Title: Environmental Law
1Environmental Law
2Resource LawWater
- Surface Water Law
- Navigable streams are treated as community
property - Individual ownership not allowed
- Water rights are allowed
- Riparian Doctrine who ever owns land adjacent
to a stream has a right to use that water more
applicable to humid eastern U.S. - Doctrine of Prior Appropriation first user of
the water has top priority more applicable to
arid western U.S.
3Distribution of underlying principles of
surface-water law
4Resource LawWater
- Groundwater Law
- More complex than surface water law
- Rule of Capture (English Rule)
- Property owners have the right to extract all the
groundwater from under their property - Lateral movement of ground water is ignored
- Rule of Reasonable Use (American Rule)
- Property owners are limited to extract ground
water for beneficial use in connection with the
land above. Extraction of ground water should
not be so great that it deprives a neighbor of
their ground water - Issues have been argued about what constitutes
beneficial use - Problems with invisibility of ground water has
created numerous legal conflicts
5Distribution of underlying principles of
groundwater law
6Resource LawMineral and Fuel
- In U.S. original laws were meant to encourage the
exploitation of natural resources - 1872 Mining Law
- Granted mineral rights, and often land title, to
anyone locating a mineral deposit on federal land
and would invest some time and a little money in
the claim - Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 and Mineral Leasing
Act for Acquired Lands of 1947 restricted the
previous land giveaway. - Treatment for certain commodities such as oil,
gas, coal, potash, and phosphate deposits became
restricted - Mine reclamation not seriously addressed until
1977
7Federal land ownership
8Resource LawMineral and Fuel
- Mine Reclamation
- Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 applied to coal only - Intended to restore farmland and ground water
flow once mining ceased - Several states have enacted their own laws
regulating mining within their boundaries - No state has received financial returns form
mineral extraction on federal lands - However, states must contend with a variety of
pollution problems that mining has produced
9International Resource Disputes
- Mineral claims at sea have often become issues of
serious dispute - Traditional 3 mile (5 km) territorial limits
proved unsatisfactory as modern technology allows
for deeper exploitation of many commodities - 200 mile territorial limits were established but
many small closely packed countries did not
benefit
10International Resource Disputes
- Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the
Sea (1982) - Established a 12 mile territorial limit plus
various navigational, fishing, and other rights - Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs)
- Established a 200 nautical mile exclusive mineral
rights use zone - A provision could allow a country to claim more
continental shelf/ocean floor and extend their EEZ
11Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States
12Possible mineral and rock resources in EEZ of the
United States
13International Resource Disputes
- Antarctica has been claimed by many countries
because of their respective exploration
activities or geographic proximity - Treaty of 1961 set aside all territorial claims
by the signing countries other have signed on
subsequently - Convention for the Regulation of Antarctic
Mineral Resources Activities (CRAMRA) in 1988
established restrictive controls on Antarctica
mineral exploration and extraction - CRAMRA not fully accepted by U.S.
- U.S. passes Antarctic Protection Act of 1990 and
encourages others to sign on - U.S. EPA issues Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) rules on non-government activities such as
scientific study and tourism in Antarctica
14Land Claims in Antarctica prior to the 1961 treaty
15Pollution and Its Control
- Do we have a right to a clean environment?
