Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, no. 2 (Fall 2011)
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11911
2024-03-28T18:19:51ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 535-570 : Addressing the Regulatory Collapse Behind the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Implementing a “Best Available Technology” Regulatory Regime for Deepwater Oil Exploration Safety and Cleanup Technology
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11918
Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 535-570 : Addressing the Regulatory Collapse Behind the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Implementing a “Best Available Technology” Regulatory Regime for Deepwater Oil Exploration Safety and Cleanup Technology
Bush, Brittan J.
The Deepwater Horizon spill exposed a variety of regulatory
failures by the federal government. After the spill, critics attacked
regulators for an inadequate environmental review process under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Policymakers also
attacked the Minerals Management Service’s (MMS) numerous
conflicts of interest with the oil industry. This Comment, however,
focuses on the federal government’s failure to implement a regulatory
regime mandating adequate safety and cleanup technology in
deepwater oil exploration. Ultimately, this Comment seeks to remedy this failure by proposing a regulatory regime that implements a Best
Available Technology (BAT) standard for deepwater oil exploration
safety and cleanup technology.
36 pages
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 509-534 : Administering America’s Offshore Oil Fields: How Fewer, Performance-Based Regulations Can Produce Better Results
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11917
Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 509-534 : Administering America’s Offshore Oil Fields: How Fewer, Performance-Based Regulations Can Produce Better Results
Orth, Derek
Part I of this Comment introduces the facts behind the BP disaster
and compares the legal and legislative reactions to the Exxon Valdez
and the Deepwater Horizon spills. Parts II–III document the
development of the 1990 Oil Pollution Act and consider the Act’s
effectiveness in preventing offshore spills. In Part IV, this Comment
investigates current legislative reform efforts and explores their
potential for effectiveness. Part V delves into the history of the
Minerals Management Service and explains how its contradictory
mission and subsequent regulatory failings contributed to the
Deepwater Horizon disaster. Parts VI–VIII compare and contrast
prescriptive versus performance-based regulatory regimes, utilizing
the British and Norwegian models as case studies. Part IX advocates
for the implementation of a performance-based regulatory regime in
the United States and considers the feasibility of utilizing
administrative rulemaking to accomplish this goal. Generally, this
Comment will touch upon how partisan legislation and overly
prescriptive regulations have halted effective safety improvements
and technological development in the American offshore oil industry.
26 pages
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 493-508 : The Prosecution of Environmental Crimes in Oregon: An Interview with Attorney General John Kroger
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11916
Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 493-508 : The Prosecution of Environmental Crimes in Oregon: An Interview with Attorney General John Kroger
Kroger, John; Long, Geoffrey
In an effort to learn more about Oregon’s prosecution of
environmental crimes, Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation
(JELL) articles editor Geoffrey Long sat down with Attorney General
John Kroger. AG Kroger has made protection of the environment one
of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) primary goals. The DOJ
investigates and prosecutes environmental crimes, ensures the proper
cleanup and containment of hazardous and nuclear waste, protects
roadless wilderness areas, and fights to protect endangered species
and important waterways. The following is a transcript of the
interview from June 30, 2011.
16 pages
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 461-492 : Righting Environmental Wrongs: Assessing the Role of Legal Systems in Redressing Environmental Grievances
https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11915
Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 26, No. 2, p. 461-492 : Righting Environmental Wrongs: Assessing the Role of Legal Systems in Redressing Environmental Grievances
Gellers, Josh
During the second half of the twentieth century, many countries
fundamentally altered the way in which their legal systems addressed environmental issues. In particular, legal innovations were developed
to offer citizens a means of redressing grievances against the state or
private entities for violating environmental regulations. The United
States began expanding access to its courts for environmental
litigation through a landmark decision that broadened the concept of
standing; India enlarged the field of potential claimants in
environmental litigation through a landmark decision and innovative
constitutional interpretation; Japan sought to provide avenues for
obtaining remedies through national environmental legislation, but
grievances have been more successfully redressed through major
decisions that have expanded the scope of constitutionally guaranteed
rights. Despite differences in governmental structure, legal doctrine,
and legislation, states have undergone dramatic transformations in the
way that the public interfaces with the legal system in order to right
environmental wrongs.
32 pages
2011-01-01T00:00:00Z