environmental Law

EPA Rating Definitions: EO

Environmental Objective: EPA identifies significant environmental impacts to avoid in order to adequately protect the environment. -corrective measures may require substantial changes to preferred alternative or consideration of another project alternative (including no action alternative)

EPA Rating Definitions: EU

Environmentally Unsatisfactory: EPA identifies adverse environmental impacts that are of sufficient magnitude that the proposed action must not proceed as proposed.

Motor Vehicle Air-Pollution Control Act of 1965

HEW: -Secretary of HEW authorized to prescribe a "standards application" to any class of new motor vehicle/engine -Stressed need for uniformity of standards -Drawbacks: -Limited effectiveness: considered economics & technology development w/regard to feasibility -Thus: Gave industry an "out"

Water Quality Act of 1965

-(amended FWPCA): -Moved federal water quality role from the Public ----Health Service to the Federal Water Pollution Control -Administration (later EPA) -Recognized deteriorating water quality on a national level -Permitted feds to set quality standards (if states did not) -Opposition by industry and states: -Results: Standards set were ineffective and not enforced

Water Issues: Global Climate Change

-100-150 years of recorded data -Forensic records -Tree rings (400 years) -Paleo-hydrology (ancient floods/geologic record) -Are we in a warming period or in for long term change? -How will GC impact western US society and the management of its resources?

Protecting Surface Water Quality: History: 1800s/before:

-1800s/before: little concern for quality protection by the feds (Primarily a local concern)

Early legislation: Air Quality

-1800s: Communities attempted to regulate smoke from steam boilers -1880s: Ordinances passed by Chicago/ Cincinnati -1890s: Ordinances passed by New York City, Pittsburgh, State of Ohio -1952: Oregon passed a comprehensive air-pollution law & created a state air pollution agency

Protecting Surface Water Quality: History: Late 1900s:

-1960s: A watershed () decade in water policy: -Awareness: Rachel Carson's Silent Spring -Events: (brought more public awareness) -1969: Cuyahoga R near Cleveland, OH caught fire as a result of industrial pollution -1969: Major oil platform leak off Santa Barbara, CA -Result: FWPCA of 1972: -Mandated a process for water quality control -Formed a foundation for current practices -EPA now in existence

Clean Air Act 1990

-1990 Amendments: -Expanded constituent list and deadlines for compliance (188 toxic pollutants from industry) -Expanded regulations regarding airborne toxins -Addressed technology: (Maximum Achievable Control -Technology, MACT) relaxed under Bush -Addressed Risk Management -Addressed acid rain -Provided for set up of operating emission permits for individual sources -Initiated Auto Inspection/Maintenance programs -Allowed for citizen lawsuits against state/fed officials for failing to take action against polluters

Lummi Indian Nation

-2003: United States (on behalf of the Lummi Indian Nation) sues in US District Court against (defendants): Landowners who owned wells on a portion of the Lummi Reservation (Sandy Point) -Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), manages water right permits. -The defendants asked declaratory and injunctive relief concerning the Lummi Indian Nation's right to groundwater within the litigation area.

Lummi Indian Nation: Judgment

-2005 -District Court granted partial summary judgment for Ecology and local landowners: -Treaty of Point Elliott reserved Lummi water for agriculture/ domestic use sufficient to fulfill purposes of the Reservation -Treaty of Point Elliott "did not, reserve water for additional community or 'homeland' purposes as a primary purpose of the Lummi Reservation." -Thus: -District Court rejected Lummi arguments and held: -"Plaintiffs' 'homeland' theory of reserved water rights failed because the "Treaty...does not evidence a primary homeland or community purpose...at the time of the Treaty." - Court reserved any decision on quantification of the Lummis' reserved agricultural and domestic water rights.. November 2007: -Joint Allocation/Management: -Allows separate allocation of groundwater in the case area (Ecology: 120 AF/Y, Lummi: remainder) -Ensures current and future use of water by non-Lummi water users -Joint Regulation -Lummi Nation regulates all groundwater on the peninsula (not under the Ecology portion) -Future needs must get permits from state or Lummi's and monitor/test quality of water annually -Watermaster appointed for disputes

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Review process:

-5 year cycle -Based on recent data and trend information -Goal: to ensure standard viability over time -Drawbacks of review process: -Usually controversial (agreement of stakeholders difficult) -Instigates lawsuits (e.g., trucking orgs, industry groups) -Often based on cost-benefit balance - disagreement here... -Justice Scalia: cost-benefit approach not needed for health related standards under the CAA

What is EIS?

-A full disclosure document -Two forms: Draft and Final -FINAL: Reports the sponsoring agencies summary and public/other agency comments.

Pollution Prevention Act (AKA Pollution Control Act) of 1990

-A more proactive approach than command/ control: -Instills process to prevent future pollution (rather than fix old problems), beyond end of pipe control... Premise: -Opportunities exist for industry to prevent/reduce pollution at the source, in production/operations and in extraction of raw materials -Thus: Opportunities exist for source reduction (rather than at the "end of the pipe"): -Concept/Theory: Source reduction is more desirable than waste management/pollution control

PCA Examples of Grant Use

-Agricultural Sector: -Adoption of less environmentally harmful pesticides or cultivation of crop strains with natural resistance to pests -Protection of sensitive areas from pollution -Energy Sector -Increasing efficiency in energy use -Design changes that reduce the demand for energy

Early Post-Modern Federal Legislation: Air Quality

-Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 -Motor Vehicle Control Act of 1960

Minimal content requirements of EIS

-Any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts -Statement of environmental impacts (positive/negative) of the proposed action -Alternatives (including no action) -Relationship between short term uses of the environment and enhancement of long term productivity -Irreversible commitments of resources

Negotiation Procedures: Phase II:

-Assessment and Recommendations -Assessment and documentation of: -Negotiation positions -Litigation cost/exposure assessment (top secret) -Costs of no-settlement -Value of claims -Costs of a settlement

Four main components: Clean Air Act

-Authorized Surgeon General to conduct investigations regarding local problems or at request of state/local governments -Expanded research & technical assistance (under the Motor Vehicle Act) to assist states with control programs -Provided for development of air quality criteria by HEW (advisory) -Provided for federal "abatement" in cases of health/welfare -HEW could convene conferences for interstate problems. Allowed enforcement & ability of states to sue other states. -Reports/recommendations/enforcement used on case by case basis (cease and desist orders, law suits by AG)

Motor Vehicle Control Act of 1960

-Authorized research into pollution by autos -No enforcement or standards

Early 2000s

-Bush 43 elected: -Championed states rights, property rights, oil industry -EPA administrator Whitman and DOI Secretary Norton were allies regarding these policies -Reduced regulation and budgets (similar approach to Reagan) -Opposed international attempts to reduce GH emissions: Kyoto Protocol

