WESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF LAW
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 433A
SUMMER 2007
PROFESSOR DORRIS
COURSE SYLLABUS & POLICIES
TEXTS
Required: Assigned readings are from Findley, Farber, and Freeman, Cases and
Materials on Environmental Law (6th edition). Please bring the required text to all
classes. Other readings marked “Handout” will be provided by the instructor or available
by a website link provided by the instructor.
Recommended: Environmentalism Unbound, The MIT Press: Cambridge,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.
OBJECTIVES
This course provides a broad survey of environmental and land use law. It will examine
several key federal and California laws designed to protect the environment, and the
theories that explain how those laws discourage future pollution and remedy past
pollution. In addition, the course will cover the use of private actions to enforce
environmental standards and the overlay of environmental justice issues. The course also
will discuss the important roles of scientists and engineers in environmental law, from
determining what chemicals and exposures cause environmental harm to evaluating
cleanup remedies to allocating responsibility for costs.
EXAMINATIONS AND GRADING
Each student will receive a numeric grade based on a take home final given during final
examination week. The entire grade will be based on the final examination. The final
take-home exam is to be completed and returned in forty-eight hours. The exam will
require analysis of the law and policy issues covered in the reading materials and class
lectures. It will be open-book, open-note. Three questions will be provided, from which
the students will select two to respond to in the exam.
ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION
This course will explore not just how environmental and land use laws protect the
environment, by why they use those particular legal mechanisms. This exploration
process depends on student participation and understanding. For this reason, students
will be expected to have carefully read and analyze assigned materials before each class.
Unless otherwise instructed, please review the readings assigned on the syllabus
by the date specified, regardless of where we are in the class lectures. Your attendance
and participation in all classes is required. Failure to prepare will count as an absence.
Students who miss more than two classes will be academically withdrawn from the
course.
COURSE WEBSITE- MANDATORY ENROLLMENT
I am preparing a course website on Lexis/Nexis Webcourses. You are required to enroll
on the website as soon as possible after the beginning of the semester. I will be regularly
updating the website with articles, study materials, practice exams, links to sites of
interest, etc. throughout the semester. The syllabus may change in the course of the
semester. You are responsible for checking the website regularly and you will be
responsible for all materials posted on it.
CONSULTATION HOURS
If you have questions about the substantive law discussed in this course, you may make
an appointment for a 5-10 minute conference call with me by contacting me by e-mail.
My email address will be posted on the course website. Individual consultations may not
cover questions concerning the topics to be covered in the final exam or exam-taking
techniques.
COURSE CONTENT AND ASSIGNED READING:
May 29.
The Purpose of Environmental Laws
17-22
Leopold, Aldo (1949) A Sand County Almanac
33-35
Hardin, “The Tragedy of the Commons” (stop at 35)
53-55
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, First Report, Why there is
a Pollution Problem
May 31.
Development
10
Lazarus, “The Greening of America and the Graying of United States
Environmental Law”
273
Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co.
283
Spur Industries v. Del E. Webb Development Co.
703
TVA v. Hill
Please bring computers with wireless connections if possible. We will be pulling up
electronic versions of various environmental statutes, regulations, and guidance
documents.
June 5.
Warming.
Hot Environmental Topics: Environmental Justice and Global
573
Omar Saleem, “Overcoming Environmental Discrimination” and Notes
578
Note on Legal Implementation of Environmental Equity
Recommended:
Gottleib, R. (2001) Environmentalism Unbound
Please check website for additional materials on global warming.
June 7.
The Magic of Environmental Science: Determining Environmental
Harm and Allocating Responsibility
505
514
516
517
517
519
533
533
543
Alan Rosenthal, Legislating Acceptable Cancer Risk
Cass R. Sunstein, Which Risks First?
Notes
Risk Assessment
Note: How EPA Assesses Risks
Chlorine Chemistry Council v. EPA
Risk Management and Cost-Benefit Analysis
Steve P. Calandrillo, “Responsible Regulation”
Reserve Mining Co. v. EPA
In addition, prior to class please pull up a copy of a Proposition 65 on the internet and
OEHHA’s list of chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer or
reproductive harm. Please bring to class website links to both and to the Attorney
General’s website on Proposition 65. Please also bring to class the website link to a site
identifying RCRA-listed hazardous wastes.
Additional handouts may be provided on the class webpage; please check the webpage
for updates.
June 12.
Regulation of Hazardous Waste - RCRA and State Counterparts
628-51
661-669
Text on RCRA; American Mining Congress v. EPA; Chemical Waste Mgt.
Inc. v. EPA; Land Ban Rule
Stoll, Coping with the RCRA Hazardous Waste System
June 14.
Water Pollution Control – Guest Lecturer James Geocaris, Esq.
Please bring to class your earlier printouts of the Clean Water Act and Porter-Cologne.
