共查询到10条相似文献,搜索用时 203 毫秒
1.
The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) is generally responsible for the implementation of federal Clean Water Act wetland regulations. It therefore plays an important role in the protection of wetlands within the United States. Unfortunately, past evaluators of ACEs implementation of these regulations found low rates of regulatory compliance. However, the fact that two states have taken responsibility for the implementation of these regulations within their boundaries provided the opportunity to assess whether one of these states might be doing a better job of enforcement. This paper reports on compliance with some of these regulations within one Michigan region. We evaluated permittee compliance with paperwork filing requirements related to wetland mitigation projects. Sixty-seven percent of county road commission permittees were out of compliance with at least one filing requirement. Forty percent of private and non-county government permittees were out of compliance. Our results therefore suggest that serious problems exist with Michigans implementation of wetland regulations. They do not suggest that compliance in this state is significantly better than in states under ACE administration. We believe that increased agency monitoring and enforcement would improve compliance. 相似文献
2.
虽然针对美国《清洁空气法》(CAA)的研究众多,然而诸多研究并未发掘至其之所以先进的核心。CAA之所以先进的关键在于重新分配法律(EPA是其代表)与州政府之间权力与义务的环境质量达标制度。CAA要求在联邦层面构建一个约束美国各州的大气环境质量标准体系,并且以各州的客观环境与发展程度为前提,赋予各州政府一系列的大气环境质量目标。各州政府需要在自身的权限范围内采取行动,从而为这一系列目标向联邦负责。CAA将自身的法律设置分为两大内容(或称两大原则):国家空气质量标准原则与州政府独立实施原则,并将两大原则转化为具体的程序:NAAQS与SIP。代表国家法律的环保署与代表实际环境义务承担者的州政府之间,是互相依赖又互相独立的关系。 相似文献
3.
Bottom-Up Risk Regulation? How Nanotechnology Risk Knowledge Gaps Challenge Federal and State Environmental Agencies 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
Nanotechnologies have been called the "Next Industrial Revolution." At the same time, scientists are raising concerns about the potential health and environmental risks related to the nano-sized materials used in nanotechnologies. Analyses suggest that current U.S. federal regulatory structures are not likely to adequately address these risks in a proactive manner. Given these trends, the premise of this paper is that state and local-level agencies will likely deal with many "end-of-pipe" issues as nanomaterials enter environmental media without prior toxicity testing, federal standards, or emissions controls. In this paper we (1) briefly describe potential environmental risks and benefits related to emerging nanotechnologies; (2) outline the capacities of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act to address potential nanotechnology risks, and how risk data gaps challenge these regulations; (3) outline some of the key data gaps that challenge state-level regulatory capacities to address nanotechnologies' potential risks, using Wisconsin as a case study; and (4) discuss advantages and disadvantages of state versus federal approaches to nanotechnology risk regulation. In summary, we suggest some ways government agencies can be better prepared to address nanotechnology risk knowledge gaps and risk management. 相似文献
4.
Douglas J. Norton James D. Wickham Timothy G. Wade Kelly Kunert John V. Thomas Paul Zeph 《Environmental management》2009,44(2):356-368
Common decision support tools and a growing body of knowledge about ecological recovery can help inform and guide large state
and federal restoration programs affecting thousands of impaired waters. Under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), waters not
meeting state Water Quality Standards due to impairment by pollutants are placed on the CWA Section 303(d) list, scheduled
for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) development, and ultimately restored. Tens of thousands of 303(d)-listed waters, many
with completed TMDLs, represent a restoration workload of many years. State TMDL scheduling and implementation decisions influence
the choice of waters and the sequence of restoration. Strategies that compare these waters’ recovery potential could optimize
the gain of ecological resources by restoring promising sites earlier. We explored ways for states to use recovery potential
in restoration priority setting with landscape analysis methods, geographic data, and impaired waters monitoring data. From
the literature and practice we identified measurable, recovery-relevant ecological, stressor, and social context metrics and
developed a restorability screening approach adaptable to widely different environments and program goals. In this paper we
describe the indicators, the methodology, and three statewide, recovery-based targeting and prioritization projects. We also
call for refining the scientific basis for estimating recovery potential.
