Search

Amidst congressional gridlock, administrative rulemaking is the main pathway for environmental policy making. Scholars have assessed the role of the institutions of government (the president, Congress, and the courts) and key interest groups (i.e., business and environmental interests) in shaping rulemaking outcomes. What is missing from this literature is an assessment of the role of key implementers, state environmental agencies. This research fills this gap by assessing the role and impact of state government agencies in three case studies of rulemaking at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Based on original interviews and a public comment analysis, this research suggests that state agencies play an active and influential role in EPA rulemaking. And, in some cases, state agencies wield more influence than other interest groups. Interviewees argued that this influence stems from these agencies' unique voice as an implementation collaborator. As a result, researchers should incorporate an assessment of the role of these interests to more effectively explain regulatory outcomes at the EPA and potentially across the bureaucracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the roles of science and environmental policy in relation to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA's) efforts to set national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), and it mentions America's Clean Air Act and the EPA's attempted rerevision of NAAQS for photochemical oxidants (ozone). A risk-based standard for U.S. environmental laws is examined, along with U.S. administrative rulemaking and the ozone-related case Whitman v. American Trucking Assn’s.

Unlike the regulation of other heavy industries, fracking—in which companies create cracks in shale rock to extract gas, oil, or other substances—has been exempted from federal reach, leaving regulation to the states, which appear vulnerable to capture by energy interests. As fracking has expanded, become more complex, and generated considerable controversy, some states have sought to quash local government efforts to impose more stringent regulations. Citizens and activists have sought redress through the courts, and some states are fighting over the transport of waste disposal across state lines. The story is one of fractured, fragmented federalism that illustrates the key role played by regulated interests that prefer state to federal regulation, resulting in a variable, often weak state regulatory regime. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyze those US colleges and universities that are participating in the Green Power Partnership (GPP). GPP is a voluntary environmental program initiated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2001 to help increase the use of green power (electricity produced from solar, wind, geothermal, biogas, biomass, and low-impact small hydroelectric sources) among US organizations. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on literature in voluntary environmental programs to develop an understanding as to what types of campuses might be most likely to partner with the US Government to be leaders in the use of green power. It then characterizes partner campuses based on institutional, geographical, financial, student specific and sustainability variables. The study draws attention to the GPP participants that are also signatories of the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC). This provides leeway into future research that would benefit from investigating the motivations for and constraints to such dual commitments. Findings – The analysis reveals that GPP partners are primarily private, four-year institutions located in the northeast region. These campuses show a high level of awareness for the environment and vested interest on part of the students, as evidenced by the dominance of environmental studies in the curriculum, student-run organizations dedicated to sustainability issues, and adoption of green fees. Further, they are actively involved in the generation and use of electricity from renewable sources and more than two-thirds have also signed the PCC. Originality/value – This study is the first to explore EPA's GPP program with respect to the participation of higher education institutions (HEIs) in this program. It serves as a pioneer study, exploring a voluntary partnership between the US Government and the higher education sector and contributes to the understanding of the vital role of higher education in the development and deployment of renewable energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we examine states' use of local clean air agencies and provide a preliminary assessment of what causes states to devolve air quality policy authority to the local level. Data from a unique comparative state survey shows that states vary widely in the number of local clean air agencies they employ and the amount of authority these agencies have to set standards, monitor air quality, and enforce regulations. Multivariate analyses suggest that second-order devolution is partly driven by a general propensity to decentralize policy authority, but that policy-specific factors relating to the problem and interest group environment affect devolution as well. These findings indicate that local agencies play an important role in U.S. air quality regulation, and that the dynamics of state devolution to local agencies deserve further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the social, economic and political concerns of radon exposure due to the rise in uranium mining in American Southwest. It discusses the Radon risks in Colorado mines and Pennsylvania private homes and the action taken by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to the crisis. It states that EPA used epidemiological studies of uranium miners which include those who worked during the 1940's to 1960's, as well as set standards for residential environments. It also describes the boom of the uranium industry cultivated by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) on regulation for radiations, and talks on EPA's standards for indoor radon issues.

The article discusses the case petitioned by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NDRC) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The court ruled that certain decisions under the international legal regime that protect the ozone layer are not considered as a law which the EPA must abide under the Clean Air Act. According to the author, the court suggested that holding the decisions that would make it a law would bring up serious constitutional questions. The objective of the international ozone regime, specifically the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and the Montreal Protocol which aims to protect the ozone layer is also presented.

The article reports on the paper released by the U.S. Government Accountability Office in June 2005 titled "Chemical Regulation: Options Exist to Improve EPA's Ability to Assess Health Risks and Manage Its Chemical Review." The report claims that the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) has failed to empower the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ensure the safety of chemicals being used by companies in the United States. However, many other experts have testified that the TSCA has mostly accomplished what it sought to do.

The article focuses on a discourse regarding appropriateness of environmental laws and regulations in the U.S. particularly on regulating carbon dioxide. It mentions the move of policymakers to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as significant to avoid the potentially catastrophic harm caused by global change. It raises an issue regarding the role of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in regulating carbon dioxide (CO2).

Objective. This article begins the process of broadly evaluating the role of nongovernmental actors in regulatory markets by specifically examining environmental groups’ use of the sulfur dioxide (SO2) market established by Title IV of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. This research posits that the use of nonexclusionary markets in environmental quality regulation allows interest groups a nonpareil opportunity to seek to directly affect policy outcomes. Methods. This article uses two forms of analysis. The first part of the article provides a qualitative analysis of the motives of interest groups that use incentive-based policies in an attempt to achieve their desired policy outcomes. The last section of the article uses empirical data from the Environmental Protection Agency's Allowance Tracking System to evaluate interest groups’ use of market-based policies. Results. The use of market-based mechanisms in public policies offers interest groups a new form of participation in the policy process, yet it seems that only “new” groups are willing to enter the market. Further, I find that though the participating groups may not be able to affect the relative price of allowances (as they claim they will), they nonetheless are able to reduce the absolute number of allowances available. Finally, using market-based policies to achieve their preferred outcomes may be a “rational” decision for groups in that the “return” on their investment may indeed be quite high. Conclusions. One aspect of pollution markets is clear—they do create an interesting new mechanism of public activism for groups that wish to protect the environment but do not want to “lobby or litigate.” By purchasing pollution allowances groups attempt to directly affect environmental policy outputs without entering the policy cycle as it has been previously understood. As market-based policies are employed more broadly, opportunities accorded to environmental groups for active involvement in seeking to limit ambient pollutants, as well as the groups’ potential impact, may only expand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A risk assessment approach was developed to arrive at a comparative risk analysis of the various recommended wastewater irrigation microbial health guidelines for unrestricted irrigation of vegetables normally eaten uncooked. The guidelines compared are those of the WHO and the USEPA/USAID. The laboratory phase of the study determined the degree of contamination of vegetables irrigated by wastewater. Based on these estimates of the risk of ingesting pathogens, it is possible to estimate the risk of infection/disease based on the risk of infection and disease model developed for drinking water by Haas et al. (1993). For example, the annual risk of infectious hepatitis from regularly eating vegetables irrigated with raw wastewater is shown to he as high as 10-3. The study indicates that the annual risk of succumbing to a virus disease from regularly eating vegetables irrigated with effluent meeting WHO guidelines (1,000 FC/100mL) is negligible and of the order of 10-6 to 10-7 The risk of the more infectious, but less serious, rotavirus is 10-5 to 10-6. The USEPA considers an annual risk of 10-4 to be acceptable for microbial contamination of drinking water. The additional health benefit that might result from a further reduction of risk gained by adhering to the USEPA/USAID Reuse Guidelines (1992), which require no detectable faecal coliforms/100mL, appears to be insignificant in relation to the major additional costs associated with the expensive technology required to treat effluent to such a rigorous standard. Our preliminary estimates show that meeting the USEPA Guidelines would result in an extra expenditure of $3-30millions/case of disease prevented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Questions how clean is clean when speaking of the clean up of Superfund sites. Congressional efforts to define clean; A new definition by the EPA which has some concerned that the cleanups may not be thorough; The two major questions about cleaning up wast sites, one of which is who is paying for it; Pressure on the EPA from industry to relax standards; Argument of industries that tough cleanup standards have been obstacles to cleanup; Lack of federal funding to help; Second strategy of industry to avoid the costs of cleanup; Details of the law.

The article discusses the use of retrospective analysis on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and regulations, including in gauging the accuracy of regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) on environmental policy. An overview of the use of RIA on the EPA's 1998 Cluster Rule, which was created to reduce pollutants and emissions from paper and pulp mills, is provided.

The article focuses on a joint project between the U.S. National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the project the two groups will be trying out a new toxicity testing paradigm which could increase the speed at which chemicals are tested, and which may reduce the number and use of animals in such tests. The project was developed after a 2007 National Research Council Report indicated that there was a need for a new approach to toxicity testing in the United States.

Reports on the court ruling that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated the Constitution when it strengthened regulations for ozone and particulate matter (PM). Divergent reactions to the ruling; Implications of the ruling on other regulations by EPA and other agencies; Lack of sufficient data on the health effects of PM; Balance of public health factors.

Reports on actions taken and rulings issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as of May 1999. Civil rights investigation into the environmental and health concerns of African-American and Hispanic communities in New York City; Proposal of the relaxation of dumping rules for lead paint debris; Plan to focus more on `inert' ingredients in pesticides.

Reports on the petition filed by state governments and mine workers in the United States for a judicial review of a regulation placing nitrogen oxide emissions caps on 22 states. United Mine Workers of America's criticism against eight-hour ozone standard rule; Environmental Protection Agency's plan to review the emissions from other states.

The article presents a policy statement of the American Public Health Association concerning the opening of the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP). The WIPP is a nuclear waste repository. The association urges the U.S. Department of Energy to delay the opening of the WIPP site until federal health agencies independent of the Department of Energy assure the safety of the site. It asks the Environmental Protection Agency to develop and implement standards for the safe operation of nuclear waste repositories.

The author reflects on the ruling in smog control under the U.S. Clean Air Act which involve policy judgments and scientific determinations. The author said that the Act leaves the decision to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) panel to examine the standards based on science conflates policy and science inquiry. Moreover, he favored the proposal by EPA to tighten the primary ozone standard.

This article reports that activists are criticizing a proposal by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to speed up its regular review of air-quality standards. By law, EPA must revisit its National Ambient Air Quality Standards every 5 years. Staff scientists evaluate the latest research and propose ranges for new standards, which are then reviewed by the agency's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Because EPA regularly misses its deadline and gets sued, an internal EPA committee proposed several suggestions in for speeding up the process. EPA chief scientist George Gray said that the idea behind this proposal is not to have the policy drive the science.

The article reports that environmental scientists have applauded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) request to eight manufacturers to voluntary eliminate perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and related chemicals, as a regulatory breakthrough. EPA will eventually classify PFOA and associated compounds as persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic when they are added to the Toxics Release Inventory. Companies were requested to submit their 2000 baseline numbers for emissions and product content by October 31, 2006.

The article reports that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is extending the public comment period on proposed changes to the New Source Review (NSR) permitting program to February 17, 2006. The changes aim to provide consistency on how states implement the program for electric-generating units. The changes would work to standardize the emissions tests used in NSR to determine whether a physical or operational change at a power plant would cause emission increases that would require the plant to install additional pollution controls.

This article reports that the transportation bills under negotiation in the U.S. Congress would undermine environmental laws and programs. The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and the road-building industry, however, maintain that changes are necessary to cut back on the red tape that hinders road building. The Senate bill, in particular, would substantially weaken the role of environmental agencies, local elected officials, and the public in the planning process. Additionally, both bills would streamline the environmental review process required under the National Environmental Policy Act by cutting state and local resource agencies out of the process, shortening the time for legal challenges, and reducing the number of alternatives for consideration. The two bills include funding for mass transit and the construction of bike and pedestrian projects. And the Senate bill offers an amendment that would require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to revise its fuel-economy tests to give a more accurate reflection of real-world driving conditions.

Discusses the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals upholding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's regulations establishing standards for radionuclides in public water systems in the case of City of Waukesha v. Environmental Protection Agency. Overview of the EPA Final Rule on radionuclides; Accusations against the EPA; Argument of the EPA against the city; Judicial review of the EPA regulations.

Reports on the United States Environmental Protection Agency's launch of the initiative called USTfields which provide grant money for cleaning up abandoned underground oil storage tanks. Budget allocated for the project; Planned awarding of grants to ten community pilot projects on November.