386-390
396
408-415
415-416
417
Background (up to “Results”)
Pollutants
Effluent Standards: Dischargers, Distinctions, and Deadlines
Exceptions to the Rule of Technology-Based Standards
Point Sources
418
478
449
451
455
458
467
470
NRDC v Costle
Nonpoint Sources
Toxics
Chemical Manufacturers Ass’n v. EPA
Water Quality Standards
PUD No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Wash. DOE
Area Planning
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Additional assignment: www.waterboards.gov – examine industrial stormwater general
purpose order in the stormwater section, together with the explanatory
section.
June 19.
Civil Liability under RCRA and Superfund
723-759
763-776
Handout
Text and Cases
Notes on the Identification of Responsible Parties
Cooper Industries, Inc v. Aviall Services, Inc.
June 21.
Dynamics of Environmental Litigation – Police Power vs. Private
Party – Guest Lecturer Todd Normane, Esq., Counsel, BP Amoco
Case Study 1 – Former Station 5355, Los Angeles, CA
This location was the former site of a gasoline service station that ceased operations in
2004. Remediation was initiated pursuant to an Agreement with the Developer/Owner
and with Oversight by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Subsequently, the
Water Board unilaterally and without notice, changed its position and mandated
additional remedial work. The Water Board’s action was the catalyst for the present
dispute. It turned an amicable relationship with the Developer into an adversarial one
and led to the filing of an Administrative Appeal to the State Water Board.
Suggested Reading – Statement of Points & Authorities dated January 31, 2006
Case Study 2 – City of Pomona v. John Michael Faull et al., Pomona, CA
Plaintiff City of Pomona (the “City”) brought an action to clean up soil and groundwater
contamination at 198 North Hamilton, Pomona (“198 North Hamilton”), California, and
to recover associated costs. The action also sought to enjoin the clean up of an adjacent
site located at 123, 145, and 165 North Hamilton (the “Calsol Site”) and to recover costs
associated with the clean up of that property as well. The 198 North Hamilton Site was
the location of a former Richfield Oil terminal from 1924 to 1974. The City acquired the
property in 1990 and has been ordered by the Water Board to remediate the property.
This case went to trial in Federal District Court in Los Angeles in late April 2006.
Suggested Reading – Plaintiff and Defendant’s Trial Briefs
Case Study 3 – Former Sulphur Mine, Alpine County, CA
The Leviathan Mine is a former underground (copper and sulfur), and open pit (sulfur)
mine located in Alpine County about 25 miles southeast of South Lake Tahoe, California.
The site is in a remote location at an elevation of approximately 7000 feet. In 1983
Atlantic Richfield reached a settlement with the State of California, paying money to
cover the estimated cost of building a pollution abatement system on site. In exchange,
the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Board agreed to take sole
responsibility for designing, building, operating and maintaining such a system, and
released Atlantic Richfield from all liability for the mine site, including “any and all
claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind whatsoever, known or unknown …
connected with the past ownership or use of the site by Atlantic Richfield or any of its
predecessors in interest.” USEPA put the site on the national priorities list in May of
2000 and issued a unilateral order to Atlantic Richfield in November of 2000, requiring
the preparation of a remedial investigation and feasibility study of remedy options, and to
treat all uncaptured acid mine drainage on an interim basis until a final remedy is
implemented. USEPA can hold Atlantic Richfield R liable for the cost of responding to
contamination arising from Anaconda’s operations on site under CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.
9607(a).
Please go to course website for handouts to examine in advance of this class.
June 26.
Enforcement by Public Prosecutors and Private Citizen Groups.
Please read and bring to the class a copy of the California Unfair Competition Law, Bus.
and Prof. Code § 17200 et seq., and Proposition 65. Please also read the citizen suit
provision of the Clean Water Act.
Please also find on the internet, print, and bring to class at least one news story on an
owner, manager, or executive sentenced criminally for environmental violations
committed by staff or agents.
Handout: Kraus v. Cortez
June 28.
Endangered Species. Guest Lecturer James Geocaris, Esq.
Please bring computerized or hard copies of the federal Endangered Species Act.
Handouts may be posted on the web course site for review prior to class. Please also
bring to class the following: (computerized copies are fine if accessible during class):
1. Federal Endangered Species Act: 16 U.S.C. Sections 1531-1544.
2. California Endangered Species Act: Cal. Fish and Game Code, Sections 2050-2115.5.
3. California Natural Community Conservation Act: Cal. Fish and Game Code, Sections
2800-2835.
July 3
[Holiday – no class]
July 5.
Protection of the Environment through Land Use Regulation –
Introduction to NEPA and CEQA
143
NEPA
149
Threshold Requirements
149
Hanly v. Mitchell
172
Scope and Timing of the Impact Statement
173
Kleppe v. Sierra Club
Handout
Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents.
Please also review your prior printouts of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and bring
them to class. Please also re-examine the website of the State of California Governor’s
Office of Planning and Research to learn about additional resources on CEQA prior to
class. The class will be meeting in the computer room under the law library.
July 10.
NEPA and CEQA at Work
Handouts
Western States Petroleum Association (administrative record issues)
Friends of Mammoth
CalFed litigation materials (up for Supreme Court review)
July 12.
Air Emission Regulation
[reading list to be provided at least 1 week before class]
July 18.
Recap
Handouts and assignments will be posted on the course website.