Clear Skies Initiative

-Bush administration -Remake of the CAA in a move to relax regs: -Existing regulations would be met with a national cap, rather than use traditional established programs (relaxed overall pollutant levels) -Mercury subject to a cap and trade system -Effect: Would increase sulfur dioxide (50%) and nitrogen oxide(40%) -Died in Congress

Clean Air Act (1963)

-CAA -First national air quality act that went beyond research/investigation:

Violations/Penalties

-Civil and Administrative penalties of FCWCA/CWA and amendments: -Knowing endangerment: -Up to 15 years imprisonment -Up to $250,000 fine (organizations: up to $1M) -Negligent violations: -Fine: up to $27,500/day -Citizen suits allowed for harm -Fines, scheduled remediation, payment of attorney fees

Protecting Surface Water Quality: History: 1970s:

-Clean Water Act of 1977/Water Quality Act of 1987: -Strengthened FWPCA (coined the Clean Water Act): increased federal role: -Set clear water quality standards/objectives in US -Considered: -Chemical, physical, biological integrity -Health of fish, shellfish, and wildlife -Mandated all waters to be fit for fishing and swimming -Approach strategy was to combine: -Restrictions on dischargers -Use of ambient quality standards -Result: National Pollution Discharge Elimination -----System (NPDES) developed...

PCA Strengthened

-Clinton -Updated requirements (for federal agencies): -Federal agencies must develop a pollution prevention strategy committed to source reduction -Federal agencies must reduce total releases of toxic chemicals by 50% by the end of 1999 -Federal agencies must establish a plan to eliminate the procurement of hazardous substances for agency use -Note: This act was considered a success in the 1990s and has resulted in many green initiatives such as "green buildings."

Significant Water Issues

-Coastal Issues -Supply & Use Competition and complexity Storage (surface and ground) Snow Use & Conservation -Environmental/Quality -Land Use Urban vs. Rural vs. Nature -Legal -Administrative Challenges -Ownership (water rights) -Infrastructure -Climate Change -Culture: Attitudes regarding water

2. Subsidies, Emissions Charges, Emission Permits (trading)

-Common practice today: -May reduce cost to government over tort law and provide some pollution abatement -May aid the potential polluter to offset cost of new technology, or allow some pollution at a cost/fee

Drinking Water Quality Protection: Protected system categories: 3 Categories:

-Community systems -Non-transient non community systems -Transient non-community systems

Water Issues: Supply & Use: Complexity

-Complexity & Competition: -Competing uses (increasing needs while supplies dwindle) -Human stakeholders: Cities, industry, ranchers, irrigators, etc. -Environmental "stakeholders" (wildlife, fish, phreatophytes) -Competing management agencies/organizations -Complexity of laws/acts: CWA, river compacts, ESA, -NEPA, Winters Rights, etc. -Politics! -Federal, state, local -Administration changes -Lobby groups Etc., etc., etc.

Water Issues: Administration/Management Issues

-Complexity of administration/management laws -ESA, NEPA, CWA -Stakeholders at the federal, state, local levels -Complexity of ownership (several water doctrines)

Emission Charges

-Concept: Air/water are public, thus, to use them, you must pay the "owners" for that use/damage -Experience: Large fees reduce pollution more and encourage new technology -Drawbacks: -How are pollutants measured/monitored? -How should the fee be set? Effectiveness threshold? -Too Low: Firms can pay fee and continue to pollute -Too high: Smaller firms may not survive

Early 1980s

-Concern developed over: -Cost of regulation & cleanup -Economy in a slump -Action taken: -Reagan administration: -Conservative leaders appointed to EPA and DOI -Example: James Watt, from industry, previously fought against environmental regulation/legislation -Deregulation trend. Drove agency talent out of government. -Environmental Agency staffs reduced (≤ 20%) -EPA budget reduced by 1/3 (hobbled regulatory ability) -Insult to injury: high inflation -Regulatory burden shifted to states

PCA Guidelines

-Conduct periodic pollution prevention assessments -Develop cost allocation systems to characterizd true costs of waste management -Encourage technology transfer -Review program effectiveness (feedback)

NPDES Components:1. Categorizes 3 pollutant types: Toxins:

-Considers: toxicity, degradability, presence in organisms, persistence, etc. Added in CWA 1978.

NPDES components: Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) restrictions:

-Cooperative approach agreed to by USDA and EPA -Regulation varies on size of operation -Large operations: >1000 cattle, 125000 chickens, etc. -Requires permit -Requires nutrient management plan -Medium operations: 300-999 cattle, 37500-124999 chickens -Requires permit if a ditch carries wastewater or manure to a surface water body or if animals contact a surface water body -Small operations: <300 cattle, <37500 chickens...etc. -Little regulation unless indentified as a problematic pollutant source

Tort Law Drawbacks

-Courts reluctant to grant injunctions: -Potential economic damage of an injunction (shutting a plant down) -Standing (legal right to bring action difficult to define): -Nuisance may be public or private issue -Public officials have more standing for a public resource (courts reluctant to allow private citizens to file case regarding a "public" resource) -Proving a nuisance is difficult: -Burden of proof on plaintiff -Complexity of multiple polluters; difficult to distinguish harm/liability -Cost and ability to pay (individuals vs. corporations) -Tort law is reactive and based on a lower level of proof

1983: Arizona v. California:

-Created the Reservation Doctrine: -Extended Winters rights to all federal reservations (parks, bases, etc.) and their uses (recreation, military, forests). -Further complicated a tight water supply -Led to the concept (need) of negotiated water rights

Negotiation Criteria

-Criteria applies to Indian WR settlements in which the federal government participates. -DOI will be a signing party. -Settlements should resolve all outstanding claims (finality). -Cost of settlement should not exceed value of claims. -Federal contributions to settlement should not exceed: -Calculable legal exposure ("top secret") -Programmatic responsibilities -Settlements should include non-federal cost sharing proportionate to benefits received by non-federal parties. -Settlements should be structured to promote economic efficiency and tribal self sufficiency. -Operating capabilities and resources of federal and non-federal parties should be considered (water conservation, flood control). -If federal funds contributed, feds should not assume any obligation or liability. -Federal participation should be conducive to long-term harmony and cooperation of the parties. -Tangible and non-tangible costs to the feds and non-fed parties should be included in costs of settlement contributions. -Financial calculations will use discount rate as per the water resources rate in the current federal register. -Contractual/statutory responsibly of the Secretary DOI will be reviewed. -Settlements will include standard language. -Payment terms will include standard language.

