Search

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), a decades-old concept, has recently garnered significant support and investment as a leading method for decarbonizing the atmosphere. However, regulation of CCS technology lags behind its rapid development. In most cases, primary regulatory control belongs to the Environmental Protection Agency, though state regulations also play a role. However, an increasing number of states seek control over their own CCS programs through a process known as primacy. This Comment provides an overview of CCS regulation within states that already have or are currently seeking primacy over CCS from the Environmental Protection Agency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, climate change events have surged in both frequency and intensity. Paradoxically, the most vulnerable and economically disadvantaged states, despite contributing the least to global emissions, face the gravest consequences. Developed nations, despite their wealth of resources, have consistently failed to act in the face of this crisis. For example, the recent United States Supreme Court Decision, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, limited the administrative state's rulemaking authority and thus, its ability to enact necessary climate policy. This decision, based in the infamous "major questions doctrine," asserts that administrative agencies must have explicit authority from Congress when deciding questions of vast economic and political significance - even in times of crisis. This Note, in four parts, traces the evolution of the American judiciary's interpretation of administrative rulemaking from Chevron to the present, ultimately urging Congress to enact legislation that requires courts to defer to the expertise of administrative agencies when interpreting the law--ultimately strengthening the administrative state and its ability to fight climate change. This Note aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding climate policy and administrative law, emphasizing the imperative for coordinated efforts to address the climate crisis at both the national and international levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In looking at Carol Browner's leadership at the Environmental Protection Agency, this article draws on insights from the literature on women and executive politics, women and the environment, and environmental policy and decision-making, bridging these fields of study to explore the height of US executive environmental politics through a gendered lens. It examines whether Browner articulated a feminist analysis of environmental issues and whether her life experiences differed from those of the men who previously dominated environmental politics, and if those translated into distinctive concerns and policies. Focusing on a selection of Browner's key environmental priorities and initiatives, this article ultimately assesses the impact she had on the development of environmental policy in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study assesses what causes American states to assume the authority to administer federal environmental programs within their borders, rather than leave implementation to the Environmental Protection Agency. Some observers have argued that interstate competition for mobile capital may motivate states to seek this authority so that they may reduce the regulatory burdens imposed on industrial polluters. Other scholars highlight the importance of intrastate political and economic factors or vertical influences emanating from federal officials. I argue that the relative importance of each of these classes of explanations will vary across environmental policy arenas, depending on the amount of implementation discretion that federal programs provide to state agencies. Results from event history analyses of two major environmental programs are generally, though not entirely, consistent with this theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States Forest Service (USFS) is the federal agency responsible for overseeing all national forests and grasslands. The agency's forest management duties rest on a careful balancing of interests. On numerous occasions, this balance has tipped in favor of the agency's timber harvesting goals while moving further away from environmental protection. The agency's decision making, under the framework of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), captures this development in several cases. NEPA calls for the agency to conduct objective and detailed environmental reviews of any major actions that it proposes. Fulfilling this responsibility has been compromised by financial incentives that arise from the agency's budget structure. Such incentives prompt an inquiry into whether the agency can approach NEPA reviews on logging projects as a neutral decision maker. This inquiry becomes especially pertinent as environmental concerns increase and forest management grows more contentious. Are financial incentives so entrenched in the agency's timber harvesting and sale activities that it should bear no responsibility at all for conducting environmental reviews of these activities? This Note argues for transferring the duty to conduct such NEPA reviews to another agency entirely, the Environmental Protection Agency. After describing the USFS's relationship to logging and NEPA, this Note provides and evaluates a proposal for reassigning NEPA duties, with the goal of ensuring more objective and transparent environmental reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decision makers often cite data quality as a limitation in environmental management. Value of information approaches evaluate the benefit of new data collection for management outcomes. Pesticide exposure risk assessment for endangered species is one context where data limitations may affect decisions and a value of information type approach could be useful for identifying optimal data quality and resolution. Under the U.S. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for registering pesticides before they can be sold and regularly reviewing pesticides. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires that the EPA consider potential impacts of pesticides to listed endangered species and critical habitats in this process, and for the Services—U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service—to complete a formal Section 7 consultation if the EPA deems it necessary. The current process is time‐intensive, lacks transparency and confidence among stakeholders, and leaves hundreds of unreviewed pesticides on the market. Increasing the resolution of pesticide usage data could address these concerns by improving estimated overlaps between species ranges and pesticide usage. Thus, we evaluated the relative importance of different resolutions of pesticide usage data for assessing expected carbaryl exposure to endangered plant species endemic to California. We found that spatially explicit, township resolution usage data (~36 mile2) excluded 33% of terrestrial plants (55/168) and 51% their critical habitats (27/53) from requiring a Section 7 consultation, while coarser resolution data excluded none. In contrast, the EPA's biological evaluation for carbaryl only excludes 4% of terrestrial plants (nationally) from requiring formal Section 7 consultation. This suggests high‐resolution data could increase pesticide review efficiency and decrease the amount of time pesticides remain on the market without a formal evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the framework produced by the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its desirability in requiring downwind states to prove cost-effectiveness of pollution controls in section 126 petitions. Topics discussed include the upholding of the rule in the case EPA v. EME Homer, the issues identified in the regulation of interstate air pollution under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, and the public health benefits of the regulation.

