Making Environmental Law Work

  • Joseph F. DiMento
Part of the Environment, Development, and Public Policy book series (EDPE)


Compliance has no one definition. Noncompliance has no one explanation. A farmer or small businessperson sees noncompliance as a response to unfair regulations promulgated by bureaucrats who do not possess adequate knowledge of the private sector. Legal counsel to an environmental agency concludes that the pollution problem would be solved if government more efficiently ai;d aggressively enforced major regulatory laws. The vice-president for environmental affairs of a large corporation, a resident of a community that has been polluted by a neighboring industry, the technical consultant to a legal suit involving unacceptable disposal techniques all have different views of the compliance problem.


Support Group Regulatory Program Enforcement Policy American Business Administrative Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Stone (1975, at 228) states that his recommendations involve “more widespread invasion of corporate managerial autonomy than anything ever tried in this country.”Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    10 CFR 61. Another important example is the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, P.L. No. 98–616, 96 Stat. 3221.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    42 U.S.C. § 7401–7642.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inside EPA, Apr. 8, 1983, at p. 6. See also 50 Fed. Reg. 46504 (Nov. 8, 1985).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Inside EPA, Sept. 17, 1982,’ at p. 5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    See the Federal Trade Commission Improvements Act of 1979, 15 U.S.C. 58 and Executive Order 12291, Feb. 17, 1981.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Inside EPA, Jan. 6, 1984, at p. 4.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Inside EPA, Nov. 26, 1982, at p. 4.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Inside EPA, July 24, 1981, at p. 6.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    The Board of Directors in 1985 consisted of Archibald Cox, Carl M. Loeb, a professor in the Harvard Law School; William Baker, Chairman Emeritus, Bell Laboratories; Donald Kennedy, President, Stanford University, and formerly administrator of the United States Food and Drug Administration; and Charles Powers, President, Clean Sites, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Consensus Workshop on Formaldehyde, Little Rock Arkansas, Oct. 2–6, 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    “Environmental Mediation Hits Snag,” Chemical and Engineering News 15 (Oct. 15, 1984) at 15.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    DiMento, Joseph, Lambert, William, Suarez-Villa, Luis, and Tripodes, James. “Siting of Low Level Radioactive Waste Facilities,” Journal of Environmental Systems 15, 1 (1985–86), at 19–43.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    I am indebted to Gilbert Geis for this latter point.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    5 U.S.C. §§ 551–559; 701–706; 3105; 3344; 5362; 7521 (1967). For a rather complete analysis of the practices required in agency reaction to new information on the record see Ethyl Corporation v. EPA, 541 F.2d 1(1976).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    The Advisory Council on Executive Organization headed by Roy L. Ash, “President’s Advisory Council on Executive Organization,” Presidential Doc. (Feb. 8, 1971), at 174, cited in Glen O. Robinson, “On Reorganizing the Independent Regulatory Agencies,” Virginia Law Review, 57 (1971), at 947–995.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reed, P., “The Environmental Protection Act of 1983—Is an Environmental Protection Commission Necessary?” Environmental Law Reporter, 13 (Mar., 1983) at 10064–10065.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    The reform has already been introduced in Congress. See H.R. 2362, 98th Cong., 1st Sess. (Scheuer), Mar. 23, 1983.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Los Angeles Times, Feb. 5, 1983.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    See also Representative Albert Gore’s hearings on EPA, Sept., 1983.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Interview, Mar. 1, 1982.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    See Chap. 5.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    See Appendix for complete citation.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    See Note (Winter, 1982).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Interview K.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Judge Sidney Feinberg, Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, Remarks at Environmental Law Institute ALI-ABA Conference on Environmental Law, San Francisco, California, Feb., 1983.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    15 U.S.C. § 57a(h)1 (West Supp. 1976).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Seventeen states allow for the initiative in their constitutions. Council of State Governments, The Book of States (1982).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    See Institute for Governmental Studies, California Data Brief, “Propositions: The Initiative In Perspective,” University of California, Berkeley (Apr., 1982).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    California Coastal Zone Conservation Act, 18 Cal Pub. Resources Code §§ 27000 et seq. It became effective Nov. 8, 1972.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    42 U.S.C. §§ 7401–7642, 7604; 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251–1376, 1365.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    An example is MEPA. See Chap. 3, p. 48.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Compare Sax and DiMento (1974) and Haynes (1976) and Bryden (1976).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph F. DiMento
    • 1
  1. 1.University of California, IrvineIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations