Editors' Summary: TSCA provides EPA with broad authority to address potential hazards posed by the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of chemical substances and mixtures. In this first of a three-part series, the authors begin a detailed examination of the statute and regulatory program. They review the origins, objectives, and key components of TSCA, and then analyze TSCA's scope -- focusing particularly on definitional issues and exclusions.

Today, nuclear technology is used in a variety of applications, including energy, medicine, research, and agriculture. These applications produce waste that is radioactive and, therefore, harmful to humans for a certain period of time. Radioactive wastes are generally sorted into three categories based on how radioactive the waste is: low-level waste; intermediate-level waste; and high-level waste (HLW). The storage and disposal of HLW poses a challenge because of the level of radiation emitted from this waste and/or the longevity of the radiation.

Each presidential election brings the possibility of large-scale changes in environmental policy. Pres. Donald Trump has not explicitly laid out ocean policies for his new administration, but he has provided some clues; these policies ultimately will be important for the ecological and economic health of the United States and the world. On December 9, 2016, ELI convened a panel of experts to discuss some key ocean issues that the Trump Administration will face. This Dialogue presents a transcript of the discussion, which has been edited for style, clarity, and space considerations.

Under the ESA, areas that otherwise qualify as critical habitat “may” be excluded from a designation if the government determines that the benefits of exclusion would outweigh the benefits of inclusion, and if the exclusion would not result in the species’ extinction.

Environmental law and environmental protection are often portrayed as requiring trade offs: “jobs versus environment;” “markets versus regulation;” “enforcement versus incentives.” In the summer of 2016, members of the Environmental Law Collaborative gathered to consider how environmentalism and environmental regulation can advance beyond this framing to include new constituents and offer new pathways to tackle the many significant challenges ahead.

As renewable energy becomes more cost-effective, there are increasing calls to leave traditional fossil fuel resources “in the ground.” But our ability to do so is constrained both by current technology and by the existing legal and policy structure. This Article examines the improvements in renewable energy technologies and their limitations and economic implications and discusses the challenges facing federal and state attempts to mandate and encourage renewable energy as a result of recent federal court and agency decisions.

On November 4, 2016, DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division convened an extraordinary group of legal scholars and practitioners to discuss “The Future of Environmental Law.” Speaking before the presidential election but mindful of the transition possibilities, the symposium panelists identified and discussed cutting-edge issues in administrative law, natural resources law, and environmental enforcement that will be crucial going forward for both government lawyers and the environmental law profession as a whole.

Access to water is a fundamental climate change issue in North America and internationally. It is related to significant political, social, and ecological struggles that indigenous peoples face, and governments and courts so far have done little to address these inequities.

Climate change has important implications for the management and conservation of natural resources and public lands. The federal agencies responsible for managing these resources have generally recognized that considerations pertaining to climate change adaptation should be incorporated into existing planning processes, yet this topic is still treated as an afterthought in many planning documents. Only a few federal agencies have published guidance on how managers should consider climate change impacts and their management implications.

In Alaska Oil & Gas Ass’n v. Pritzker the Ninth Circuit upheld a rule listing two species of seals as “threatened” under the ESA based on climate change projections and associated habitat loss from reduction of sea ice. The listing rule concluded that the loss of sea ice over shallow waters in the Arctic would leave the Pacific bearded seal subspecies endangered by 2095.