The article describes some of the legal and policy approaches that have been taken to phase out and regulate perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the U.S. They include the Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Stewardship Program, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and the Stockholm Convention. Also mentioned are the Safe Drinking Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) health advisories, and congressional actions.

Under President Trump, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was largely successful in at least temporarily achieving the administration's policy goals. It did so, in part, by significantly altering or distorting the processes used under prior Republican and Democratic EPA leadership to obtain consensus opinion of the scientific community on issues pertinent to EPA's science-based regulatory activities. In this article I explore the extent to which these changes reflect replacing the norms of science with norms more appropriate to the advocacy practices of law. Under the Biden Administration, we can anticipate restoration of the norms of science that previously guided the scientific consensus processes used by EPA. However, the lesson of the Trump administration is that these norms need buttressing by developing and strengthening laws that govern the selection of members of EPA's external scientific and technical advisory committees, their deliberative processes, and the literature reviewed by EPA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, environmental federalism largely relies on a system for policy implementation that allows the federal government to delegate primary program authority (or primacy) to state agencies. Although it is an ingrained feature of several major federal environmental policies, such as the Clean Water Act (CWA), there is little evidence to indicate what impact delegating authorities has on programs. In order to examine this, the authors use a synthetic control technique to determine how actual CWA program outcomes in five states compare to expected outcomes if EPA retained primary authority. Findings indicate that while there were no significant differences in Texas and Oklahoma, state primacy led to improved program outcomes in Florida, but worse outcomes in Maine and South Dakota. Conclusions suggest that primacy has asymmetrical impacts that largely depend on state implementation systems, which carries important implications for environmental federalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite significant air quality improvements over the past 30 years, haze-- a blend of pollutant particles that can travel for hundreds of miles--continues to affect the clarity of our nation's air. Under a provision of the Clean Air Act that aims to restore scenic vistas in national parks and wilderness areas, EPA developed a long-term program to achieve "natural visibility" in protected spaces by 2064. But in 2017, EPA modified its program to allow states to change their 2064 goal from "natural visibility" to "natural visibility" plus an "estimate" of internationally sourced haze. This Note explores various problems associated with EPA's new approach: it is inconsistent with the language of the Clean Air Act, it incentivizes states to overestimate cross-border haze, it disincentivizes cross-border collaboration, and it fosters environmental injustice. The Note proposes a two-part alternative approach that includes (1) changing how states account for international pollution in their state implementation plans, and (2) reaffirming state and federal duties to engage in cross-border haze reduction efforts. Though the literature has analyzed the progress of EPA's haze program and evaluated cross-border environmental efforts, this Note builds upon past work by exploring the impact of EPA's 2017 rule, which states will implement in their next round of plans due on July 31, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the court ruling in Wisconsin v. Environmental Protection Agency, which held that the deadline for upwind states to stop any substantial interference must align with the deadline for downwind states' compliance to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Topics covered include the ruling's implications for air quality regulation, and the good neighbor provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

