DAVID MORELL: Let me begin by saying that, outside Washington, D.C.,  you will find that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a relatively minor player. The federal, state, and local regulatory systems are dominated not by the federal agency, but by many actors who engage in many activities. There are 50 sovereign entitites operating in different ways, and literally thousands of municipalities and communities that go either in no direction at all or in their own directions.

It has been a year now since the term "energy crisis" burst into our vocabulary. To most of us, it meant sitting in a line for gasoline and hoping that we would make it to the pump. To some of us, it meant "dialing down" the heat in our homes and a hefty increase in our electric bills. But with the spring came the thaw. Gasoline was once more plentiful—no more lines and fearful waits. We turned off the heat and enjoyed the sunshine.

The beverage container industry has shifted over the last several years from a deposit-and-return system to the "throwaway" metal or glass container. Legislation has been introduced in Congress that would require a deposit on all containers of beer and soft drinks, and thus have the effect of causing a widespread return to "returnable" containers. Laws that have this objective have been enacted in three states and several communities, and have been presented to the governing bodies of numerous other communities and states.

In recent years, the United States has finally awakened to the fact that its environmental assets are being rapidly and irreparably depleted due to lack of care and foresight, and that this destruction of our environment could ultimately result in our own collective demise. Many citizens consider the problem serious enough to merit constitutional recognition and have been pressing for such reform at both the state and federal levels. The federal government's attitude towards granting such recognition can hardly be described as enthusiastic.

Editors' Summary: This Article examines the policies and systems with which the U.S. Navy implements the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The author analyzes the many problems regarding NEPA compliance that the Navy has encountered, and proposes numerous reforms in the Navy's NEPA implementation system. This topic is especially timely because the Navy's NEPA program is currently facing a major court challenge in Concerned About Trident v. Schlesinger, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

After its first session, the 95th Congress can take credit for completing work on long-standing controversies in several major fields of environmental protection.The new amendments to the air and water pollution control laws represent a partial retreat from the strict statutory standards they replaced, but this retrenchment may be a result of both the pressures of economic uncertainty and a widespread inability to comply with past ambitious antipollution restrictions.

The passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)¹ precipitated a recurring conflict between the needs of the military to prevent disclosure of military and diplomatic secrets and the public's legislated right to obtain information about the environmental impacts of government actions. NEPA brings environmental considerations into government decisionmaking and simultaneously requires public disclosure of the results of the process.

April 23, 1974, marked the first anniversary of EPA's jurisdiction over United States industrial and municipal ocean-dumping. In 1968—according to Council on Environmental Quality estimates—some 10 million tons of industrial waste and sewage sludge were disposed of at sea. In 1973—five years, a statute, and a treaty¹ later—that figure has climbed to 12 million tons. How did we get where we are? Where do we go from here?

The congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) is approaching the end of its first year of operation. Already, it is drawing considerable attention from environmental groups, and for good reason.

For decades, local governments have guided land development in the United States with antiquated techniques like zoning and a general lack of expertise. Growing public concern over this situation prompted the American Law Institute (ALI) to investigate the possibility of model legislation aimed at providing comprehensive land use planning at the state as well as municipal level.