Editors' Summary: On November 15, 1990, President Bush signed into law the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the first comprehensive changes to the Act in 13 years. During the intervening months since its enactment, EPA has geared up, streamlined, and commenced its rulemaking processes to accommodate the regulatory burden the new law places on the Agency. As amended by the 1990 amendments, the Clean Air Act instructs EPA to promulgate 27 rules during each of the first two years.

Editors' Summary: On November 15, 1990, President Bush signed into law the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the first comprehensive changes to the Act in 13 years. During the intervening months since its enactment, EPA has geared up, streamlined, and commenced its rulemaking processes to accommodate the regulatory burden the new law places on the Agency. As amended by the 1990 amendments, the Clean Air Act instructs EPA to promulgate 27 rules during each of the first two years.

Editors' Summary: In this second of a three-part series on the Clean Air Act and the 1990 amendments, the authors analyze the background of several key Clean Air Act sections, including the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program, new and modified source review, the national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) program, acid deposition control provisions, and mobile source controls. The authors explore the evolution of the PSD program from its origins in Sierra Club v.

Editors' Summary: This Article is the third in a three-part series on the Clean Air Act and the 1990 amendments. The authors analyze the new permit program mandated by the 1990 amendments, which requires the creation of a state-administered permit program. The authors also analyze the enforcement mechanisms available under the Clean Air Act that are applicable to stationary sources, and the administrative procedures and judicial review provided for in the Act.

Editors' Summary: At the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992, participating nations agreed that the compatibility of environmental protection and economic development is critical to sustainable development.

Editors' Summary: EPA's final decision on its proposed WEPCo rule, which addresses how new Clean Air Act provisions apply to electric utilities, is expected soon. This Article provides a glimpse into the regulatory machinery needed to deal with implementing just one aspect of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: whether an electric utility's proposed renovations at one of its facilities constitutes a "modification" triggering new source performance standards and new source review programs.

Editors' Summary: Environmental issues often involve collective choice about the kind of society we want. Choosing a President and a Congress on November 3 is one way we make that choice.

With that in mind, the Environmental Law Reporter called the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee. ELR asked each for the environmental platform positions adopted at the 1992 conventions. Reprinted below is what each party sent. ELR has not edited the text.

Editors' Summary: The 102d Congress adjourned on October 9, 1992, leaving a mixed record of environmental successes and failures. The three principal environmental statutes before it — RCRA, the FWPCA, and the ESA — all failed to win reauthorization. Much heralded proposals to elevate EPA to cabinet-level status got nowhere. Bills to protect banks and municipalities from CERCLA liability and reform federal mining law stalled and died. However, Congress did pass a landmark national energy policy bill, and extensive hearings were held on the bills that were not enacted.

Editor's Introduction: On August 8, 1984, the House passed H.R. 5640, the Superfund Expansion and Protection Act of 1984. If agreed to by the Senate, the bill will greatly expand the hazardous waste cleanup program begun under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).

Editors' Summary: In December 1987 the Supreme Court held, in Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., that citizens could not obtain civil penalties under §505 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) for violations that occurred wholly in the past. The ruling seemingly resolved a three-way split among the federal circuit courts of appeal on the scope of such citizen suits. But the Court's analysis actually leaves a number of questions unanswered, as the author of this Article observes.