Search Results | Environmental Law Reporter®

Search Results

Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

The Double Jeopardy Problem Inherent in RCRA Enforcement: An Overview and Possible Solutions

Editors' Summary: In May 1984, EPA's Office of Solid Waste issued the first Civil Penalty Policy under RCRA. Since then, EPA has been criticized for assessing penalties that are not large enough to offset the economic benefits of noncompliance. On the heels of this criticism, EPA issued its revised RCRA Civil Penalty Policy in October 1990.

The Revised European Community Civil Liability for Damage From Waste Proposal

Editors' Summary: With its long history of industrialization and high population density, Europe faces serious environmental problems. Initiatives developed by the European Community (EC) are serving as catalysts and frameworks for addressing these problems. One initiative that the EC is currently considering is the proposed Directive on Civil Liability for Damage From Waste. This proposed directive would create a far-reaching toxic tort and cleanup liability regime.

Keynote Address

How to improve the federal/state "partnership" in the environmental area is a difficult subject. Despite my best attempts to devise simple solutions with resolving power, the situation is not amenable to easy fixes.

Regulation of Air Quality: Who is Leading Whom? Some States Have Adopted Greater Restrictions While Others Are Believed to Lag Far Behind

LEE DEHIHNS: Rather than discuss the Clean Air Act amendments from the view of their relationship to the states, let me review some of the history of our federal air act legislation to illustrate how it frames our present situation. You will see in the history the underpinning of some of the proposed amendments. You also will see that the proposed amendments still won't solve the federal/state dilemmas.

The first federal clean air legislation was passed in 1955.

Regulation of Water Quality: Is EPA Meeting Its Obligations or Can the States Better Meet Water Quality Challenges?

JAMES R. ELDER: I am going to discuss what I want to describe as EPA's tightrope walk between the need for national consistency and state flexibility in implementation. I will discuss the obligations and roles of both EPA and the states.

The states need to be at the front line to take the lead on implementation, but what is the extent of this lead? What is the meaning of delegation? And what degree of responsibility is EPA left to retain?

Regulating Solid and Hazardous Wastes: Has Federal Regulation Lived Up to Its Mandate or Can the States Do a Better Job?

NANCY FIRESTONE: I would like to discuss a recent EPA study. When Don Clay, the new Assistant Administrator for the Office of Solid Waste And Emergency Response, took office in November and Chris Holmes was designated his Principal Deputy, they already had before them the Superfund 90-day study. This became a blueprint for carrying out the Superfund program.

A Clean Air Act Primer: Part I (Chapter 4)

Editors' Summary: On November 15, 1990, President Bush signed into law the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the first comprehensive changes to the Act in 13 years. During the intervening months since its enactment, EPA has geared up, streamlined, and commenced its rulemaking processes to accommodate the regulatory burden the new law places on the Agency. As amended by the 1990 amendments, the Clean Air Act instructs EPA to promulgate 27 rules during each of the first two years.

A Clean Air Act Primer: Part II (Chapter 6)

Editors' Summary: In this second of a three-part series on the Clean Air Act and the 1990 amendments, the authors analyze the background of several key Clean Air Act sections, including the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program, new and modified source review, the national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) program, acid deposition control provisions, and mobile source controls. The authors explore the evolution of the PSD program from its origins in Sierra Club v.