In the latest of a series of challenges to the integrity of New York's Adirondack Park, a New York Supreme Court judge has upheld the "reasonable" regulation of public lands within the Park that are constitutionally protected as "forever wild." The ruling reinforces earlier New York decisions affirming the validity of the Park and its management but raises potentially troublesome legal and tactical questions about the Park's future.
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.