Environmental Law: Takings, Clean Air Act, and Clean Water Act

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/122

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

Comprehensive vocabulary flashcards covering Takings doctrine, constitutional property protections, common law nuisance, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act.

123 Terms

1
New cards

Takings Clause (5th Amendment)

Constitutional rule that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. The government is allowed to take property, but it must pay.

2
New cards

Incorporation Clause (14th Amendment) – Takings

Extends the Takings Clause to state and local governments, not just the federal government.

3
New cards

Taking

Occurs when the government seizes private property for public use; categorized into physical takings and regulatory takings.

4
New cards

Physical taking

Invasion or occupation of property rights by governmental action (e.g., taking land to build a highway; eminent domain); constitutional as long as the government pays just compensation (market value).

5
New cards

Regulatory taking

Occurs when the government restricts an owner's rights so much that the action becomes the functional equivalent of a physical seizure. Analyzed as a categorical taking, a use restriction (Penn Central test), or an exaction (Nollan-Dolan test).

6
New cards

Eminent domain

The government's power and right to physically take private property for public use, provided just compensation is paid. Just compensation is always required.

7
New cards

Just compensation

Payment owed by the government to the owner upon taking property; generally fair market value. Required for eminent domain and categorical takings, but not owed for navigational servitude or the public trust.

8
New cards

Condemnation lawsuit

The legal process or lawsuit used to physically take property, which usually hinges in court on determining fair market value.

9
New cards

Police power

The government's inherent power to regulate to protect the health, safety, and welfare of citizens. Broad and non-arbitrary; private interests must yield without compensation (Hadacheck), unless a regulation goes 'too far' (Penn Coal).

10
New cards

Categorical taking

A taking that is automatic without applying a balancing test, requiring just compensation (fair market value). Includes (1) physical invasions/access mandates and (2) complete loss of all economically viable use.

11
New cards

Physical invasions

A categorical taking where the government mandates public access to or occupation of private property, requiring compensation even if the invasion is small (e.g., Kaiser Aetna).

12
New cards

Complete loss of economically viable use

A categorical taking occurring when a regulation deprives an owner of all economically viable use of land (Lucas), unless state nuisance law background principles would already have prohibited the use.

13
New cards

Use restriction

A government regulation on how land may be used that does not eliminate all economic value, analyzed under the Penn Central test.

14
New cards

Penn Central test

An ad hoc balancing test evaluating whether a government action constitutes a taking based on: (1) character of the government action, (2) extent of interference with reasonable investment-backed expectations, and (3) economic impact on the owner.

15
New cards

Character of the government action

The first Penn Central factor evaluating the 'why' behind an action—whether it is a broad police-power regulation benefiting all citizens (less likely a taking) or singles out/physically invades the owner (more likely a taking).

16
New cards

Reasonable investment-backed expectations

The second Penn Central factor assessing what the owner reasonably expected to do with the property when investing; greater interference makes a taking more likely.

17
New cards

Economic impact on the owner

The third Penn Central factor examining the actual reduction in property value caused by a regulation; greater diminution weighs toward a taking, though diminution alone is insufficient.

18
New cards

Transferable development rights (TDRs)

Rights lost through a landmark restriction that can be transferred to nearby plots, mitigating the economic impact of the regulation (as in Penn Central).

19
New cards

Moratorium

A temporary ban on development while a land-use plan is formulated. Not a per se categorical taking; analyzed based on expectations, actual impact, public interest, and underlying reasons (Tahoe-Sierra).

20
New cards

Exaction

A conditional permit requirement where the government mandates that a property owner dedicate property or provide a public benefit in exchange for development approval.

21
New cards

Nollan-Dolan test

A two-part constitutional test for development exactions requiring: (1) an essential nexus between the exaction and a legitimate state interest, and (2) rough proportionality between the exaction and the development's impact.

22
New cards

Essential nexus

The first prong of the Nollan-Dolan test requiring a reasonable connection between the permit condition (exaction) and the legitimate state interest advanced by the government.

23
New cards

Rough proportionality

The second prong of the Nollan-Dolan test requiring that the exaction be related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development.

24
New cards

Easement

A legal right to use another's land for a specific purpose (such as a right of passage) without transferring title; a common form of development exaction.

25
New cards

Dedication

Giving away title and ownership of real property to the government or community for a specific purpose; a stronger form of exaction than an easement.

26
New cards

The Public Trust

The principle under which the state (such as the State of Michigan) holds navigable waters in trust for public use.

