Law Commons^™

When Uncle Sam Spills: A State Regulator’S Guide To Enforcement Actions Against The Federal Government Under The Clean Water Act, Ian M. Staeheli

Washington Law Review

The U.S. government is one of the largest polluters on the planet. With over 700 domestic military bases and countless more federal facilities and vessels operating within state borders, there exists an enormous potential for spills and discharges of pollutants into state waters. The regulatory burden for enforcing environmental laws against the federal government falls on the Environmental Protection Agency and state regulators. But enforcing laws and regulations against the federal government and its progeny is a daunting regulatory task.

Other scholarship addresses some of the vexing peculiarities involved when regulating Uncle Sam. Those works discuss the “confusing mess” that …

The Clean Water Act: Wading Back Into Muddy Interpretations, Kord Wilkerson

Mississippi College Law Review

“Fresh water: everything that lives on land, animal or plant, depends upon it.” A necessity to our very livelihood, our nation’s waters must be protected. As concern grows over Earth’s stability, and environmental issues in particular, clean water has been at the forefront of this Gordian knot. To mitigate our nation’s impact on water cleanliness, state organizations, environmental activists, and the Environmental Protection Agency have joined forces in an effort to create and enforce environmental protection.

These water quality efforts, however, have not come without struggle. The creation, enforcement, and efficiency of legislation to mitigate water pollution in certain water …

Upper Missouri Waterkeeper V. Epa, Clare Ols

Public Land & Resources Law Review

State water quality standards developed under the Clean Water Act play a key role in curtailing the negative environmental, economic, and human health impacts of water pollution. Under the state water quality regulatory framework, EPA may grant variances to state standards should the state demonstrate the compliance with its standards is infeasible for a certain pollutant discharger or waterbody. Montana DEQ developed a variance for nutrients based on evidence that compliance with those standards would cause economic harm. EPA approved Montana's nutrient pollutant variance, and Upper Missouri Waterkeeper challenged EPA's approval on the grounds that the variance violates the Clean …