- Criminal Law requires legislation by Federal
and State government - Civil Law not so restrictive it has been the
best route to seek justice in many cases
16Water Pollution
- Refuse Act of 1899 prohibited dumping or
discharge of refuse in navigable water - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956
focused on municipal waste treatment - Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 and Clean
Water Act of 1977 addressed spills and chemical
pollutants - Subsequent legislative actions have modified many
provisions of these laws but few major
improvements, or overhauls, have occurred
17Air Pollution
- Clean Air Act of 1963 empowered federal
agencies to undertake air pollution control
efforts - Amended in 1965 to allow national regulation of
motor vehicle emissions - Air Quality Act of 1965
- required air quality standards on known harmful
effects of several air pollutants - Goal was to protect and enhance the quality of
the Nations air resources so as to promote the
public health and welfare and the productive
capacity of its population - Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 is more
restrictive than previous act
18(No Transcript)
19(No Transcript)
20Waste Disposal
- Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 - Intended to help state and local governments deal
with disposal of municipal solid wastes - EPA monitors the compliance with these acts
- RCRA amended in 1984 - imposed new requirements
on landfills and disposal sites banned disposal
of toxic liquid waste at a landfill - RCRA re-authorization of 1992 failed additional
regulation for broader pollution controls and
mining waste are needed - Funding for identified toxic waste sites is
needed to continue the work that the superfund
program began
21U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- Established in 1970 - responsible for
establishment and enforcement of air and water
quality standards requires testing and
regulation of toxic chemical substances entering
the environment - Enforcement activities often limited by budgetary
restrictions and political factors
22(No Transcript)
23International Initiatives
- U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification of 1996
addressed localized problems found around the
world - U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change
recognizes the role of CO2 and other greenhouse
gases in global warming - Encourages nations to report their CO2 emissions
- Encourages developed nations to assist developing
nations to address increasing dumping of CO2 into
the atmosphere
24(No Transcript)
25International Initiatives
- Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer (of 1987) - An attempt to have all nations recognize the need
for international commitments to pollution
control for everyone's benefit - This effort represent a new movement, based on a
precautionary principle, that international law
and diplomacy must work to correct serious
environmental problems - Kyoto Protocol of 1997 an attempt to have
industrialize nations agree to reduce
greenhouse-gas emissions 5.2 below 1990 levels
by 2008-2012 - U.S. expressed concerns over the economic impact
of such a move and did not agree to these
standards
26International Initiatives
- The U.N. has recognized, in the various protocols
and attempts at creating international
environmental law, that we all share the global
environment - Some nations contribute more to the various
problems than do others - The countries that create more of the harmful
emissions can better afford to work to reduce
their emissions and to assist the developing
countries to reduce their emissions
27Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Our attempts to legislate economic treatments, or
use of technology, resulted in more conflicts and
enforcement problems - Laws and legislation create a myriad of legal
maneuver room so companies, countries, and
individuals can escape their respective
responsibility - we lack the economic technology
- the science isnt clear
- It is too expensive
- there will be not benefit if we use this
technology - this clause will allow us to avoid our
responsibility - And other excuses
- In some cases it is cheaper to pay the fine than
to correct the problem
28Components of EPAs risk-assessment process for
potential health hazards
29Cost-Benefit AnalysisFederal Government
- President Reagans Executive Order 12291 (in
1981) allowed the following - A (pollution control) regulation may be put forth
only if the potential benefits to society
outweigh the potential cost - This in effect weakened such legislation as the
Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act
30Laws Relating to Geologic Hazards
- Laws, or zoning ordinances, restricting
construction or establishing construction
standards related to known geologic hazards have
been opposed - Investment concerns
- Development concerns
- Lack of understanding by the general public
- Construction controls and restrictive building
standards in earthquake prone areas have
experienced success - Many California earthquakes, since the Long Beach
earthquake of 1933 nearly destroyed that city,
have not destroyed as much property as they could
have - San Fernando 1971
- Loma Prieta - 1989
- Northridge 1994
31Effects of improving building codes for
earthquake resistance
32Not All Hazard Responses Work
- Too many issues left to local officials to decide
what is an acceptable risk for their
communities - Some laws apply only to new construction and
allow schools to be built on flood plains or in
seismically active areas - Some legislation passes the fiscal risk on to all
tax payers through federally funded insurance
programs
33Hazard-mitigation legislation
34(No Transcript)
35(No Transcript)
36National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
- NEPA enacted in 1969 and established
environmental protection - an important national
priority - Established the Council on Environmental Quality
in the Executive Office of the President - Established the requirements for Environmental
Impact Statements (EIS) - Applies only to federal projects
- many states have adopted EIS procedures and rules
also
37Environmental Impact Statements
- NEPA specifies that an EIS should include
- A description of the proposed action, its
purpose, and why it is needed - A discussion of various alternatives (including
the proposed action) - An indication of the environment to be affected
and the environmental consequences anticipated - List of preparers of the statement and those
agencies, organizations, or persons to whom
copies of the statement are being sent
38Number of EISs
39Distribution of EIS filings with EPA in 1994
40Trans-Alaska pipeline
41Route of the Trans-Alaska pipeline and proposed
alternative means for transport of the oil