Centerpiece of CAA 1970: NAAQs (National Ambient Air Quality standards):

-Criteria pollutants named. Two standards each: -Primary standards: designed to protect human health -Addressed those most vulnerable (children, elderly) -Short term standards (<24 hours) -Long term standards (annual average) -Secondary standards: designed to protect human (society) welfare. Includes protection of" -Visibility, wildlife, buildings -Both standards require review by EPA every 5 years

Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Company

-Defendants: Operated cement plant near Albany, NY -Plaintiffs: neighboring landowner: complained of dirt, smoke, vibrations -- sought injunction: -Lower court: Monetary damages granted but injunction to cease /desist denied: -Considered $45 M plant with 300 employees (economic impact of injunction) to risky to shut down -Appellate court: Awarded $185,000 in damages in lieu of injunction (if not paid, an injunction would be in effect)... -Agreed that there was a nuisance and damages -Result: Monetary settlement limited full pollution abatement

Scope/Coverage of EIS

-Definition: "how far beyond the immediate project does the EIS coverage need to look (regarding) environmental impacts?" -Direct and Secondary Impacts? -"Downstream" and "upstream" -"Sufficient manner"

Mobile Source Performance Standards

-Designed to reduce hydrocarbon, CO, and nitrous oxide emissions from motor vehicles - Considered most successful provision of CAA -Operation: Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program -EPA set emission standards -Car manufacturers required to meet standards -Controversial: Manufacturers argue limits are too stringent. Often granted deadline extensions -Success story: Lead emissions limitations -Shift to no-lead gasoline -94% reduction of lead from 1980-1999 -Original source: Autos. Today: metal processing plants.

Surface Pollutant Discharge Controls (NPDES)

-Discharge permits (NPDES) required for: -All point sources -All municipal and industrial stormwater systems -Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) -Permits: >400,000 sources regulated in US -Process is specific to: -Type of pollutant -Type of discharger -Characteristics of the local watershed (newer process)

Mid/Late 1980s

-Dissatisfaction regarding the dilution of the environmental system emerged (public) -1982: Reagan "indicted" -10 environmental groups alleged that Reagan Administration: -Broke faith with the public -Subverted environmental policy and law -Congress joined in: -Evaluated EPA activities/effectiveness -Strengthened environmental laws

Winters v. United States: 1907:

-District Court decision appealed to the US Supreme Court -Plaintiff: Winters, a non-Indian

Water Doctrines: A Comparison: East

-EAST -Abundance of supply -Quality -Large private land mass -Simpler administration -Ownership: -Riparian doctrine -Water tied to land

SIPs:

-EPA must approve plan -EPA may develop plan for a state with unapproved SIP -SIP must provide attainment in 3 years (2-year extension)

Protecting Surface Water Quality: History: Early 1900s:

-Early 1900s: 1st federal legislation: harbors and navigation related: -River and Harbors Act of 1899: Provided limited protection by restricting discharges impacting navigation. -Public Health Service Act of 1912: Provided limited protection of water quality issues related to health -Oil Pollution Control Act of 1924: Prohibited discharge of oil into coastal waters

NPDES Stormwater Control: Two phases of process: Phase II: Regulation

-Elements of regulation: -Public education and outreach -Public participation/involvement -Illegal discharge control -Detection and elimination programs -Construction/Post construction site runoff control -Pollution prevention/good housekeeping

Auto Inspection Programs

-Enforced on Urban areas > 200,000 people -Classified as moderate, serious, severe, extreme regarding air pollution -Required to have inspection program (Colorado Air Program) -Annual inspections enforced through registration

Drinking Water Protection: SDWA:

-Established National Interim Primary Drinking Water -Regulations to protect human health -Established Secondary Standards to protect the aesthetic quality of drinking water -Slow in development (original goal for final standards: 1975; final establishment: 1992) -Standard components: -Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLG): non-enforceable health goals -Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL): enforceable -Drinking Water Priority List (DWPL): 77 substances requiring assessment; replaced by contaminant candidate list which eventually became the final list

PCA Components

-Established an office in the EPA to administer the Act -Provision for matching grants to states for pollution prevention programs -EPA Office: clearinghouse for grants and activities -Reporting: biennial reports required by act administrator

1. Issue: Public Resources vs. Private Use

-Example: Clean air and water are public goods -Pollution/use degrades this public good/property -To clean or restore this resource: -Someone has to pay. Who? -The public? The polluter? Both? -What is equitable? -Taxes?-Fines?-Fees?-Imprisonment? -Someone needs to set boundaries... -But where and how stringent? -Which level of government? Which branch? -What kinds of deterrents are needed and just?

Implications to a water-short West:

-Existing storage and distribution infrastructure -Growing cities -The environmental movement -Tribes acquiring the most senior rights in several river basins

Green Taxes

-Green taxes AKA "environmental taxes" -Tax to change pollution behaviors -Revenues passed to environmental programs Benefits: -"Corrects" the market's failure to place value the environment (punitive) -Higher taxes can more effective (more clout/deterrent) -Redistributes cost to polluters -Discretion: Funds environmental programs Drawbacks: -Costs could be passed to consumers -Backfire: Can be politically unpopular (risk to politicians)

Early 1990s

-Green" product development began -Public opinion evolved as pro-environment -Enforcement grew: Record prosecutions and fines -"Market forces" came into play as environmental concepts -Trend: Pro-environmental/liberal leadership -EPA: William Reilly -Conflicted with conservative court -Conflicted with another slumping economy -Dilemma: rising cost of environmental actions (clean up/maintenance)

Supply & Use: Groundwater Storage

-Groundwater issues -Downstream & "tributary" "connections" & impacts -Subsidence -Quality problems (salinity, toxins, fracking, etc.) -Aquifer "mining" (i.e., the Ogallala aquifer) -Competition for supply & well interference -Well permitting variations (lack of data in many areas)

Lummi Indian Nation: Issues

-Groundwater use on Lummi Peninsula near Bellingham WA controlled by state (not tribe) -Groundwater "ownership" -Potential salt water intrusion (over-pumping) by Sandy Point users (harm to Lummi Nation?) -Water use monitoring - state in control -Water quality/treatment - could tribe take over? -Later issue: Surface water ownership and treatment

In court Plaintiff:

-Has burden of proof and must prove: -Procedural inadequacies -Documentation inadequacies -Bias/methodology, etc. inadequacies -May introduce info as fitting to case -Torpedoing is not legal (one cannot hold back and then sink the EIS after the fact)

Water Issues: Our Water "Culture" & Change

-Heavy use in the desert (ground & surface) -Growing cities -State compacts and their future application -Conservation -Technology -Cost incentives -Legal "waste"... perfection of rights -Better collaboration among stakeholders -Leadership