Environmental policy in the United States (US) is known for its media-specific approach to problems, and scholars have argued that this is ineffective. To combat these problems, some have argued for a more coordinated, integrated approach to policymaking. With Congressional gridlock prohibiting legislative solutions, the Obama administration offers some examples of a regulatory path to policy integration. Importantly, these efforts do not entail significant organizational remodels, which can be difficult to adopt. Three different 'types' of policy integration from the US Environmental Protection Agency and Bureau of Land Management are described. These cases serve as a potential roadmap for broader implementation of policy integration within the fragmented US bureaucracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the relationship that exists between the citizens and the elected officials in relation to a U.S. state government's accountability for its implementation of the environmental policy. Topics discussed include the impact of public opinion on the adoption of environmental policy at the state level, the state governor's degree of accountability when it comes to the issue of air quality regulations, and the analysis of data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate the relationship between localized environmental quality and gubernatorial approval.

A growing partisan divide in Congress stalled almost all new federal climate policy in 2011. The divide frustrated efforts to pass a cap-and-trade carbon permitting system, spawned a battle between the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Congress, pushed most substantive climate change policy down to the municipal level and hindered US ability to effectively negotiate an international climate agreement. Amid the federal partisan wrangling, US cities have enacted far-sighted climate policy initiatives, and the growing cost of fossil fuels has stimulated investment in renewable energy, edging the country closer to commercially viable alternatives to fossil fuels. These trends could help provide an alternate route to climate mitigation, even without international treaties or national legislation. But the inevitable shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources would be greatly hastened by federal action to tax carbon dioxide emissions and use the revenue generated to support alternative energy technologies. That action is extremely unlikely to occur unless climate change comes to be seen in the United States as a practical, rather than ideological, issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the conflict between urban and agricultural areas over the use of pesticides in Arizona between 1977 and 1986. It examines the efforts of pesticide reform groups, particularly the Arizona Farm Workers Committee on Pesticides (AFWCP), and their interaction with government agencies such as the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It also discusses the Arizona Environmental Quality Act.

The article informs that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) have departed from precedent to support the deregulation of the U.S. waterways in the repeal of the 2015 Clean Water Rule (CWR) and its replacement with the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). It mentions about the decentralization of environmental policy; and mentions that former U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has repealed and replaced the CWR.

A speech delivered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy at New Mexico School of Law about the role of lawyers in protecting the environment is presented. It reports that McCarthy spoke of the need to protect the environment for future generations, and how that need was hampered by a communication gap between the experts and the general public.

Environmental data justice (EDJ) emerges from conversations between data justice and environmental justice while identifying the limits and tensions of these lenses. Through a reflexive process of querying our entanglement in non-innocent relations, this paper develops and engages EDJ by examining how it informs the work of the Environmental Data & Governance Initiative (EDGI), a distributed, consensus-based organization that formed in response to the 2016 US presidential election. Through grassroots archiving of data sets, monitoring federal environmental and energy agency websites, and writing rapid-response reports about how federal agencies are being undermined, EDGI mobilizes EDJ to challenge the 'extractive logic' of current federal environmental policy and data infrastructures. 'Extractive logic' disconnects data from provenance, privileges the matrix of domination, and whitewashes data to generate uncertainty. We use the dynamic EDJ framework to reflect on EDGI's public comment advising against the US Environmental Protection Agency's proposed rule for Transparent Science. Through EDJ, EDGI aspires to create new environmental data infrastructures and practices that are participatory and embody equitable, transparent data care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

