Part 1 – In your opinion, why do you think government regulations are crucial in areas as such as energy production?” Your response should be no more than 2 pages.
To give you an idea of environment incidents that are spurring additional regulations and to reinforce what you learned in the week #1 course content as to the checks and balance between the administration with EPA and the congress and judicial review, an example is given showing the role of the federal courts.
As an interest and recent environmental issue, this article explains how a federal judge in North Dakota has blocked the new administration rule on expanding the regulation of waters to include intradrainage waters where the states have controlled in the past. The judicial blocking seems to cover the 13 states that brought suit with the EPA. This 2015 ruling along with congressional actions are examples of our government system to interpret the Clean Water Act and provide checks and balance.
Spill Spews Tons of Coal Ash Into North Carolina’s Dan River – There was a major spill of up to 82,000 tons of coal ash to a North Carolina river. The 2014 spill was due to a break in a 48 inch stormwater pipe system. This coal ash spill spurred further EPA regulation review with new regulations put in place to regulate utility power plant coal ash under RCRA subtitle D with state jurisdiction.
Flint, Michigan – This incident unfolded over 18 months, where it appears that a new source of drinking water was corrosive and was not treated properly, thus the water leached out lead from old pipes and resulted in contaminated drinking water. EPA has set standards for lead in drinking water, and this system failed to comply. It appears there was a regulatory and management system failure in responding to this incident. Part 1 – In your opinion, why do you think government regulations are crucial in areas as such as energy production?” Your response should be no more than 2 pages.
To give you an idea of environment incidents that are spurring additional regulations and to reinforce what you learned in the week #1 course content as to the checks and balance between the administration with EPA and the congress and judicial review, an example is given showing the role of the federal courts.
As an interest and recent environmental issue, this article explains how a federal judge in North Dakota has blocked the new administration rule on expanding the regulation of waters to include intradrainage waters where the states have controlled in the past. The judicial blocking seems to cover the 13 states that brought suit with the EPA. This 2015 ruling along with congressional actions are examples of our government system to interpret the Clean Water Act and provide checks and balance.
Spill Spews Tons of Coal Ash Into North Carolina’s Dan River – There was a major spill of up to 82,000 tons of coal ash to a North Carolina river. The 2014 spill was due to a break in a 48 inch stormwater pipe system. This coal ash spill spurred further EPA regulation review with new regulations put in place to regulate utility power plant coal ash under RCRA subtitle D with state jurisdiction.
Flint, Michigan – This incident unfolded over 18 months, where it appears that a new source of drinking water was corrosive and was not treated properly, thus the water leached out lead from old pipes and resulted in contaminated drinking water. EPA has set standards for lead in drinking water, and this system failed to comply. It appears there was a regulatory and management system failure in responding to this incident.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/252140-judge-blocks-obamas-water-rulehttp://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/252140-judge-blocks-obamas-water-rule
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/09/us/north-carolina-coal-ash-spill/index.htmlhttp://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/09/us/north-carolina-coal-ash-spill/index.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/16/us/flint-water-michigan-attorney-general.html?_r&_r=1https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/16/us/flint-water-michigan-attorney-general.html?_r&_r=1
