational than the CWA.
However, since major US environmental laws are enacted to protect the air, water, and land separately (i.e. the CleanAirAct, the CleanWaterAct, the Safe Drinking WaterAct), as a result, EPA programs are often implemented narrowly, not holistically.
The CleanWaterAct – It’s routine for EPA to take more than 10 years to act on NPDES permit renewals. The CleanAirAct – The Supreme Court has ruled that it does not provide authority for EPA to address the defining issue of our time. They created a pathway towards cleaning our air, water, and land.
He also goes on to state that "The 1960s were also Congress’s first forays into issues like air and water pollution, wilderness protection, and the endangered species. " Even allowing for methodological nationalism and the focus on the unrepresentative Supreme Court, this is all rather strange.
The 1960s were also Congress’s first forays into issues like air and water pollution, wilderness protection, and the endangered species. Download as PDF. The post Learning to Name Environmental Problems appeared first on Legal Planet.
This includes conducting a comprehensive review of stormwater discharges and groundwater contamination and implementing initiatives to ensure compliance with environmental laws, including the CleanWaterAct, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and parallel Pennsylvania laws.
The central takeaway of this book is that though Democrats controlled Congress throughout these years, “all environmental laws passed from 1964 to 1976 commanded huge bipartisan support” (p.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content