What happens when a presidential administration fails or refuses to properly administer our nation's environmental laws? Thanks to the design of our federal environmental statutes, American citizens are armed with a valuable legal tool to hold the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accountable: the citizen suit. Environmental citizen suits allow private citizens to sue the EPA to require it to carry out its statutory duties, and can be a valuable mechanism in the face of a presidential administration unsympathetic to environmental protection. Because citizen suit provisions allow citizens to sue the EPA Administrator for failing to perform an action or duty that is nondiscretionary under the statute, the permissibility of lawsuits frequently turns on judicial interpretation of the term "nondiscretionary duty." There is currently a split across the federal courts as to how to construe this term. In fact, the case law on this topic has become somewhat muddled, with disparities arising among district courts and few courts of appeal ruling conclusively on the issue. Some courts have narrowed the term, thereby limiting opportunities for citizen suits. A primary disagreement is whether the presence of the word "shall" in a statutory provision is sufficient to impose a nondiscretionary duty or whether more is required. Some courts have determined that a duty is discretionary unless the provision also includes a "date-certain" deadline, requiring the Administrator to perform the prescribed action by a specific date that appears within that part of the statute. Other courts have resisted adopting a bright-line rule requiring a date-certain deadline before imposing a nondiscretionary duty on the Administrator. The Supreme Court has not spoken on this date-certain deadline rule. This Note will explore how courts have interpreted the term nondiscretionary duty in environmental citizen suit provisions. This Note argues that the federal judiciary as a whole should abandon the date-certain deadline rule and side with courts that construe nondiscretionary duty more broadly. This reading can be supported legally, and will ensure that citizens are able to sue to compel EPA action even when a presidential administration fails to carry out important environmental laws and regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The work of international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) has contributed to the institutionalization of environmentalism. Putting environmental INGOs in comparative perspective, it is argued that differences in authority among INGOs are an important determinant of the strategies that INGOs adopt and the ultimate influence they are able to achieve. This claim is illustrated through an examination of the changing political opportunities for INGOs and a case of a recent private governance initiative, The Sustainability Consortium. The status maintenance concerns of leading INGOs encourage them to adopt incrementalist and pro-market policies that help launch weak governance schemes and frustrate many other environmental INGOs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on environmental nongovermental organizations (ENGOs). It refers to the support of activities of less-institutionalized, more radical activists by ENGOs in various ways. It describes the symbiotic relationship between ENGOs and radical environmental activists. It explains the role of ENGOs in some sociologists of social movements. It highlights the external institutionalization of ENGOs which did not eclipse less institutionalized forms of direct action and should not be exaggerated.

The article discusses the impact of ammonia on air pollution in the U.S. Topics include research led by atmospheric scientist Jeff Collett, the role of agricultural sources and automobiles in urban areas in causing air pollution, and air quality regulations affecting ammonia emissions in Great Britain. Possible U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policies are noted.

