Protecting the Environment

1. Protecting the Environment

2. Chapter Objectives 1. Common Law. Identify common law actions available against polluters. 2. Environmental Regulatory Law. Understand general environmental laws and principals – be able to identify key regulations and areas regulated. 3. Superfund. Identify the purpose and functions of Superfund.

3. Student Debate– Farmtex Case Farmtex Feedlot • Home building – Feedlot business Q: 21-3, p. 708 • Moonbay is a home building corporation that develops retirement communities. • Farmtex owns a number of feedlots in Sunny Valley. • Moonbay purchased 20,000 acres of farmland in Sunny Valley to develop • Farmtex continued to expand • Eventually only 500 feet separated the two operations. • Moonbay found it difficult to sell homes because the odor and flies from the feedlots. • Moonbay sued to stop Farmtex from operating its feedlots near the retirement community. • Who should win? 500 feet MoonBay Retirement Community Casey Martin

4. What about new digital billboards? Common Law Actions Businesses/people responsible for operations that created dirt, smoke, noxious odors, noise, or toxic substances were sometimes held liable under common law theories of: • nuisance • A common law doctrine under which actions against pollution-causing activities may be brought. • An action is permissible only if an individual suffers a harm separate and distinct from that of the general public. • or negligence. • the harm was a foreseeable result of the firm’s failure to exercise reasonable care (negligence) • businesses engaging in ultra hazardous activities are liable for whatever injuries the activities cause, regardless of whether the firms exercise reasonable care Start here thurs – discuss nuisance a bit mroe

5. Federal Regulation • The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 imposes environmental responsibilities on all federal agencies. • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for federal projects. • An EIS must analyze the action’s impact on the environment, its adverse effects and possible alternatives, and its irreversible effects on environmental quality. • The Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 to coordinate federal environmental programs; it administers most federal environmental policies and statutes. • air pollution, • water pollution, • noise pollution, • toxic chemicals, • and radiation.

8. Air Pollution Clean Air Act Should it be okay to control air pollution through building taller smokestacks (i.e. to spread the pollutants out over a greater distance)?

9. Water Related Pollution • Clean Water Act of 1972. • Navigable Waters • Safe for swimming • Protect fish and wildlife • Eliminate discharge • Wetlands.Prohibits filling/dredging of wetlands unless permit obtained • Drinking Water– 1974 – max level of pollutants • 2006 US Supreme Court (5-4 decision) Clean Water Act • Divided Opinion. 5 separate opinions covering 100 pages. • Cannot Regulate Dry Land that Drains to Wetland. Army Core of Engineers, the lead federal agency in wetland regulation, exceeded its authority when it denied landowners permits to dump rocks and dirt not directly in marsh land but also in areas linked to wetlands only through a series of drainage ditches. • Significance. Significant because some thought it would more severely limit scope of wetland regulation

10. Noise Pollution Noise Control Act of 1972.

11. Toxic Chemicals • Toxic Chemicals. Pesticides and herbicides, toxic substances, and hazardous waste are regulated under the authority of • The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, regulates the clean-up of hazardous waste-disposal sites. • U.S. v. Elias (2001). Clean up of sludge with cyanide

12. Superfund • To ensure clean-up of hazardous wastes • Joint and several liability (2009 Supreme Court case somewhat limits this – if liability can be apportioned) • Potentially responsible parties Carson Harbor v. Village

13. Superfund Sites Superfund Who is potentially liable? What is the logic? Is this fair? • Brother Tom Nichols of Franciscan Friars of California. • Gift of a mine • Copper, Silver, and Gold • $2.2 Million cleanup • Monks spent $940,000

14. Violations of Acts • Fines.For violations of emission limits under the Clean Air Act, the EPA can assess civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day. • Additional fines of up to $5,000 per day can be assessed for other violations, such as failing to maintain the required records. • Imprisonment.Those who knowingly violate the act may be subject to criminal penalties, including fines of up to $1 million and imprisonment for up to two years. Long Prairie Packing Company fined $12,500 in 2007 for not promptly notifying MN Pollution Control about a manure storage problem

15. Global Environmental Issues Potlatch Example • Cross-Border Pollution. • Global Warming. • What is the Answer? Economic Development? • 2007 Supreme Court Opinion on Global Warming • Supreme Court Ruling. EPA is responsible for providing clean air. • Issue. In 1970 Congress passed a law mandating that all known pollutants be to health levels by 1977. Yet, in 1987 100 million Americans still breathed polluted air. • Problem.

16. State and Local Regulation • Many states regulate the degree to which the environment may be polluted. • City, county, and other local governments control some aspects of the environment.