Environmental Law problem statement

Environmental Law Problem Statement

Author - Joshua Price
Date -
Assignment Due -

Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction
The following report to the board of director’s ill address several legal issues that have become apparent upon the closing of purchase of the 200 acre parcel of land from Integrated Defense Machines.
The report will provide an overview of all nine ‘post-closing discoveries’ in order to provide the board with a basic understanding of some of the issues that could be presented. Further to this three more issues will be looked at in depth with in this report. This in-depth view will provide, among other things, any potential liability, any potential mitigating strategies that the board can make, as well as recommendations and conclusions.
The aim of the report will be to provide a better understanding of the legal situation that the Hardrock Development Company finds itself. This report will also aim to provide recommendations that will allow for both the HealthyCare and CleanEnergy projects to go forward with their development.
Identification of any additional environmental liabilities
Future – storage tanks.
Future- storage tanks north carolina
Comprehensive outline of each post-closing discovery
This section shall provide the board with a brief overview of each of the post-closing discoveries.
Existence of Asbestos-containing material in hospital building
Introduction
Asbestos, once hailed as ‘miracle material’ came into the legislation limelight in the 1970’s and represents the longest running mass tort in United States History. Indeed the amount of lawyers fees accrued as a result on asbestos litigation exceeds even that of the tobacco settlement. The problems of asbestos litigation and legislation are still continuing today, this section will provide a brief overview of some of the regulations that Hardrock Holdings may encounter while trying to deal with this

Bibliography: Berry, F. D. (1993). Wetlands: Guide to science, law and technology. New Jersey: Noyes Publications. Brown, E. (1987). What Lawyers Must Know about Asbestos. ABA Journal , p.74-76. Camplin, J. (2003). Asbestos - "Second wind" brings contaminent back into public eye. Heath Hazards - Professional Safety , p. 32-39. Carroll, S. H. (2005). Asbestos Litigation . Santa Monica: Rand - Institute for civil justic . Cornell Law . (2011 ). Judicial Scope CWA. Retrieved from www.law.cornell.edu: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/clean_water_act_cwa Cornell Law Dahl, E. (1990). Wetlands losses in the United States 1780 's to 1980 's . Washington DC: Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service . Demeo, A. (1994). More Effective Protection for native american cultural propery through regulation of export . Ind. Law Review, 70. Department of Defense - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers. (2008). Compensatory Mitigation for Loses of Aquatic Resouces; Final Rule. Environmental Protection Agency . Dethick, M. (2002). Up in Smoke: From Legislation to Litigation in Tobacco Politics . Washington D.C.: CQ Press. Duboff, L. (1992). 500 years after Columbus: Protecting Native American Culture, . Cardozo Arts & Entertainment L.J., 48. Elbert, A. V. (2004). The Second Wave of Asbestos Litigation . Claims, p. 28-32. Environmental Protection Agency . (1963, December 17). Renovation & Demolition Requirements . Retrieved March 23, 2013, from www.epa.gov: http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/owners-managers.html Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Agency . (2013, February ). Clean Water Act . Retrieved from www.epa.gov: http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/cwahistory.html Environmental Protection Agency Hough, P. R. (2009). Mitigation under section 404 of the clean water act: where it comes from, what it means. . Wetl Ecol Manag, p. 15-33. Izuel, L. (1991). Property Owners Constructive Posession of Treaure Trove: Rethinking the Finder Keepers Rule . UCLA Law Review, p. 1670. Murphy, J. G.-C. (2009). New Mitigation rule promises more of the same: why the new corps and EPA mitigation rule will fail to protect our aquatic resources adequately. Stetson Law Review, p. 315-335. National Research Council. (1992). Restoration of the Aquatic Ecosystems; Science, Technology and Public Policy . Washington DC: National Academy Press. Occupational Safety & Health Adminstration. (NA, NA NA). Industry Standards . Retrieved March 23, 2013, from Occupational Safety & Health Adminstration Website: www.osha.gov Roger, W Sifneos, J. C. (1992). Effects of section 404 permitting on freshwater wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi . Wetlands , p30-36. Studt, F. (1994). Memorandum - Wetland impact acreage analysis. NA: Department of the Army . Sudol, M. (1996). Success of riparian mitigation as compensation for impacts due to permits issued through section 404 of the clean water act in Orange County, California/. Los Angeles: University of California . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . (2012, November 27). Clean Water Act. Section 309 - Enforcement . Retrieved March 29, 2013, from www.epa.gov: http://www.epa.gov/region07/public_notices/CWA/309.htm White, M White, M. (2002b). Explaining the Flood of Asbestos Litigation: Consolidation, Bifurcation, and Bouquet Trials. Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research. Wilkinson, J. T. (2006). 2005 Status report on compensatory mitigation in the United States. Washington DC : Environmental Law Institute. 854 F.2d 426 (1988) ST September 6, 1988.