For many national parks and wilderness areas with special air quality protections (Class I areas) in the western United States (U.S.), wildfire smoke and dust events can have a large impact on visibility. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 1999 Regional Haze Rule used the 20% haziest days to track visibility changes over time even if they are dominated by smoke or dust. Visibility on the 20% haziest days has remained constant or degraded over the last 16 yr at some Class I areas despite widespread emission reductions from anthropogenic sources. To better track visibility changes specifically associated with anthropogenic pollution sources rather than natural sources, the EPA has revised the Regional Haze Rule to track visibility on the 20% most anthropogenically impaired (hereafter, most impaired) days rather than the haziest days. To support the implementation of this revised requirement, the EPA has proposed (but not finalized) a recommended metric for characterizing the anthropogenic and natural portions of the daily extinction budget at each site. This metric selects the 20% most impaired days based on these portions using a “delta deciview” approach to quantify the deciview scale impact of anthropogenic light extinction. Using this metric, sulfate and nitrate make up the majority of the anthropogenic extinction in 2015 on these days, with natural extinction largely made up of organic carbon mass in the eastern U.S. and a combination of organic carbon mass, dust components, and sea salt in the western U.S. For sites in the western U.S., the seasonality of days selected as the 20% most impaired is different than the seasonality of the 20% haziest days, with many more winter and spring days selected. Applying this new metric to the 2000-2015 period across sites representing Class I areas results in substantial changes in the calculated visibility trend for the northern Rockies and southwest U.S., but little change for the eastern U.S. Implications: Changing the approach for tracking visibility in the Regional Haze Rule allows the EPA, states, and the public to track visibility on days when reductions in anthropogenic emissions have the greatest potential to improve the view. The calculations involved with the recommended metric can be incorporated into the routine IMPROVE (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments) data processing, enabling rapid analysis of current and future visibility trends. Natural visibility conditions are important in the calculations for the recommended metric, necessitating the need for additional analysis and potential refinement of their values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses U.S. community involvement of citizen scientists in environmental cleanup and protection, under guidance of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). An overview of the citizens' roles in environmental cleanup of Superfund sites in the U.S., including assistant professor Mónica Ramírez-Andreotta's role in this regard, is provided. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The Huai River and Qingling Mountain divide (H-Q) divide China into north and south with respect to public policies for building construction and operation practises. China's building energy efficiency standard mandates that air exchange rates be 0.5 h − 1 north of the H-Q divide and 1 h − 1 south of the divide. China's heating policy allows space heating systems only north of the H-Q divide. Consequently, indoor temperature and humidity differ considerably between north and south. A theoretical model using indoor temperature, humidity, and air change rate was developed to predict indoor formaldehyde concentrations. Data for 39 cities were obtained from 42 studies. There was good agreement between the literature and modelling in a theoretical reference room. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA) model was applied to estimate cancer risk from formaldehyde exposure indoors. The median indoor formaldehyde concentration for renovation ever from 2002 to 2015 in Chinese cities was 125 μg/m 3 , which is higher than the WHO threshold, 100 μg/m 3 . The median indoor formaldehyde concentrations in the north were higher than in the south (0.5 times higher for dwellings renovated within the past year and 0.2 times higher for renovation ever), driven by the much higher northern winter concentrations (40–1320%). The U.S.EPA model predicts that the lifetime formaldehyde related cancer risk for people living north of the H-Q divide is 1.2 times greater than for people living south. This can be partly explained by greater indoor exposure to formaldehyde for Chinese living north of the H-Q divide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the National Ambient Air Quality Standards of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that outlines the acceptable air pollution threshold value for each of the six criteria pollutants. It mentions that the compliance with the ozone NAAQS is determined by the 3-yr average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-h average ozone.