Protecting Quantity: Water Rights: Groundwater:

-Historically based on land ownership -Riparian style or "English Rule" owners could pump unlimited amounts of water beneath their land (heaven and hell "doctrine") -Acceptable until harm comes to nearby landowners (harm to ground and surface supplies)...recent times: -American Rule -Catalyst: Invention of the centrifugal pump -Pumping could be greater, deeper

Mobile Source Performance Standards: Other components:

-Individual Vehicle Tailpipe emission standards (Title II) -CAFE Standards (Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency) -Fuel efficiency -Vehicles under 8,500 lbs sold in US -2004: Cars = 27.5 mpg, light trucks=20.7 mpg -2011: 2025 car standards set to 54.5 mpg -Fines for non compliance -Cleaner fuel development -MTBE additives and ethanol (oxygenated fuel) -Often used in winter (where inversions prevalent) -More expensive per gallon, lower mileage -MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) found in drinking water -Corrosion issues -Vehicle certification

Criteria Pollutants

-Initially perceived as major problem pollutants -Heart of CAA regulation -Criteria pollutants -Carbon monoxide (CO) -Lead (Pb) - not in original list -Nitrogen oxides (Nox) -Ozone (O3) -Particulates -Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) -Other major pollutants -Airborne toxins -Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

3. Standards: ISO 14000

-International Standards set by the International -Organization for Standardization -Established in 1947 -Mission: (Originally) to develop manufacturing, trade, communication standards. -Began developing environmental management standards in late 1980s (14000 series) -Environmental auditing -Environmental labeling -Performance evaluation -ISO 14001/14004: requires certification and criteria for environmental management systems (EMS) in an industry -Feather in cap

Water Issues: Land Use Issues

-Land use & water ownership -Point / non-point source pollution -Leaching from agricultural lands/pesticides/herbicides -Urban runoff -Sedimentation/erosion -Riparian corridor impacts -Bank stabilization issues -Shade/temperature control

NPDES Stormwater Control: Two phases of process: Phase I: Permits

-Large population (>250,000): -Medium population (100,000 to 250,000) -Small population (<100,000): no permit required -Note: EPA has latitude in dealing w/individual communities

Pre-1970:

-Limited environmental policy -Limited research (body of knowledge) -Limited technology (detection, standards, etc.) -Limited computer technology (modeling of current or long term impacts) -Limited cleanup technology -Limited understanding (no higher education degrees in environmental science existed) -Limited political pressure to make a change -Our value system not tuned to the environment

Negotiation Criteria: Settlements should not include:

-Local contributions from bond issuances -Credits in the absence of cost sharing -Credits to federal OM&R operations impacted by the settlement -Fees or charges to finance non-federal share -Federal subsidies for OM&R costs for Indian and non-Indian parties. -Irrigation costs on poor lands. (Domestic water may be exempt). -Per capita distribution of trust funds. -Credits to federal share from annual tribal funding. -Penalties for failure to meet construction schedules. -Exemptions from Reclamation law (USBR).

Groundwater Quality Control

-Mainly managed at state and local level. -Specific to local areas and situations -Apparent lower priority than surface water (changing)

Risk Assessment Bill

-Mandated risk assessment on actions impacting the economy (level: $75 M/year) -Gave Congress some review/veto power for new regulations -became law

Winters v. United States: 1952:

-McCarran Amendment (43 USC 666, 1988). -Forced Winters conflicts to be tried in federal court -McCarran has been repeatedly tested and upheld

Protecting Surface Water Quality: History: -Mid 1900s:

-Mid 1900s: Greater population, more issues, more concern. Prompted more complex legislation: -1930s/1940s: Feds began funding WWTPs -Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) of 1948: -Formalized federal obligations re: quality control -But no definition of pollution or standards provided -States had primary responsibility to enforce act -Feds: financial and technical assistance to states -Amended in 1956 & 1965: strengthened role of feds but still left states in charge -Increased funding at the federal level

CAA of 1970

-More comprehensive/addressed issues of: -Dissatisfaction with progress in air quality control -Continued rise in emission levels/decline in ambient air quality conditions -State control weak (politics) -Non-uniformity of state regulations: competitive disadvantages developed (industry leverage) Forged a stronger alliance between feds/ states

Winters v. United States: Post 1908:

-Most tribes did not have capacity/ability to utilize newly recognized rights. -Rights were not quantified by the court decision. -Other users stepped in and appropriated water -Other lawsuits occurred (opinions differed regarding venue in state/federal court).

No Significant Deterioration (NSD)/Prevention of SD (PSD)

-NSD -Developed in response to non-attainment designation being based on "narrow vision" -Clean areas: may already meet NAAQS -No degradation policy: limits bringing in new industry that may still allow for meeting NAAQ Standards -One view: "punished" for living in a clean area -Solution: NSD/PSD policy. 3 class "areas" (adopted: 1977) -Class I: most pristine. Minimal increase in degradation permitted -Class II: allowed a moderate amount of degradation in accordance with moderate, well-controlled growth -Class III: Most degradation allowed from new sources...at times allowed to reach secondary standards.

New Source Review

-NSR) -New pollutant source review (adopted: 1977): -Considers "major" (non-routine) modifications to industry that may add pollutants to existing levels (a new source) -Added pollutants would fall under more stringent standards (of new sources) -Example: adding electrical generating plants (i.e., coal) -NSR Problems/history: -Early years: little enforcement -Most modifications classified as "routine" maintenance -Pollution levels increased in some areas/industries -Expectation/hindsight: Old plants will be retired (this did not happen....) ...backfire!

Negotiation Procedures: Phase IV:

-Negotiations -DOJ, OMB regularly notified -If costs go beyond earlier determinations, a review by DOI will take place. -May involve congressional briefings of progress

Reasons for Lawsuits

-No EA or EIS done -EA was done to avoid an EIS: -Inadequate document -Inadequate scoping -False premise of FONSI -Inadequate EIS documentation: -Lack of required information -Inadequate technical analysis

Winters Water Rights : Require:

-No diversion -No beneficial use -No permit ...to divert under state law -Also: -Cannot be lost due to non use or perfection -May be classified as aboriginal: -If a reservation is on aboriginal lands, the seniority of the right is "time immemorial" -Winters Rights: one of 3 "species" of Indian water rights -Aboriginal -Pueblo -Winters

Emissions Permits & Trading

-One step beyond charging for emissions: -Permits -Government sets emissions target/sells permits of emissions volumes up to the target -Trading -Companies can sell permits to others (who may not have adequate technology to reduce emissions) -As a permit sells, its cap is reduced, thus reducing the total cap Benefits: -An economic incentive to use better technology -Gradual reduction in overall cap or level of pollutant units Drawbacks -How to monitor and measure pollution? -New market entrants restricted by available permits

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Standards

-Outgrowth of 1970 amendments -Ambient air quality: quality of air that is representatively sampled for an area -247 air quality regions arranged based on: -Common pollution sources -Common weather characteristics

Practicably irrigable acreage

-PIA -became the standard (PIA claim). Problems: -Indian vs. non-Indian methods varied (Indians used older and less efficient technology) -Using non-Indian methods for water use estimation...a great deal of land was involved, putting a great deal of water at stake

Success in Partnering to Prevent Pollution

-Past partnerships include improvements in: -Automotive refinishing -Furniture flame retardants -Federal electronic purchases/disposal -"Green" chemistry -Etc.

