The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a declaration of national policy intent, reflecting a reorientation of priorities to accord with changing environmental values and perceptions. It does not amend the Constitution; it is not a regulation; and it cannot compel the president to administer its principles and provisions in any particular way: Nor can it cause the Congress to activate more fully its potentialities through supplementary legislation and more generous funding.

This Article is intended to give readers an overview of a wide range of issues involving solar energy that the Environmental Law Institute Solar Project staff is currently examining. The complexity of the legal issues and the speculative nature of many of the questions associated with this new and largely unrealized technology account for the broad approach taken here. There are too objectives in presenting in broad fashion the legal, institutional, and policy issues surrounding solar energy.

This Article represents an anticipatory exercise in analytic environmental law. It is anticipatory in the sense that the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (hereafter referred to as CZMA) has yet to have an on-the-ground impact on land and water use decisions in the nation's coastal areas. Thus, this Article is designed to facilitate understanding of how that Act will function once the state programs created pursuant to it are implemented, as well as to illustrate the potentials and pitfalls for the states that may lie hidden in its statutory structure.

I. Introduction

Introduction

After long delays, implementation of §208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (FWPCA) of 1972 is now underway in every state and most major metropolitan areas. The §208 program was designed to provide a comprehensive umbrella for the FWPCA's water quality planning and management provisions. This program is one of the most innovative and complex elements of the FWPCA and has tremendous potential for improving water quality and land use practices by requiring states and localities to produce enforceable water quality management plans.

Thanks to some heavy end-of-term work, the 94th Congress made great strides in enacting environmentally-protective legislation, especially in the areas of federal activities on public lands, toxic substances, and solid wastes. The overall record is not without its low points, however, particularly with regard to continued uncertainty over energy problems. The outlook for the new year is encouraging because President Carter is well-known for his sensitivity to environmental concerns, and the 95th Congress may well be willing to settle many environmental matters that have been postponed.

After considering the matter for more than a year, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has declined,¹ over the dissent of one of its members, to become the first federal agency to provide financial assistance to indigent participants in administrative proceedings in the absence of an express statutory grant of authority.² In deciding not to initiate such a program, the Commission concluded that its existing power under enabling laws and appropriations statutes to grant assistance is so limited that the possibility of assistance awards

Substantial risks of environmental damage from oil spills are associated with ocean transport of oil by tanker. These risks have been magnified with the advent of the behemoths known as "supertankers," which can carry up to twelve times as much oil as ordinary tankers. Collision or grounding of tankers is more likely to occur close to shore, where tanker navigation can be especially difficult. Puget Sound, a unique (and narrow) coastal estuary in Washington, poses just such navigation difficulties for the tankers that service refineries located adjacent to the Sound.

The recently concluded migratory bird protection convention between the United States and Russia¹ is a direct result of the "environmental detente" established during former President Nixon's trip to Moscow in 1972.² The treaty is especially significant, however, because it is the fourth, and most sophisticated, bilateral agreement in 60 years calling for protection of migratory birds.