Scholars of democratic experimentalism and new governance rightly criticize the static allocations of authority found in the American traditional federalism framework for its rigidity and potential to stifle innovation at the state and local levels. Nevertheless, this critique underappreciates the level of experimentation harbored by this framework, as witnessed in the dynamic interaction between the various levels of government. This dynamic interplay, which is very much on exhibit with respect to climate change regulation, is far from being devoid of new policy innovation. It also exhibits something that, in the long run, may be just as important—the adoption, at local and regional levels, of policy innovations developed at other levels, often on a national or international scale. Hence not only do we see policy innovation arising out of traditional American federalism, but also “scale innovation.” This backdrop is important when exploring the best governance models for emerging environmental issues, the full scope of which are still poorly understood. Where does climate change adaptation fit? Does it illustrate the market failures and potential gamesmanship that have justified traditional federalism models, complete with a strong policymaking role for the federal government, or is it best addressed as a problem ripe for the multilevel governance solutions offered by collaborative models? Any attempt to answer this question must match up the problems presented by adaption to the tools and processes offered by more traditional environmental federalism and that offered by collaborative governance regimes. I argue that, as understood so far, adaptation calls for a hybrid between traditional federalism models and models suggested by democratic experimentalism and collaborative governance. Commentators uniformly predict that climate change will bring with it dynamic, complex and potentially abrupt, eco-systemic change at varying scales. Thus, for some, regulations in the service of adaptation should seek to reduce the vulnerability of ecosystems to abrupt and uncertain change and to reinforce the resiliency of such systems. This process would seem ideally suited to democratic experimentalism—a problem in need of a regulatory system that is constantly monitoring its effects and updating its requirements. But for others, adaptation will necessitate national (and possibly international) infrastructure and regulations, which, together with needed minimum standards applicable to intrastate issues, will call for federal, state and local regulation similar to traditional federalism. I conclude that a model for a hybrid of the two—experimentalism and federalism—might be found in the cooperative federalism structure of EPA’s recent Clean Power Plan. Here, states are held accountable by the federal government to regulatory goals of their own making. Thus the Plan incorporates flexibility of experimentalism but also the minimum standards and backstop of federal regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Technical innovation is ubiquitous in contemporary society and contributes to its extraordinarily dynamic character. Sometimes these innovations have significant effects on the environment or on human health. They may also stimulate efforts to develop second-order technologies to ameliorate those effects. The development of the automobile and its impact on life in the United States and throughout the world is an example. The story of modern environmental regulation more generally includes chapters filled with examples of similar efforts to respond to an enormous array of technological advances. This Article uses a different lens to consider the role of technological innovation. In particular, it considers how technological advances have the potential to shape governance efforts in the compliance realm. The Article demonstrates that such technological advances--especially new and improved monitoring capacity, advances in information dissemination through ereporting and other techniques, and improved capacity to analyze information--have significant potential to transform governance efforts to promote compliance. Such transformation is likely to affect not only the "how" of compliance promotion, but also the "who"--who is involved in promoting compliance. Technological innovation is likely to contribute to new thinking about the roles key actors can and should play in promoting compliance with legal norms. The Article discusses some of the potential benefits of these types of technological innovation in the context of the Environmental Protection Agency's ongoing efforts to improve its compliance efforts by taking advantage of emerging technologies. We also identify some of the pitfalls or challenges that agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency need to be aware of in opening this emerging bundle of new tools and making use of them to address real-world environmental needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The absence of a clear definition of environmental justice areas has been cited as one of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's major deficiencies in managing federal environmental justice programs. Several states have explicitly defined potential environmental justice areas and integrated targeted efforts into the policy-making process. At the block-group level, this study evaluates the effects of New York State's environmental justice policy, which defines communities of concern in terms of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics as well as mandates supplemental regulatory enforcement activities for these neighborhoods, on the agency's policy implementation practices under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. The empirical findings suggest that there is inconclusive evidence regarding race/ethnicity- and class-based environmental inequity. Also, the state's policy intervention is not universally effective. Moreover, task environments of a given community are a consistent determinant of the agency's regulatory compliance monitoring and assurance activities. This study then derives broader implications regarding the adoption of a policy instrument that defines and screens potential environmental justice communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2007, the United States Army Corps of Engineers granted Mingo Logan Coal Co. a permit to discharge dredge and fill material into four West Virginia streams and their tributaries. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not file an objection despite concerns about the discharge's environmental impacts. Two years later, EPA moved to withdraw the permit in light of new information and circumstances regarding the discharge's impact on wildlife. EPA claimed that it was authorized to withdraw the permit under Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act, which provides the Administrator of EPA with the authority to veto specification sites "whenever he determines" a discharge will have an "unacceptable adverse effect" on identified environmental resources. Mingo Logan appealed EPA's permit withdrawal on the grounds that EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld EPA's authority to retroactively withdraw the permit. Although the court's decision has sweeping implications for the reach of EPA, this Comment argues that such broad administrative authority is justified by the plain text of the Clean Water Act and the need for the federal government to take immediate action during environmental crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ports are closed or semi-closed coastal systems with limited water circulation, poor flushing and weak tidal exchange. They are characterized as pollution hotspots or areas of stagnation with a variety of maritime pollutants. Nowadays, shipping and port managers aim to address environmental risk in their operations, striving to achieve suitable environmental management systems and environmental policies. In that way, environmental impacts are thoroughly considered, actions to minimize and prevent these effects are identified while human activities for prevention, reduction and mitigation of harmful consequences are managed. The current project provides details of quality and performance indicators, based on physical and biogeochemical environmental parameters required to monitor and audit the effectiveness of environmental management system and environmental policy applied in ports. These indicators will be used as powerful tools strengthening sound decisions when developing, shaping and evaluating national and local environmental management systems and policies. The selected indicators are described and their monitoring processes are presented and discussed. Examples of selected best environmental practice from various port authorities are included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]