Traditionally, emergency planning and the regulation of public nuisances have been functions of local and state governments. The role of the federal government has been limited to planning for national and regional calamities, in areas other than hazardous chemical accidents, and the direct regulation of industry. The federal government has also been involved in responding to such calamities, including chemical accidents and post-accident cleanup.

Samuel Epstein and Shirley Briggs reiterate Rachel Carson's grim Silent Spring¹ vision of the world in their recent Dialogue.² The authors state that the "runaway technology" of the chemical industry is responsible for increasing cancer rates and "contamination of our world." This apocalyptic³ view of cancer and pollution is not supported by the scientific knowledge gained in the quarter century since Silent Spring was published.

Nineteen eighty-eight marks the 25th anniversary of the establishment in 1963 of the Senate Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution. In the 1960s our effort was to learn as much as we could about environmental problems and the options for dealing with them. We undertook to arouse public awareness of the problems in order to generate political support for the policies and programs we were equipping ourselves to recommend. Our legislative initiatives, from today's perspective, evolved slowly, but they picked up momentum as we developed confidence in our perceptions of what was required.

New Jersey's innovative Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act (ECRA) has been the subject of much discussion since it became effective on December 31, 1983.¹ The majority of this discussion has focused on who is subject to ECRA and why it takes so long for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to review a case. Harriett Jane Olson's recent Dialogue is an example of what is being said about the above two topics.²

Editors' Summary: Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is an umbrella phrase that includes a variety of techniques designed to avoid expensive and time-consuming litigation. ADR techniques such as mediation and arbitration have been used successfully for years to resolve disputes among private parties. However, attempts to apply ADR to environmental enforcement cases have met with resistance from the federal government and the private sector.

Editors' Summary: In last month's issue, Jeffrey G. Miller analyzed Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., where the United States Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs in FWPCA §505 citizen suits must make a good faith allegation of ongoing or intermittent violation. Professor Miller suggested that Gwaltney leaves so many important questions unresolved that it constitutes an "invitation to the dance of litigation." This month, we asked practicing attorneys actively involved in citizen suit litigation to give us their views of Gwaltney.

Editors' Summary: In last month's issue, Jeffrey G. Miller analyzed Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., where the United States Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs in FWPCA §505 citizen suits must make a good faith allegation of ongoing or intermittent violation. Professor Miller suggested that Gwaltney leaves so many important questions unresolved that it constitutes an "invitation to the dance of litigation." This month, we asked practicing attorneys actively involved in citizen suit litigation to give us their views of Gwaltney.

Editors' Summary: One of the landmark environmental decisions handed down by the Supreme Court in recent years is Tull v. United States, holding that defendants have a right to a jury trial to determine liability for government-sought civil penalties. The decision is based on the Constitution's Seventh Amendment, and so is probably more permanent than an opinion based on statutory interpretation, which the Environmental Protection Agency could seek statutory amendments to effectively reverse.

Editors' Summary: One of the most important participants in the Superfund scheme is the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Established in 1980 pursuant to CERCLA, the ATSDR evaluates the potential health problems caused by individual NPL sites and analyzes the health effects of numerous substances subject to Superfund cleanup. Dr.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a statutory obligation to begin 175 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) cleanups by October 1989, and 200 more CERCLA cleanups by October 1991.¹ If EPA is to meet these deadlines, it must negotiate on a truly massive scale with potentially responsible parties (PRPs), to ensure private cleanups at many sites.² Even so, EPA has generally insisted on provisions in CERCLA consent decrees calling for draconian stipulated penalties and one-sided dispute reso