Ever since the first bill was introduced in 1940, attention has focused on the need to devise legislation that adequately addressed the environmental problems associated with strip mining for coal.

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) attempt to use its regulatory powers under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) Amendments of 1972 to limit the injection of industrial wastes into deep wells has apparently come to naught.

Going out on a shaking legal limb, the New York Court of Appeals on June 23 refused to overturn the historic landmark designation of New York City's Grand Central Terminal. The court decreed in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York¹ that the designation, which includes a scheme for transferring the development rights over the terminal to adjacent parcels, does not represent a deprivation of property in violation of the Due Process Clause.

In the proposed reorganization of his Executive Office,¹ President Carter rejected the suggestions of his Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reorganization team to abolish or greatly deemphasize the importance of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Mr. Carter decided instead to keep CEQ in its position of environmental advisor to the president and coordinator of government implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Early this summer, Congress attached an amendment to the Housing and Community Development bill¹ eliminating restrictions on federally related mortgage and construction loans in flood hazard areas in communities which choose not to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.² The amendment, sponsored by Sen. Eagleton (D-Mo.) and Rep. Taylor (D-Mo.), disappointed environmentalists who view the program as an important mechanism for promoting wiser land use in flood plains.

On August 4, Congress culminated nearly three years of intense legislative effort by accepting a conference committee report¹ of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977. President Carter then signed the measure into law² on August 7, terming it "a sound and comprehensive program for achieving and preserving healthy air."³

Background

In its first major decision interpreting Wisconsin's Environmental Policy Act,¹ the Wisconsin Supreme Court on July 1 announced unswerving support for the Act (known as WEPA) that promises to make environmental analysis an important component of Wisconsin agency decisions. Reviewing an electric utility rate proceeding, the court in Wisconsin's Environmental Decade, Inc. v.

After 75 years of haphazard administration, the Department of the Interior has proposed "Reclamation Rules and Regulations for Acreage Limitations" to enforce basic provisions of the reclamation laws which are designed to foster creation of family-sized farms in areas irrigated by federal water projects.¹ The proposed regulations have been issued in response to a court order² requiring initiation of public rulemaking proceedings to develop criteria for ensuring enforcement of two important statutory provisions, §5 of the Reclamation Act of

In a decision reaffirming the Interior Department's Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leasing procedures, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, in County of Suffolk v. Secretary of the Interior,¹ reversed a lower court's nullification² of Interior's first sale of Atlantic OCS exploration leases. The court concluded that the district court erred in finding that the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) had been violated.

On July 19, the Army Corps of Engineers issued final revised regulations¹ for its program of controlling discharges of dredge and fill material into waters of the United States pursuant to §404 of the Federal Water Pllution Control Act (FWPCA).