University:
Indiana University Bloomington
Course:
Financial and Managerial Accounting: Information for Decisions - John J. Wild
Academic year:

2024
Views:

307

Pages:

2
Author:

bratrochanter

Analysis of Environmental Regulation Cases and Scenarios 1. ASARCO Drilling Permit and NEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)     Scenario: ASARCO seeks a permit to conduct exploratory drilling in a wilderness area inhabited by endangered grizzly bears. The activity could impact the bears’ habitat and reproductive success. Key Issue: Does this constitute a "major federal action" under NEPA, requiring an EIS? Analysis: o NEPA mandates an EIS for federal actions that significantly impact the environment. o While the proposed drilling area is small, its potential to disrupt an endangered species’ ecosystem could trigger NEPA requirements. o An EIS should evaluate cumulative effects, including future activities like mineral extraction. Conclusion: Likely, the permit would require an EIS to ensure proper evaluation of environmental risks to the grizzly population. 2. Vanguard Corporation and Clean Air Act Compliance     Scenario: Vanguard operates a plant emitting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in a nonattainment area. Despite claiming good-faith efforts, the company requests an 18-month extension to comply with air quality standards. Key Issue: Does good faith exempt Vanguard from Clean Air Act violations? Analysis: o The Clean Air Act holds facilities in nonattainment areas to stricter standards. o Good faith does not excuse noncompliance; the law requires demonstrable compliance or valid permits to extend deadlines. o Technological or economic infeasibility may justify variance requests but must be substantiated. Conclusion: Vanguard remains in violation unless it secures regulatory approval for an extension. 3. Tzavah Urban Renewal and Asbestos Violations     Scenario: Tzavah improperly handles asbestos during demolition and fails to secure the site after EPA notification. EPA seeks an injunction to abate the hazard. Key Issue: Should the court compel Tzavah to remediate the asbestos hazards? Analysis: o The Clean Air Act requires strict compliance with asbestos regulations to prevent public health risks. o Tzavah’s actions endangered nearby residents and violated EPA protocols. o Courts generally favor injunctive relief in cases where environmental and public health risks persist. Conclusion: The court should issue an injunction compelling Tzavah to properly abate the asbestos hazards. 4. Villegas and Point Source Discharge Under the Clean Water Act     Scenario: Villegas dumps blood vials into the Hudson River. He is charged with discharging pollutants from a "point source." Key Issue: Does human action qualify as a "point source" under the Clean Water Act? Analysis: o A point source is defined as a "discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance." o While not explicitly listed, human actions, such as deliberate dumping, can fall under this definition. o Courts often interpret "point source" broadly to ensure environmental protection. Conclusion: Villegas's conviction is likely valid, as his deliberate placement of vials could be classified as a discharge from a point source. 5. Mall Properties and Corps of Engineers Permit Decision    Scenario: A proposed mall development requiring wetlands filling is denied due to socioeconomic concerns from a neighboring city. Key Issue: Can socioeconomic factors unrelated to environmental impacts justify denying a wetlands permit? Analysis: o The Corps o