2. Issue: What is Fair?

-Polluters, free riders, and the public: -Is it fair that one party (free rider) can exploit or degrade resources while others pay (external costs) to clean it up? -If a clean environment is a basic right, why should we as taxpayers pay to exploit/clean it? -Can tort law cover this dilemma? -Human nature: exploitation for gain. -Problem: If this is human nature, how do we keep the resource viable? -How do we control exploitation?

The EA option

-Precursor to the EIS: Contains: -Brief description of the proposed action -Reasonable alternatives, -Probable environmental impacts. Considers: -Cumulative impacts when determining that a proposed action significantly affects the environment. Requires: -Public notice of availability of EA documents. (Each agency has own regulations concerning the public notice (scoping) requirements). -A "scoping period" is not required to prepare an EA. -Often, agencies use scoping to define alternatives or determine significant environmental impacts. Result: -FONSI -Determination that an EIS is required

Protecting Quantity: Water Rights: Surface Water

-Protection of ownership and supply -State issue, unless interstate conflict is non-resolvable -Two doctrines (Riparian and Appropriative) -Each have their place and reasoning -Can conflict with each other in some states or across borders -Premised on beneficial/reasonable use

Permits

-Provided in 1990 amendments (modeled from CWA of 1972): -Regulates small firms (sources) -5 year permits that detail limits on pollutants -Combines all constituents into 1 permit -Issued by state or local authorities -Can be amended

Clean Air Act 1976 : 1976 Amendments to CAA

-Provisions: -Addressed urban violations (nonattainment areas) -Pushed for further emission reductions on industry -Addressed significant air quality degradation in "attainment regions" (i.e., keeping pristine areas pristine) -New Source Reviews (adopted 1977): Considers review of modifications to plants that may result in increased pollution

1986 Radon Gas and Indoor Air Quality Act

-Public information, technical assistance provided -Risk identification for indoor hazards -"sick building" diagnosis and correction -Strategies still under development

Issues and arguments involving regulation:

-Public vs. private resources -What is fair regarding pollution/clean up costs? -What is ethical? -Market forces vs. the environment?

legal arguments related to how we "own" & apply water to beneficial use: Issues

-Purpose of use -Suitability of use to the watercourse -Economic value of use -Social value of use -Harm associated with use -Practicality of avoiding harm -Practicality of adjusting quantity of use -Protection of existing values of water and associated land -Equity between water user and injured parties

Sole Source Aquifer Protection Program

-Recognized GW drinking water source. Additional protection warranted -(50% plus of a community using an aquifer). -Established as part of SDWA/amended in 1986, 1996. -1996 amendments: -Communities, individuals, organizations can petition -EPA to protect their GW drinking supply -EPA may approve projects (permit authority /financing) -EPA may work with with special problems such as certification of gasoline storage facilities, etc. -1986 Amendments: -Wellhead protection program established. To prevent contamination by infiltration into drinking water wells

ISO 14000: Potential goals and benefits to industry:

-Reduce cost of waste management -Savings in consumption of energy/materials -Lower distribution costs -Improved corporate image -Framework for continuous improvement of environmental performance

2. Voluntary Programs

-Reducing pollution through stewardship/partnering -Businesses and individuals can partner with EPA or other agencies to reduce waste/pollution -Examples: -Water Alliances for Volunteer Efficiency (WAVE) -Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP): reduced GHG by 21 M metric tons = removing 13.9 M cars from the road/yr) -Energy Star (saved $12B in energy costs and reduced GHG by 63 M metric tones by 2005)

Litigation arguments: Lummi Indian Nation: Plaintiff (Lummi):

-Relies upon reserved water rights doctrine. Sought declaration that the 1855 Treaty (of Point Elliot) with the US implied: -Reservation of groundwater is for Lummi's use/benefit as a homeland -Lummis' reserved groundwater rights are superior and exclusive of: -All conflicting non-Indian gwater rights on the Peninsula -Including those to whom Ecology issued permits -Only 7% of Reservation is suitable for agriculture Lummis' domestic needs are limited by their population (1,256 Indians: 1990 census) -Thus... Treaty of Point Elliott was intended to provide the Lummis with a "homeland" and that the Court should find sufficient water reserved to provide for -Domestic, agricultural, community, commercial, and industrial purposes.

Ambient Water Quality Control

-Represents a 2nd regulatory strategy beyond NPDES process (new) -Tends to focus on nonpoint sources -Covers: Interstate water bodies -Recreation/Water supply/Aquatic life/Agriculture -Standards are subject to federal review -Compliance level (current non-impaired waters): -61% of stream miles -54% of lake acreage -49% of estuarine square miles -22 % of Great Lakes shorelines

NPDES Components:1. Categorizes 3 pollutant types: Nonconventional:

-Requires Best Available Technology (BAT): (economically/technologically achievable) -More rigorous than BCT, but still considers cost. -Specific to type of pollutant. Pollutant types: - Anything not in list above (thermal pollution)

NPDES Components:1. Categorizes 3 pollutant types: Conventional

-Requires Best Conventional Technology (BCT) - considers costs v. benefits of control. -Considers age of equipment, process, engineering, etc. -Types of pollutants: -BOD/Total suspended solids/pH -Fecal coliform -Oil and grease

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Standard development process:

-Research culminates into an EPA criteria document for each pollutant. Research must document: -Harm to humans/environment -Methods of control -Two standards developed: -Primary: necessary to protect human health Based on most sensitive individuals: children, elders -Secondary: designed to protect public welfare Visibility, animal life, buildings/material, plant life -Note: Primary and secondary standards often set for long term (annual average) and short term (24 hours or less) effects.

