Law Commons^™

Regulation Weakness And Lack Of Public Awareness Has Impeded The Implementation Of Environmental Policies In Saudi Arabia, Nada Gurmalla Algamdy

Dissertations & Theses

This research aimed to substantially illustrate that the weakness of environmental regulations and lack of public participation in urban planning alongside poor public awareness in Saudi Arabia has inhibited the implementation of environmental policies across this region. To study these issues, this research compared the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (“KSA”) to the United States (“US”) building on numerous studies to illustrate how the identified weaknesses correlate with weak or ineffective environmental policies. It is well known that it would be better to use a European country “because it's known that the EU has tough environmental measures" as a model for …

Drinking Water Protection And Agricultural Exceptionalism, Margot J. Pollans

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Providing safe drinking water is a basic responsibility of government. In the United States, local water utilities shoulder much of this burden, but federal drinking water law sets these utilities up to fail. The primary problem arises in the context of nonpoint source pollution, where federal drinking water law favors end-of-line clean up by water utilities over pollution prevention by farmers and other nonpoint source polluters. This system is both inefficient and unfair.

Although the Safe Drinking Water Act requires local utilities to provide safe water, it gives them few tools to engage in water pollution prevention and instead emphasizes …

Plain Meaning, Precedent, And Metaphysics: Lessons In Statutory Interpretation From Analyzing The Elements Of The Clean Water Act Offense, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article, the fifth in a series of five, completes the author’s detailed analysis of how federal courts have interpreted each element of the Clean Water Act (CWA) offense. Compiling statistics across the four prior articles, it draws conclusions about statutory interpretation in general, finding that the depth of legal analysis increases with the level of court; that environmentally positive results decrease with the level of court; that courts use only a small number of canons and other interpretive devices; that their uses of interpretive devices change over time; and that interpretive devices are not all outcome-neutral. The author also …

Plain Meaning, Precedent, And Metaphysics: Interpreting The “Point Source” Element Of The Clean Water Act Offense, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article, the fourth in a series of five, examines the continuing struggles to define “point source” and “nonpoint source” under the Clean Water Act. State regulation of nonpoint sources is neither pervasive nor robust, and most continuing water pollution problems can be traced primarily to nonpoint sources. EPA should define nonpoint sources by regulation and begin to expand the definition of point source by incorporating established case law and Agency practice to bring more nonpoint sources into the point source definition.

Plain Meaning, Precedent, And Metaphysics: Interpreting The “Navigable Waters” Element Of The Federal Water Pollution Offense, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article, the third in a series of five, examines the meaning of “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act. It traces the traditional judicial interpretation of navigable waters and how Congress and EPA attempted to extend its meaning, then examines how the term has been applied in the context of tributaries and wetlands, isolated waters, groundwater, and EPA’s unitary theory of navigable waters. The author then analyzes EPA and the Corps’ 2014 proposed amendments to the definition of “waters of the United States,” and concludes that those amendments may resolve much of the interpretive crisis.

A Primer: Air And Water Environmental Quality Standards In The United States, Jason J. Czarnezki

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article, designed as a resource for environmental law professors both domestically and abroad, addresses how environmental quality standards are created, implemented, and enforced in the United States. The answers to these questions are useful to those teaching U.S. environmental law and international scholars, especially in the European Union, who are faced with the challenge of creating new environmental quality standards under both national and EU directives. It must be noted that this project is complicated by the federal system within the country, and, thus, attention must be devoted to the federal-state relationship. In fact, the major relevant statutes, the …

Plain Meaning, Precedent, And Metaphysics: Interpreting The “Pollutant” Element Of The Federal Water Pollution Offense, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article, the second in a series of five, examines the meaning of “pollutant” under the Clean Water Act. Congress and EPA have defined “pollutant” to mean a list of specific substances and broad categories of materials and wastes discharged into water, e.g., “biological materials” and “chemical wastes.” The definition is broad enough to encompass virtually all substances associated with human activity that are discharged to water, regardless of whether the substances cause pollution or are produced through human endeavor. Therefore, “pollutant” is rarely a limiting element. Instead, the issues with the definition of “pollutant” primarily address whether it includes …

Plain Meaning, Precedent, And Metaphysics: Interpreting The “Addition” Element Of The Clean Water Act Offense, Jeffrey G. Miller

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The Clean Water Act (CWA) prohibits addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source by any person without a permit. Surprisingly, the first element of this prohibition, “addition,” remains undefined. It has been interpreted broadly by regulators and judges to expand the prohibition to such an extent that it threatens to capture innocent people. EPA in particular has confused “addition” with “navigable waters” to such an extent that it threatens to eviscerate half of the CWA’s regulatory strategies and programs: water quality standards and the § 404 program protecting wetlands. This Article examines the interpretation of “addition” …