The investigation and prosecution of environmental crimes has steadily increased over the past decade.¹ Regulatory agencies responsible for overseeing compliance with environmental statutes have become aggressive prosecutors of environmental crimes. This change in posture, first witnessed in the early 1980s, has been contagious and is today evident at all levels of the law enforcement community. For example, in recent years, legislatures have enacted new environmental statutes and strengthened existing ones.

Theory Becomes Practice

Of all the proliferating ideas for reinventing environmental regulation, none are more portentous than those grouped loosely under the heading "civic environmentalism." In a nutshell, such proposa's urge the delegation of crucial decisions and their implementation to grassroots groups of interested parties who would collaborate in the development of creative solutions to the problems that have stymied traditional regulation.¹

A growing number of business, government, and environmental interest groups have concluded that environmental policy in the United States is inadequate to deal with the complexities of environmental protection in the 21st century.

Regional haze and visibility impairment results from particles and gases in the atmosphere scattering and absorbing light.¹ The primary pollutants that affect visibility throughout much of the United States are sulfates and nitrates.² This Dialogue addresses the statutory commands, regulatory programs, and other forces that are likely to drive future regulation of industry in this evolving, highly complex area.

Editors' Summary: Human exposure to lead is one of the most serious environmental health threats today. Lead causes a variety of adverse health effects and is particularly harmful to children. Unfortunately, the current regulation of lead exposures is fragmented and often unsuccessful. California's Proposition 65, a right-to-know initiative, however, has achieved some noteworthy successes in reducing public exposures to lead.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR or the Bureau) observed its centennial in 2002, and celebrated 100 years of building dams and supplying water for irrigation and other purposes in the western United States. In 2003, the U.S. Department of the Interior (the Interior) and the Bureau shifted their focus to the future of the West and its water supply needs, producing a document called Water 2025: Preventing Crises and Conflict in the West.

Editors' Summary: When Congress enacted CERCLA in 1980, it put potential site owners and operators on notice that contaminating sites with hazardous substances can have severe consequences. Four years later, however, at least one company failed to heed that warning. In 1984, the Summitville Consolidated Mining Company, Inc. began operations at the Summitville mine site in Colorado. The result was a classic case of regulatory and corporate failure to prevent environmental disaster. In this Dialogue, the authors examine the reasons for the disaster at the Summitville site.

In New York v. SCA Services, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected the notion that a transporter cannot be an arranger under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This Dialogue reviews the parties' arguments and the court's opinion. It then analyzes the impact this case will have on transporters.

Editors' Summary: This is the second of a three-part series explaining pesticide regulation. This installment discusses requirements for registration of pesticide producers, producer recordkeeping, end user requirements including those related to restricted use pesticides, enforcement authority, and EPA rulemaking and judicial review. The previous installment, which appeared in last month's issue, 24 ELR 10449, examined federal jurisdiction over pesticides, labeling and packaging requirements, pesticide registration, and related regulatory authorities.

Editors' Summary: Since 1910, the federal government has played a role in regulating pesticides. At first, the motive was to fight fraud, but as pesticides became more sophisticated and as environmental concerns grew, the government's regulatory efforts became more comprehensive. Now, near the dawn of bioengineered pesticides, with society confronting and reevaluating environmental risks, and with agencies facing fiscal challenges, pesticide regulation continues to evolve. It is a field of concern to the pesticide industry, of course, but in U.S.