Policy of George H.W. Bush:

-Resolve disputes of Indian water claims through negotiations. -Reasoning: - Cheaper than litigation -Framework: -US (DOI) can participate as trustee to Indians -Indians receive equivalent benefits for rights -Indians realize value from confirmed settlements -Settlement contains appropriate cost-sharing by all parties benefiting from a settlement

Obama Elected

-Reversal of many Bush EO's -Still no decision on ANWR -Offshore drilling relaxation (and then: BP spill) -Public preoccupation: Iraq/Afghanistan/economy -2011: Announces reduced regulation in favor of the economy

Negotiation Procedures: End Game:

-Settlement and implementation. -Implementation team may be assigned -Planning and construction (if required)

1967 Air Quality Act: Requirements:

-States required to adopt ambient air standards -HEW could set/impose standards (for stationary sources) on states -State adjustments to standards required HEW approval -States required to develop implementation plans (SIPs) - Subject to HEW approval

CAA 1970: State Implementation Plans (SIPs) clarified:

-States: can impose restrictions and penalties with more latitude (as they see fit): -Can impose emission controls that are more strict than Fed standard w/in 3 years of implementation -Can play hardball with certain industries as desired (can discriminate).

Water Issues: Infrastructure Development/Removal

-Storage, treatment (desal), conveyance: -Lifespan of facilities...replacement cost? -Operation and maintenance costs -Funding, who pays? -Facility ownership -Liability -Building storage vs. removal of dams

4. Direct Regulation

-Style: Command & Control: -Primary means of pollution control in US -Standards/rules set and mandated with sanctions -Often called "end-of-pipe" regulation (focus on output from manufacturing process). Reactive? -Present trend: shift away from EOP regulations. -Rule-making today also considers: -Internal manufacturing process details -Economics of reducing pollution

Winters v. United States: 1908:

-Supreme Court decision: -US created a reservation for the tribe, thus should have attached water to allow the reservation for it to be self-sufficient -Tied a priority date to the reservation's date of establishment (1888)

Supply & Use: Surface Storage

-Surface storage/reservoir operations: -Use type: -Single or multiple use? -Water supply (irrigation, municipal, industrial) -Flood control/Hydropower -Temperature/habitat operations -Recreation/Fish and wildlife -Efficiency of operation: Evaporation/seepage -Operational impacts: waste, environmental harm -Sedimentation issues with reservoir lifespan, wildlife, fisheries -Dam safety -Snowpack vs. The late summer supply -Lack of data > 10,000 feet -Flood/water supply forecasting -Storage to capture spring melt -Good and bad forecasting of supply -Weather modification

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Standards: Maintenance Areas

-The Clean Air Act defines a "maintenance area" as the geographic region previously designated nonattainment, and subsequently redesignated to attainment. -EPA takes this action only after monitoring data demonstrate the air quality standards are being met, and a maintenance plan has been developed under section 175A of the Clean Air Act.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Standards: (Non) Attainment Areas

-The Clean Air Act defines a "nonattainment area" as a locality where air pollution levels persistently exceed --National Ambient Air Quality Standards. -Designating "nonattainment" is a formal rule-making process -EPA normally takes this action only after the air quality standards have been exceeded for several consecutive years.

3. Issue: Environmental Ethics

-The Environment is fragile and complex -Complex diversity of function, relationships are vital -Humans and human nature: -Top of food chain, the big cheese... -Knowledge of systems and environment -Power to drastically change (good or bad) the environment -Duty? Is it our duty to respect our abilities/ knowledge and preserve the environment for other living things/future generations? -Ethical approach? Precautionary? Ignore or wait for problems? -Laws/Regs: Can be black/white...or vague. -Will issues be fully addressed?

Lummi Indian Nation: Ground-Breaking Components of Case

-The Lummi Settlement Agreement: -Unique terms are largely untested -water sharing -"Purpose" of reservation limited by court -May prove to be a model for coordinated water resource management from a negotiated settlement -State/Lummi to share management -A model for groundwater management - - particularly near marine areas at risk for saltwater intrusion. -Underscores significant role that Tribes can play in the management of groundwater underlying their Reservations.

The Timbisha Shoshone and a new Homeland. History:

-The Timbisha Shoshone have inhabited DV since "time immemorial" -1863: Government & Western Shoshone signed Treaty of Ruby Valley. -Western Shoshone agreed to end war/allow US access to the land for mining/settlement, etc. -Shoshone people did not cede any land to the US with the treaty. -1933: Death Valley National Monument established by President Hoover. -Brought National Park Service (NPS) and it's "removal policy" to the region. -NPS forced relocation of Shoshone camps several times before final move to Timbisha Village, a 40 acre plot of on the valley floor. -1979: Indian Claims Commission (ICC) awarded Western Shoshone 26 million dollars for the territory. -1980: Hearing to conclude the ICC process. -Western Shoshone asked feds: What law/right does the US have to legally acquire the land? -Feds could not answer / WS initially refused the money. -Several bills submitted to Congress to distribute the payments but none succeeded until 2004 when -President Bush signed the Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act. -1983: Timbisha Band received federal recognition However: -Recognition did not come with a formal land base (landless tribe) -1979: Indian Claims Commission (ICC) awarded Western Shoshone 26 million dollars for the territory. -1980: Hearing to conclude the ICC process. -Western Shoshone asked feds: What law/right does the US have to legally acquire the land? -Feds could not answer / WS initially refused the money. -Several bills submitted to Congress to distribute the payments but none succeeded until 2004 when -President Bush signed the Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act. -1983: Timbisha Band received federal recognition However: -Recognition did not come with a formal land base (landless tribe) -1994: California Desert Protection Act signed by Clinton. -Created Death Valley National Park -Included provision for the Timbisha Shoshone to conduct a study to identify lands suitable for a reservation within the tribe's aboriginal homelands. -1994-1995: Negotiations begin and breakdown -1998: Negotiations reconvene -2000: Timbisha Homeland Act is signed into law by Clinton. -Bill provided for transfer of 7,500 acres California / Nevada into trust for the tribe. -Created the first tribal reservation within a National Park.

1. Tort Law

-The first legal tool used to control pollution -Originally thought to be comprehensive/adequate -First used to resolve nuisance cases -Unreasonable interference with use/enjoyment of one's property -Injunctions filed by complaining party to stop interference (pollution) -Today: considered inadequate/limited use

Federal Reserved Water Rights

-Tied to lands set aside by the federal government for specific purposes (parks, forests, military, tribes, etc.): -Water needed on these lands was reserved (...or supposed to be reserved)

Negotiated Settlement: Timbisha

-Timbisha village expanded to 300 acres: -Stays in DVNP. -Mountain lands given to tribe (about 7,500 acres) -Lands condemned by BLM -Co-management of portions of DVNP -Timbisha Cultural Preservation Area -Tribal ability to build infrastructure: tribal center, cultural center, health clinic, etc.

Ambient Water Quality: Mechanism:

-Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs): Calculation of maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still safely meet water quality standards -Section 303(d) of CWA: states, territories, authorized tribes required to develop lists of impaired waters: waters too polluted/ degraded to meet water quality standards set by states, territories, or tribes -Requires jurisdictions to establish priority rankings for listed waters and develop TMDLs -Considers total daily load of pollutants in drainages -States required to implement controls to meet standards -Models/ assessments are now in vogue regarding this process and its evaluation and are sanctioned by EPA (WARMF)

1. Market Forces

-Trend: Environmental problems seen as economically based/solvable: -Indicators of inefficiencies or market externalities -Cost of market transactions/activities -(Under) pricing of natural resources -Perceived result: Market force approach to the environment will "fix" the above "market failures"

1967 Air Quality Act: Drawbacks:

-Unable to achieve rapid response to air pollution -Air quality regions crossed state lines (negotiation of state standards cumbersome) -Red Tape: Delays in developing criteria & regional boundaries -Slowed SIP development (no state met the 1970 deadline) -Again: failed to define air pollution (no definition of the problem or levels of standards regarding ambient air quality)

Water Issues: Legal Issues

-Unlawful use (adverse possession) -Pollution abatement/contamination: who pays? -Trespass/flood liability/public safety -Overland flow/Flood trespass/Public safety -Prior Appropriation (Jr vs. Sr users)...more later- -Legal availability of water -Paper water vs. wet water (over-appropriation) -Perfecting rights and beneficial use

Litigation arguments: Lummi Indian Nation: Defendants:

-WA Ecology/landowners own wells on portion of Lummi Res. -WA Ecology issues permits to withdraw groundwater on Lummi Peninsula -Winters rights reserved only for the primary purpose of an Indian reservation (which, technically was agriculture) -Agriculture was a primary purpose of the Lummi Reservation -Minor amount of land involved -Lummis had reserved water rights only for domestic purposes.

Water Doctrines: A Comparison: West

-WEST -Scarcity of supply -Quantity and quality -Large public land mass -Complex Administration -Ownership: -Appropriation doctrine -Water separate from land

Winters v. United States: 1981:

-Walton rights ruled upon (rights specific to non-Indians on former tribal allotments of land). -Tribes have jurisdiction over the state for allottees.

Tort Law Benefits

-Was a simple approach in simpler regulatory times: -A deterrent -Provided compensation

Water Issues: Environmental

-Water quality - surface and groundwater -Point pollution sources -Non-point pollution -Sedimentation -Development (think...Las Vegas) -Fish and wildlife -ESA -Fish flow issues/temperature issues (Klamath R) -Fish passage issues (Columbia R) -Habitat (Colorado R)

Water Issues: Water Ownership Issues

-Water right doctrines -Riparian Doctrine: dominates in the east -Appropriation Doctrine: dominates in the west -Mixed Appropriation and Riparian doctrines in some states -Legal availability -Transfers of place or point of use -Change of use -Negotiation -Federal reserved rights/Native American (winters rights)

Water Issues: Ownership: "Legal" Availability

-Water separate from or attached to land (real property)? -Issues (land sale, wet water transfer, paper water transfer) -Over-appropriation of rivers: -Too many claims and not enough water -Adjudication of rivers (dividing the pie) -Winters rights and other basin users -Native American water right negotiations -States rights and river compacts

Precedent: of Winter's Rights

-Winters rights have a seniority date that coincides with the date of the establishment of the reservation (i.e., Fort Belknap: 1888) -Eventually was applied to other federal reservations -Rights are under federal, NOT state law -Example: rights do not need perfection as per state laws -Native Americans could now be senior power brokers - a threat to other users

The CEQ

-composed of 3 people, one being the Chair -staff of 30-50 depending on budget, politics..ect -

Contract with America

-led by Newt Gingrich: -5 year moratorium on federal land acquisition -Leasing of ANWR coastal plain for oil exploration pushed -Lifted 14 year ban on drilling in outer continental shelf -Budgets cut at USFS, NPS, FWS -became law

NPDES Components: WWTP restrictions

-publically owned treatment works(POTWs) -industrial power plants -restrictions

Drinking Water Quality Protection: Historically

-responsibility of states -Local & state boards governed quality -Some areas had no governance -1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) -Brought the feds in to address the concern of deteriorating DW quality -Intended to protect public supplies -Non-public systems not protected - usually safe, but with local growth are in jeopardy.

EIS Quality/Critique Components

1. EPA ratings 2. Format of document 3. Scope/coverage 4. Minimal contents 5. Adequacy of content

Goals of NEPA

1. Establishment of a watchdog of federal environmental policy: The CEQ 2. Requirement for federal federal agencies to take environmental consequences into account when making decisions. 3. Requirement of documentation: An EA and or EIS must be prepared for every major legislative proposal or other federal agency action having a significant impact. 4. Requirement of collaboration: A multidisciplinary approach.

NEPA: Section 102(2)(C): 3 Triggers

1. Federal action 2. Action must be major in scope 3. Action must significantly affect the quality of the human environment

NEPA: Actions Include:

1. Federally funded projects 2. Projects with a federal component 3. Private firms actions contracted tot he feds, or of federal interest (licensing, ect.)

Goals of the EIS:

1. Identify hazards of action and alternatives 2. Evaluate environmental benefits and costs 3. Suggest mitigative measures 4. Notify interested parties 5. Inform public at large 6. Provide useful information to decision makers

General Exemptions from NEPA

1. Permits -Cleanup under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act- CERCLA (Superfund) 2. Categorical exclusions -Emergency repairs -Some small projects -Administrative actions -Sp,e cpmstrictopm/demolition -Cultural management 3. Congressional exclusions

EIS preparation Process

1. Scoping meeting 2. Preparation of EIS 3. Draft EIS 4. Public review and comments 5. Finalization and release of EIS 6. Implementation

CEQ functions

1. advise/assist President in development of policy/legislation 2. Advise President on national/international policy related to environment 3. Identify, assess, report on trends in environmental quality and recommend appropriate responses 4. Oversee federal agencies regarding environmental impact assessment process and referee inter-agency disputes 5. Report annually to POTUS: State of the environment (Environmental Quality Report- not mandated since 1995) 6. Provide general support/leadership for coordination of federal departments/agencies regarding environmental issues. 7. Support/participate in reinventing (as needed) environmental regulation. 8. Foster cooperation between federal, state, local government, private sector, and citizenry on environmental issues. 9. Interpret regulations as requested. 10. Approve agency NEPA procedures and issue guidance on procedures.