相似文献
Paul ZephEmail: |
5.
Ortiz J 《Environmental management》2003,31(3):0355-0364
The issue of solid waste management in Indian country is multidimensional in scope because it affects more than just regulatory
concerns. There are more than 550 federally recognized Alaska Native and American Indian Tribes in the United States. Tribes
are sovereign nations that have a special relationship to the federal government and a unique legal status. The environmental
problems faced by tribes are many, and it is only fair that tribes, as sovereigns, specify the levels of protection on their
lands.
The one-size-fits-all regulatory approach to environmental problems and solid waste management in particular does not work
and often leads to conflict between tribes and the federal and state governments. Inherent tensions also exist between tribes
and various levels of government concerning jurisdiction of lands and managing solid waste. These intergovernmental relationships
are often complex and present unique challenges to all.
More research needs to be done on targeting resources to meet the capacity-building needs of tribes, as well as the overall
environmental management needs of Indian country under the federal trust obligation. Successful intergovernmental relationships
can be fostered through partnership arrangements between tribes and federal, state, and local governments. In the area of
solid waste such partnerships have worked. It requires that all levels of government deal with tribes with careful consideration
of their cultural, historic, and socioeconomic aspects, which are often intertwined. 相似文献
6.
R. W. Gannon D. L. Osmond F. J. Humenik J. A. Gale J. Spooner 《Journal of the American Water Resources Association》1996,32(3):437-450
ABSTRACT: While significant nonpoint source (NIPS) pollution control progress has been made since passage of Section 319 in the 1987 Water Quality Act, existing federal legislation does not provide for the most timely and cost-effective NIPS pollution reduction. In this paper, we use findings from the Rural Clean Water Program and other nationwide agricultural NIPS pollution control programs, building on legislative history to recommend a coordinated and efficient direction for agricultural water quality legislation. A collaborative framework should be established to accomplish the goals of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), and the Conservation Title of the Farm Bill. Valuable elements of the 1990 CZMA amendments that created a coastal NIPS program should be subsumed into the CWA. The CWA should reemphasize use of receiving water quality criteria and standards and should allow states flexibility to tailor basin-scale NPS program implementation to local needs. Implementation should involve targeting of NIPS pollution control efforts to critical land treatment areas and use of systems of best management practices to address these targeted water quality problems. The 1995 Farm Bill should reorient production incentives toward water quality to support the collaborative framework, implementing ecologically sound source reduction principles. The Farm Bill and the CWA should contain interrelated provisions for voluntary, incentive-assisted producer participation and fallback regulatory measures. Such coordinated national water quality and Farm Bill legislation that recognizes the need for flexibility in state implementation is supported as the most rational and cost-effective means of attaining water quality goals. 相似文献
7.
Frederick Steiner Scott Pieart Edward Cook Jacqueline Rich Virginia Coltman 《Environmental management》1994,18(2):183-201
The protection of wetlands and riparian areas has emerged as an important environmental planning issue. In the United States,
several federal and state laws have been enacted to protect wetlands and riparian areas. Specifically, the federal Clean Water
Act includes protection requirements in Sections 301 and 303 for state water quality standards, Section 401 for state certification
of federal actions (projects, permits, and licenses), and Section 404 for dredge and fill permits. The Section 401 water quality
state certification element has been called the “sleeping giant” of wetlands protection because it empowers state officials
to veto or condition federally permitted or licensed activities that do not comply with state water quality standards. State
officials have used this power infrequently. The purpose of this research was to analyze the effectiveness of state wetland
and riparian programs. Contacts were established with officials in each state and in the national and regional offices of
key federal agencies. Based on interviews and on a review of federal and state laws, state program effectiveness was analyzed.
From this analysis, several problems and opportunities facing state wetland protection efforts are presented. 相似文献
8.
LOEW B 《Environmental management》2000,26(Z1):S15-S21
Drawing from experiences gained from the development and implementation of four approved habitat conservation plans (HCPs), I describe the goals and strategies used by the nine local government members of the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) to reconcile conflicts among a rapidly growing population and the need to conserve the habitat of a number of declining wildlife species in western Riverside County, California. Several important goals have been pursued by RCHCA member governments in their sponsorship of multiple-species habitat conservation plans (MSHCPs), including (1) establishing certainty and control over future uses of land; (2) eliminating project-by-project negotiations with federal and state wildlife agencies; (3) coordinating mitigation obligations under the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, California Environmental Quality Act, and other federal and state laws; (4) reducing conflict and litigation resulting from land development activities; and (5) ensuring that wildlife conservation activities are conducted in a manner that permits local governments to perform those functions necessary to maintain public health, safety, and welfare. I also describe the emergence of strategies by local governments to achieve MSHCP goals, including (1) use of an inclusive planning process that seeks to build consensus among affected interests; (2) extensive involvement of federal and state wildlife agencies in the preparation of MSHCP documents; (3) management of public lands to support MSHCP conservation objectives; (4) encouragement of voluntary conservation by private property owners through incentive programs; and (5) active solicitation of federal and state funding for MSHCP implementation activities. 相似文献
9.
Zhao Ma Dennis R. Becker Michael A. Kilgore 《Journal of Environmental Planning and Management》2009,52(8):1035-1051
Following the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, many states have adopted policies and procedures directing state agencies and local government units to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of development projects prior to their undertaking. In contrast to a rich literature on federal requirements, current understanding of state environmental review is narrowly focused and outdated. This paper seeks to provide information on the landscape of state environmental review policy frameworks. The paper identifies 37 states with formal environmental review requirements through a document review of state statutes, administrative rules and agency-prepared materials, and confirms this finding through a survey of state administrators. A two-tier classification is used to distinguish states based on the approach taken to address environmental review needs and the scope and depth of relevant policies and procedures implemented. This paper also provides a discussion of policy and programme attributes that may contribute to effective practice, and of the potential for adopting relevant legislation in states where environmental review is currently lacking. 相似文献
10.
This study evaluated the US Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d) listing and delisting processes, based on historical and current federal and state guidelines, to determine whether there are regional differences in water quality assessment criteria used by various states to determine impairment of a waterbody for inclusion in the 303(d) list. A review of almost 50 total maximum daily load (TMDL) and delisting documents revealed that the basis for listing or delisting a waterbody varies considerably and that, in many cases, determination of impairment was based on insufficient water quality information. Historical USEPA guidance on the 303(d) listing and delisting processes has been generally broad, resulting in wide interpretation of the assessment criteria by various states. This has led to unclear or conflicting listing methodologies among states, leading to inconsistencies in impairment determination. Common problems include inconsistent data quality and quantity, differences in frequency of monitoring, variable interpretation of narrative water quality standards, and differences in specificity of implementation and monitoring plans, resulting in significant difference in the basis for listing and delisting waterbodies. In response, several states have taken the initiative to provide much more specific guidance for their internal agencies. Listing and delisting criteria are generally clearer at the state level, but the development of differing state guidance documents has resulted in diversity in the development of the 303(d) lists and in the process of delisting a waterbody. While state guidelines are better able to address local considerations, such as variations in climate, landuse, and water quality objectives, as well as social and economic preferences, the variation in listing criteria has led to inconsistencies across state boundaries in the levels of attainment of national water quality objectives. For stakeholders that participate in the 303(d) listing process within a particular state, these types of discrepancies may not have a significant impact. However, these inconsistencies can lead to confusion for some stakeholders who participate in the process in multiples states, and must deal with differing and sometimes conflicting requirements depending on the location of their facilities. 相似文献