Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Opening The Gates Of Cow Palace: Regulating Runoff Manure As A Hazardous Waste Under Rcra, Reed J. Mccalib
Opening The Gates Of Cow Palace: Regulating Runoff Manure As A Hazardous Waste Under Rcra, Reed J. Mccalib
Michigan Law Review
In 2015, a federal court held for the first time that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) may regulate runoff manure as a “solid waste” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”). The holding of Community Ass’n for Restoration of the Environment, Inc. v. Cow Palace, LLC opened the gates to regulation of farms under the nation’s primary toxic waste statute. This Comment argues that, once classified as a “solid waste,” runoff manure fits RCRA’s definition of “hazardous waste” as well. This reclassification would expand EPA’s authority to monitor and respond to the nation’s tragically common groundwater-contamination emergencies.
Energy-Water Nexus, The Clean Power Plan, And Integration Of Water Resource Concerns Into Energy Decision-Making, Sarah Ladin
Energy-Water Nexus, The Clean Power Plan, And Integration Of Water Resource Concerns Into Energy Decision-Making, Sarah Ladin
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Energy regulation in the United States is now at a crossroads. The EPA has begun the process to officially repeal the Clean Power Plan and currently has no plan to replace it with new rulemaking to regulate carbon emissions from the U.S. energy sector. Even though the Clean Power Plan is more or less at its end, its regulatory structure stands as a model of the way decision-makers in the United States regulate the energy sector and the environment. Since the beginning of the modern environmental legal system, decision-makers have chosen to silo the system. Statutes and agencies focus on …
Technology-Based? Cost Factoring In U.S. Environmental Standards, Jamison E. Colburn
Technology-Based? Cost Factoring In U.S. Environmental Standards, Jamison E. Colburn
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
Environmental controls in the United States are often said to be “technology-based” because the polluter’s duties are determined by the available technology for controlling that pollution rather than by the social costs and benefits of doing so. Indeed, this is much of what distinguishes U.S. environmental law post-1970 from that which preceded it. But technology-based standards have in fact weighed the costs of controlling pollution in unique, often obscure ways, yielding an analysis that defies standardization and basic notions of transparency. Often lumped under an umbrella heading called “feasibility” analysis and justified on the grounds that it avoids many of …
Whose Standards Control? Maine V. Mccanhy And The Federal, State, And Tribal Battle Over Water Quality Regulation, Joseph Paul Mortelliti
Whose Standards Control? Maine V. Mccanhy And The Federal, State, And Tribal Battle Over Water Quality Regulation, Joseph Paul Mortelliti
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
This Note considers the longstanding clash between the United States government and state governments over the management of intrastate waters through the lens of Maine v. McCarthy, an ongoing federal lawsuit. McCarthy confronts whether the United States Environmental Protection Agency can require state water quality standards to specifically safeguard the health and cultural practices of Maine’s Indian tribes, particularly sustenance fishing. A panoply of legal and political factors gave rise to and shaped the course of the litigation, ranging from tribal sovereignty to agency discretion and political gamesmanship. After evaluating the litigants’ arguments and examining previous regulatory collisions between …