Editors' Summary: As Congress begins the second session of the 98th Congress, we assess both the results of the first session (see Comment, 14 ELR 10005) and the prospects for the second. For the latter task, a crystal-ball gazing exercise, we have enlisted the help of two of the sharpest-eyed observers of congressional trends available: Philip Cummings, Minority Counsel for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and Bud Ward, Editor of The Environmental Forum. Mr. Cummings analyzes the chances for Senate action; Mr. Ward those in the House.

Editors' Summary: This Comment surveys the environmental activity of the first session of the 98th Congress. Congress' oversight of the executive branch contributed to headline-grabbing changes in the administration of federal programs. But while busy checking the initiatives of the Reagan Administration, Congress enacted no major new environmental laws, despite proposals before it in the areas of air quality, water quality, hazardous waste, toxics, nuclear energy, public lands, and natural resources.

Editors' Summary: Federal resource development projects often ignore and sometimes even degrade fish and wildlife resources. In the Columbia Basin, for example, federal dams have severely reduced salmon populations by destroying spawning habitats and impeding migration. A novel fish and wildlife program developed under the Pacific Northwest Electric Power and Planning Conservation Act will go far to redress the injury to fish runs. Mr.

Editors' Summary: Environmental law has invaded the world of real estate transactions. When federal or state governments come to collect the costs of cleaning up unsafe hazardous waste sites, as statutory and common law authorize them to do, they may well stop at the door of the current landowner. The desire to avoid hidden liabilities has made hazardous waste law required reading for prospective purchasers and security holders of commercial real estate.

In the November 1983 News & Analysis, James A. Rogers reviewed the first three years of the federal government's implementation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund).¹ Mr. Rogers was sharply critical of the government's litigation strategy. In particular, he argued that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice have delayed the effective implementation of Superfund by adopting expansive interpretations of the reach of its liability provisions.

Editors' Summary: On September 20, 1983, in National Association of Metal Finishers v. Environmental Protection Agency, 13 ELR 21042, the Third Circuit upheld the basic program established by EPA to control the discharge of wastewater from 60,000 industrial facilities to municipal sewage treatment systems under the FWPCA.

Editors' Summary: This is the second of two articles in this issue concerning the Third Circuit's recent decision on EPA's pretreatment regulations. The first article, 14 ELR 10039, discusses all but one of the issues reached by the court in National Association of Metal Finishers v. Environmental Protection Agency, 13 ELR 21042, a decision that resolved finally most questions about the pretreatment program.

Editors' Summary: In order to register a pesticide under FIFRA, the registrant must submit data on the pesticide's safety and efficacy to EPA. FIFRA's provisions on EPA's use and disclosure of such data have proved controversial. In particular, the provision allowing EPA to use one manufacturer's data to support the application of another has repeatedly been challenged as an unconstitutional taking of property. In Monsanto Co. v. Acting Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, the issue has reached the Supreme Court. Messrs.

Editors' Summary: In the second of a three-part series, Mr. Miller analyzes the mechanics of bringing a citizen suit and the remedies available to the successful plaintiff under 11 federal environmental statutes. He examines the conditions precedent to citizen suits, the rights of government and citizen enforcers to intervene in each other's suits, security requirements that courts may impose on citizen suit plaintiffs, and the extent to which the citizen enforcer can obtain the same remedies available to the government.

The Environmental Law Reporter's recent comment¹ on the Avoyelles wetlands protection cases² was of particular interest to me, since I have spent to much time working on them and am still pressing for a meaningful implementation of the Fifth Circuit decision.