The Impact on Coldwater-Fish Populations of Interpretative Differences in the Application of the United States Clean Water Act 1972 by Individual State Legislatures

The pulp, paper, and paperboard industry in the United States is the larqest industrial user of water with half of the facilities discharging wastewater directly to our Nation's waters. The major pollutants of concern have historically been the conventional pollutants: biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), total suspended solids (TSS), and pH. Biological treatment systems are currently employed to reduce these pollutants. Sludges generated by these treatment systems have been categorized as nonhazardous and are generally landfilled. Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated all the reguired regulations for this industry. The national regulations are applied to individual pulp and paper mills through permits issued by EPA Regional or State staff. Permit limits can be written that are more restrictive than the national regulations to protect local water guality. In its current projects concerning the pulp and paper industry, EPA is focusing on the reduction of toxic pollutants. The Agency is conducting a joint EPA/industry program to study dioxin discharges at bleached kraft mills. The Agency will also undertake a comprehensive review of the pulp and paper regulations in 1988.

Download Full-text

Wetlands and Environmental Legislation Issues

Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics ◽

10.1017/s1074070800019180 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 26 (1) ◽

pp. 80-89 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Roy R. Carriker

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

United States Army ◽

Clean Water Act ◽

The United States ◽

Army Corps ◽

Clean Water ◽

Army Corps Of Engineers ◽

Section 404 ◽

Definition Of

AbstractThe federal government program for wetlands regulation is administered by the United States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Proposals for amending and/or reforming the Section 404 program are included in Congressional deliberations regarding Clean Water Act reauthorization. Specific issues of public policy include the definition of “waters of the United States”, criteria for delineation of jurisdictional wetlands, definition of activities exempt from regulation, mitigation and classification of wetlands, and issues of property rights.

Download Full-text

The Development and Historic Use of Habitat Structures in Channel Restoration in the United States: The Grand Experiment in Fisheries Management

Géographie physique et Quaternaire ◽

10.7202/008604ar ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 56 (1) ◽

pp. 45-60 ◽

Cited By ~ 34

Author(s):

Douglas M. Thompson ◽

Gregory N. Stull

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

New York ◽

World War Ii ◽

The United States ◽

Fish Populations ◽

The Great Depression ◽

The Government ◽

Conservation Projects ◽

Long Term Impact ◽

The Impact

Abstract The use of instream structures to modify aquatic habitat has a long history in the United States. Pioneering work by wealthy landowners in the Catskills region of New York produced a range of designs in the decades preceding the Great Depression in an effort to replenish fish populations depleted from overfishing. The scientific evaluation of structures began in 1930. Within two years, a Michigan research team claimed improved fish populations. Cheap labor and government-sponsored conservation projects spearheaded by the Civilian Conservation Corps allowed the widespread adoption of the techniques in the 1930s, before adequate testing of the long-term impact of the devices. The start of World War II temporarily ended the government conservation efforts and prevented the continued evaluation of structures. During the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, designs of instream structures remained essentially unchanged. Meanwhile, the small number of evaluations of the impact of the structures often were flawed. The continued use of early designs of instream structures helped instill a false belief that instream structures were proven to be a benefit to fish. Even modern use of instream structures continues to rely on the basic blueprints developed in the Catskills, despite documented problems with the use of these designs.

Download Full-text

Lifetime Term Limits: The Impact on Four State Legislatures

American Review of Politics ◽

10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2004.25.0.305-320 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 25 ◽

pp. 305-320 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Priscilla L. Southwell ◽