NEPA

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

NPDES Components: New Vs Old Sources

New sources subject to more rigorous limits -assume better process and plant design technology

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: States: Standard Implementation

Once approved, responsibility of maintaining standards is passed to the states States required to develop implementation plans (SIPs) Free to use any type of restriction desired to meet standard Free to set standards for individual plants, locations May go beyond federal standard

Implications of Winter's Rights

Provided Native Americans with definitive rights and recognition of the vitality/viability of their rights.

Protected system categories: Transient non-community systems

Provides water for areas where people do not stay for long periods (example: campgrounds)

Silent Spring (1962)

Rachel Carson

CEQ

council on environmental quality

Groundwater Quality Control: CWA (Section 102)/SDWA

addresses gwater quality -EPA programs that cooperate with states -Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Programs (CSGWPP) -Provides a federal-state mechanism for control -Coordinates and works with states, tribes, local governments -1999: Only 11 states had approved programs -Today: 30 states have some programs in process... -Underground Injection Control Program (UIP - EPA) -Addresses intentional injection of fluids to the ground

EPA Rating Definitions: EC

Environmental Concerns: EPA identifies environmental impacts that should be avoided to fully protect the environment. -corrective measures may require substantial changes to preferred alternative or mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact.

EIS Required Formatting

"Agencies shall use a format for environmental impact statements which will encourage good analysis and clear presentation of the alternatives including the proposed action. ... unless the agency determines that there is a compelling reason to do otherwise." a. Cover sheet b. summary c. table of contents d. purpose of and need for action f. affected environment g. environmental consequences h. list of prepares i. list of agencies, organizations, persons that get a copy j. index k appendieces (if any)

Negotiation Procedures: Phase III:

- Briefings and Negotiation Position -Working Group (DOI: WashDC) will present positions to Secretary -Recommended federal negotiation position -Strategy for funding settlement -Legal/financial views of the DOJ and OMB -Tentative issues that may arise -Secretary approval -Notification of DOJ and OMB

1970s

-(The Environmental Decade) -Public pressure mounted: -First Earth Day 4/22/70 -"Teach ins" brought knowledge to the public -Public awareness/pressure on the government -Legislation began -Reactive: little consideration for cost/political impacts -Little consideration for technology needs -Stats: -27 major laws passed -1000s of administrative regulations developed -All 3 government branches involved

NPDES Permit categories

-Facilities with effluent limitations -Manufacturing -Mineral, metal, oil and gas -Hazardous waste, treatment, or disposal facilities -Landfills -Recycling facilities -Steam electric plants -Transportation facilities -Treatment works -Construction activity -Light industrial activity

Negotiation Procedures : Phase I

-Fact Finding -Documentation/consideration of claims, team members, negotiation rationale, legal history of claims, etc.

The Santa Margarita Conjunctive

-Fallbrook, CA and Camp Pendleton: -Battle over water since the 1920's -Primary water owner: USBR -Storage water right obtained to build a dam in 1950's -Dam authorized, but never built -Pendleton/Fallbrook grow, as does need for water -Proposal: Convert USBR storage right to a flow right for developing a conjunctive use project

Keys to Success

-Financial assistance from several entities -Change in attitudes -Dick Martin: A new park superintendent -A skilled facilitator/leadership -CU Boulder: Charles Wilkinson -Detailed Fact-finding -Groundwater and surface water studies -A water use study -Local support -The NPS, Resort, local towns, citizens -Compromise locally and at the higher echelons

1967 Amendments to 1963 CAA

-First comprehensive federal attempt at air quality control (more teeth) -Organized US into 10 "atmospheric regions" -Based on meteorology, topography -Some boundaries modified for special circumstances of pollutant concentrations -Organized 247 "air quality regions" based on -Jurisdictional boundaries created for disputes/enforcement -Urban-industrial concentrations -Purpose: to provide more organized implementation of standards

Air Pollution Control Act of 1955

-First federal legislation for clean air. Provided: -Funding for research -Authorized the Surgeon General to investigate complaints by state and local governments -No enforcement or standards set

Winters v. United States: Pre-1907:

-Ft Belknap reservation created (1888) without water rights -Indians ceded land to US (obtained in an earlier treaty) and moved to the more compact reservation. -Blackfeet Indians (Ft Belknap Reservation) found flow of the Milk River diminished due to upstream non--Indian appropriators -A US Indian agent/US Marshall concurred tribal finding and filed a lawsuit on Ft Belknap's behalf: -Convinced a judge to invoke an injunction in the 9th -Circuit court to stop a pending decision favoring "non-Indian" water rights -(this decision was thus, pro-Indian).

The Tragedy of the Commons

-Garrett Hardin -Referred to the exploitation of a sheep pasture, or "common" resource -The natural trend: -Resource users tempted to increase use until the resource is gone. -Will eventually destroy the resource from self interest and non-management -With total freedom and no regulation: where do we end up?

Subsidies

-Government contributes $$ to encourage pollution control -Directly by grants -Indirectly by tax credits -Encourages the use of new technology -May bring all competitors to an equal standard -Often does not cover all costs (a contribution) -May cause reluctance to take subsidy (bottom line impacted)

4. Issue: Market vs. Pollution

-Government intervention in the economy/market influences externalities: -Market responds primarily to supply and demand -Externalities (or a third party issue/interest) such as community, quality of goods, citizen rights, environment often do not have a voice. Do you agree? -Externalities often overruled by the buyer-seller exchange -What to do? -The government could intervene by imposing external costs (e.g., cost of pollution) on the market -Intervention could apply to raising cost of the supply side or raising cost on the consumer side (tactic)? -Weaknesses/strengths in these approaches?

Adequacy of content

An EIS must: -Have full coverage of all required subjects -Have full procedural compliance. -Presented information is adequate for a non-technical reader. -Presented information is adequate for a technical reader -Shows good faith/objectivity/accuracy. -Provide full disclosure. -Not be too vague or general. -Must explain action fully.

Drinking Water Quality Protection: Protected system categories: Basic rule:

At least 15 service connections or serves >25people to be a public system

Middle/Late 1990s: Conflict

Contract with America Risk Assessment Bill

EPA Rating Definitions: LO

Lack of objections: EPA has not identified potential environmental impacts requiring substantive changes to preferred alternative. -Review may have disclosed opportunities for mitigation measures that could be accomplished with only minor changes to the proposed action

Winters v. United States: 1980s:

Litigation exposure to US a concern

The Population Bomb

Paul R. Erhlich

Protected system categories: Non-transient non community systems

Serves 25 if the same people at least 6 months/year

Water issues: Ocean/Coastal Pollution

Sources: -Sewage -Industrial and municipal effluent -Trash (plastic, paper, etc.) -Sediment from land use -Air to sea pollution (carried by rain and runoff) -Ship maintenance and waste issues -Oil spills and offshore drilling accidents/leaks

Protected system categories: Community systems

Year round supply