Noah Cicurel Associate Editor Loyola University Chicago School of Law, JD 2022 There is poison in the water. The Flint water crisis has ravaged the city of Flint, Michigan, permanently altering how many in the community see the role of government. On August 20th, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced a $600 million settlement …
On March 25, 2020, a judge for the United States District Court in the District of Columbia held that the Army Corp of Engineers (hereinafter the Corp) failed to comply with the standards of the National Environmental Policy Act (hereinafter “the Act”) by failing to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before deciding to approve federal permits for construction of a portion of the Dakota Access Pipeline which ran under the Mississippi River. The ruling came four years after the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe brought the original action in 2016. The Act is meant to ensure the public that agencies have considered the environmental consequences of a potential project before going forward with it, and so requires agencies to consider any and every significant environmental impact that could result from the project through completion of an Environmental Assessment, and, in some cases, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Northeastern Michigan was already facing a pandemic on May 19 when a breach in the Edenville dam forced 10,000 residents to flee their homes in the face of deadly floodwater. The dam failure elevates the need for state and federal regulators to standardize regulations and collaborate on their enforcement to prevent similar incidents.
The implications arising from fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) in the early 2010s spelled out a cautionary tale for automotive manufacturers wondering how to comply with increasingly strict regulations.
The meat and poultry packing industry has recently fallen victim to the spread of COVID-19. Among fierce backlash over the federal government’s lack of action to protect meat packing facility workers, the CDC and OSHA released interim guidelines. These guidelines are to be followed by employers not only to keep workers safe, but to avoid a shortage of one of America’s most prized food sources: meat and poultry. The meat packing industry, as one of the most heavily-regulated industries in the United States, now faces increased regulation during a global pandemic.
As the holiday season fast approaches, many Americans are busy planning celebrations with friends and family and shopping for the perfect gift for their loved ones. We often stress about holiday parties and travel arrangements. For many of us, however, our impact on the environment during this time is not of great importance. Unfortunately, during this time, both household and commercial waste increases at often due to online shipments. The convenience of internet shopping, especially around the holidays, packs an environmental punch. As consumers, we must be cognizant of this impact when we decide to purchase online. Not only must we be aware of our own consumption, we must also consider the awareness and efforts of e-commerce platforms to address environmental concerns during this busy time.
On August 29, 2019, the Environmental Protection Agency (“the EPA”) announced a proposed reconsideration amendment to an Obama Administration rule regulating the natural gas industry’s methane emissions. This proposal is in response to President Trump’s order for federal agencies to review their actions, purportedly to remove potential resource burdens. The EPA asserts that the changes will remove regulatory duplication and save the industry millions of dollars, but the savings may come at the expense of increasing the planet’s vulnerability.
The state of Washington is proposing new water quality regulations in an effort to encourage growth to the salmon population. The campaign against the dams in the Columbia and Snake river basins has been fought for decades and continually struggles to balance the environmental impacts with industry and energy. This regulation is the newest strategy to attempt to strike a balance between the environmental concerns and the industry concerns. Further, as more attention is given to the dwindling population of killer whales, many are calling this an emergency requiring immediate action. This action is a timely response to the recent calls to action.
“I sometimes wonder if we’re in the branded litter business, branded trash.” That was a presumably half-joking statement made at the World Economic Forum in Davos by Alan Jope, CEO of Unilever, one of the world’s largest consumer goods companies. What certainly was not a joke was the pressure and criticism major consumer goods companies faced in Davos from activists and groups that believe not enough is being done to cut use of plastic packaging in goods. Companies like Coca-Cola and Procter & Gamble (P&G) have emerged as new targets of environmental groups, who see these companies as major contributors to polluted oceans and endangered marine life. The impact of plastic waste on the environment has also drawn the ire of millennials, to the extent that one industry analyst claims the war on plastics is part of consumer goods companies’ marketing plans. While companies may be tailoring marketing plans and making pledges to reduce the amount of plastic in their products, the 8 million tons of plastic that end up in the world’s oceans each year means these companies will continue to feel the heat from activists, millennials, and regulators.
Under the Obama administration, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the Army Corps of Engineers promulgated the Waters of the United States rule, which defined “Waters of the United States” to include small bodies of water, such as rivers and wetlands. However, in early 2018, the Trump administration suspended the rule to re-assess the definition. By the end of 2018, the EPA and the United States Department of Army released a new definition of “Waters of the United States,” restricting the definition to traditional navigable waters and their tributaries, certain ditches, certain lakes and ponds, impoundments and wetlands that are adjacent to water specifically covered by the rule.