Eric A. Lindgren ◽

Ryan A. Smith

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

State Legislatures ◽

The United States ◽

Term Limits ◽

State Legislators ◽

Logit Analysis ◽

Roll Call ◽

Party Leadership ◽

Full Effect ◽

The Impact

This research examines the roll call voting record of state legislators in Arkansas, California, Michigan, and Missouri in order to assess if there are any substantive differences between those legislators who are nearing retirement due to term limits (“last term” legislators) and those legislators who are at an earlier stage of their legislative careers. These are the only four states in the United States that have lifetime term limits in full effect. Binomial logit analysis of key roll call votes suggests that these “last term” legislators stand apart from their other colleagues on certain issues. This characteristic arises from the increased tendency of last-term legislators to defy the party leadership, albeit on a limited number of bills. This “independent streak” of last-term legislators is even more pronounced among Republican legislators, although this effect is not present in the state of California. Therefore, term limits appear to have a modest, but potentially significant effect on the policy preferences of legislators.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of pollutant loadings in highway runoff and relevant legislative framework

Global NEST Journal ◽

10.30955/gnj.001375 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 797-804

Keyword(s):

Water Pollution ◽

United States ◽

European Union ◽

Stormwater Management ◽

Water Policy ◽

Clean Water Act ◽

The United States ◽

Point Sources ◽

Clean Water ◽

Highway Runoff

<div> <p>Non-point sources pollution from highway runoff is among the most important reasons for surface and ground waters degradation. Atmospheric deposition, exhaust emissions, pavement wear and tire wear all have been found to be crucial pollutants in highway runoff. The most critical pollutants included in the runoff of interurban roads such as total suspended solids, heavy metals, chlorides and nutrients, together with the factors affecting their concentration are been investigated. Existing legislation about drainage and highway stormwater management in United States and European Union as well as the federal agencies of the United States which have the responsibility to regulate drainage and stormwater management are also presented. Water pollution concerns in the Unites States are mainly addressed through the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, known as the Clean Water Act. Provisions within the Clean Water Act require all states to implement regulations in order to reduce the pollutant mass loading prior to discharging into water recipients. In European Union the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC sets common goals for the water management and created an overall water policy for management at an international level.</p> </div> <p> </p>

Download Full-text

HOW TO LIST A NEW PRODUCT ON THE NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS POLLUTION, SUBPART J PRODUCT SCHEDULE

International Oil Spill Conference Proceedings ◽

10.7901/2169-3358-2008-1-657 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 2008 (1) ◽

pp. 657-660 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Leigh DeHaven ◽

Rebecca Tirrell

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Oil Spill ◽

Oil Spills ◽

Clean Water Act ◽

New Products ◽

New Product ◽

The United States ◽

Background Information ◽

Clean Water ◽

Hazardous Substance

ABSTRACT In light of the recently updated U.S. Coast Guard Regulation for Vessel Response Plans, which include requirements for vessel dispersant response capabilities and with the recent expansion of many U.S. Coastal Dispersant ?reauthorization Zones, it is important that both alternative oil spill chemical countermeasure product manufacturers and oil spill responders have an understanding of the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution, Subpart J Product Schedule (NCP Product Schedule). The NCP Product Schedule lists alternative chemical countermeasures which may be used in oil spills in the United States if authorized by a Federal On-Scene Coordinator with consultation from the Regional Response Team including local Trustees. The product types currently listed on the NCP Product Schedule include dispersants, surface washing agents, bioremediation agents and miscellaneous oil spill control agents. Sorbents are also defined in the NCP Product Schedule, but they may or may not be required to be listed on the NCP Product Schedule depending upon their composition. The unauthorized use of oil spill chemical countermeasure products listed on the NCP Product Schedule on an on water oil spill is a violation of the Clean Water Act. In addition, the use of chemical products that are not listed on the NCP Product Schedule on oil spills on waters of the United States is also a violation of the Clean Water Act. Before a chemical countermeasure product is used during an oil spill in waters of the United States, new products must meet the data requirements stated in Subpart J of the NCP Product Schedule regulation (40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 300.900). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains and updates the NCP Product Schedule. The EPA reviews the required data packages for new products and regularly updates the NCP Product Schedule and Technical Notebook on the NCP Product Schedule website (www.epa.gov/emergencies). This paper and poster will outline the steps to list a new product and provide background information on the NCP Product Schedule.

Download Full-text