Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Minimums: Insufficient To Save The Bay, Roy A. Hoagland, Jean G. Watts
Federal Minimums: Insufficient To Save The Bay, Roy A. Hoagland, Jean G. Watts
University of Richmond Law Review
In this era of deregulation, streamlining, and government reform, the voices of state government often ring out the philosophy of "no stricter than federal law" when discussing environmental initiatives. The argument that federal minimums can serve as a minimalistic, one-size-fits-all framework for environmental protection not only contradicts the same voices' arguments for flexibility and site-specific solutions, but also ignores the reality that federal minimums alone simply cannot and will not restore our waters, conserve our land, or protect our air.
Changes In The Clean Water Act Since Kepone: Would They Have Made A Difference?, Wiliam Goldfarb
Changes In The Clean Water Act Since Kepone: Would They Have Made A Difference?, Wiliam Goldfarb
University of Richmond Law Review
In the anti-regulatory climate that currently pervades the American political scene, it is important to emphasize the palpable and significant accomplishments of environmental regulation. One measure of the success of environmental law during the past twenty-five years is that long-term, relatively localized environmental contamination-such as the pollution of the lower James River by Kepone between 1966 and 1975-probably can no longer occur in the United States. Major environmental statutes, enacted during the decade between 1976 and 1986, have precluded continuing environmental abuses of this scope and magnitude. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976, establishes a compre- …
Federal Minimums: Insufficient To Save The Bay, Roy A. Hoagland, Jean G. Watts
Federal Minimums: Insufficient To Save The Bay, Roy A. Hoagland, Jean G. Watts
University of Richmond Law Review
In this era of deregulation, streamlining, and government reform, the voices of state government often ring out the philosophy of "no stricter than federal law" when discussing environmental initiatives. The argument that federal minimums can serve as a minimalistic, one-size-fits-all framework for environmental protection not only contradicts the same voices' arguments for flexibility and site-specific solutions, but also ignores the reality that federal minimums alone simply cannot and will not restore our waters, conserve our land, or protect our air.
Facing A Time Of Counter-Revolution-- The Kepone Incident And A Review Of First Principles, Zygmunt J.B. Plater
Facing A Time Of Counter-Revolution-- The Kepone Incident And A Review Of First Principles, Zygmunt J.B. Plater
University of Richmond Law Review
The Kepone contamination episode of 1966-75 was a milestone that focused an entire nation's attention on environmental hazards and our need to do better in recognizing and avoiding them. We have learned a great deal from that unfortunate story. The evolution of American environmental law since the Kepone debacle has repeatedly used the incident as a touchstone in identifying environmental pollution's causes, effects, and potential solutions.