27
New cards

Navigational servitude

Federal authority over navigable waters allowing regulation without paying just compensation, though the government cannot convert a private pond into a public waterway without paying compensation (Kaiser Aetna).

28
New cards

Public trust doctrine

Principle establishing that the state holds title to lands under navigable waters in trust for the public for navigation, commerce, and fishing, which cannot be relinquished by transfer; no compensation is owed for regulations over trust lands.

29
New cards

Quasi-property right

A term describing the public's interest under the public trust doctrine: not complete ownership, but an indefeasible public right to use navigable waters.

30
New cards

Ordinary high water mark

The line where water normally reaches at high tide; land at or below this line is subject to the public trust and public use, while land above belongs to the private owner.

31
New cards

Navigable waters / Log float test

Michigan's navigability test providing that if a body of water can float a log, it qualifies as navigable and is subject to the public trust.

32
New cards

Hadacheck v. Sebastian (1915)

Landmark ruling that a non-arbitrary exercise of police power (banning brickyards in LA city limits) is valid without compensation, establishing that reduction in property value alone does not constitute a taking.

33
New cards

Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1922)

Supreme Court case establishing that a regulation that severely diminishes property value goes 'too far' and constitutes a taking requiring just compensation.

34
New cards

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York (1978)

Established an ad hoc balancing test for regulatory use restrictions, holding that New York City's landmark law blocking an office tower above Grand Central Terminal was not a taking.

35
New cards

Kaiser Aetna v. United States (1979)

Case holding that requiring public access to a private pond dredged to connect to the ocean constitutes a categorical taking by physical invasion/access mandate, requiring compensation.

36
New cards

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992)

Established that a regulation denying all economically viable use of land is a categorical taking requiring fair market value compensation, unless background principles of nuisance law already prohibited the use.

37
New cards

Palazzolo v. Rhode Island (2001)

Held that acquiring title after a regulation takes effect does not bar a takings claim, and that retaining some economic use (such as building one home) defeats a categorical Lucas claim, requiring Penn Central analysis.

38
New cards

Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (2002)

Held that temporary planning moratoria are not per se categorical takings, requiring instead a fact-specific balancing of landowner expectations, impact, and public interest.

39
New cards

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987)

Established the 'essential nexus' requirement, mandating a reasonable connection between a permit exaction and the legitimate state interest advanced.

40
New cards

Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994)

Established the 'rough proportionality' requirement, placing the burden on the government to prove that an exaction matches the nature and extent of the development's impact.

41
New cards

Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Illinois (1892)

Foundational case for the public trust doctrine holding that a state cannot abdicate its trust over submerged lands under navigable waters to private entities.

42
New cards

Bott v. Commission of Natural Resources (Mich. 1982)

Michigan case applying the public trust doctrine and the log float test for navigability, characterizing the public trust interest as a quasi-property right.

43
New cards

Negative Externalities

Occur when third parties bear production costs (such as pollution) without having influence over production decisions, causing market failure in balancing output and environmental quality.

44
New cards

Collective (public) Goods

Commodities that cannot efficiently be provided to one individual without allowing others to enjoy them, characterized by non-excludability (e.g., clean air).

45
New cards

Approaches to Pollution Control (5)

Five legal and regulatory mechanisms: (1) Liability, (2) Direct regulation, (3) Charges, (4) Subsidies, and (5) Pollution markets.

46
New cards

Liability (pollution control)

A pollution control method relying on litigation and tort remedies (such as nuisance lawsuits) to award damages or injunctive relief to injured landowners.

47
New cards

Direct Regulation

Command-and-control statutory mechanisms that prohibit emissions exceeding set limits (e.g., the Clean Air Act).

48
New cards

Charges

Economic penalties or fees assessed on private activities that generate external environmental costs (e.g., a carbon tax).

49
New cards

Subsidies

Financial assistance or tax credits provided to encourage private activities that reduce external environmental costs (e.g., renewable energy credits).

50
New cards

Pollution Markets

Market-based systems where regulated firms buy and sell tradeable pollution allowances or permits (e.g., cap-and-trade).

51
New cards

Common Law

Body of law derived from judicial decisions and precedent, rather than statutory enactments.

52
New cards

Private nuisance

An unreasonable interference with an individual's private use and enjoyment of their property, remedied by damages or injunctions.

53
New cards

Public Nuisance

An unreasonable interference with a right shared in common by the general public (e.g., creating a widespread public health hazard).

54
New cards

Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co. (N.Y. 1970)

New York nuisance decision holding that courts balance the economic hardships when considering injunctions, allowing payment of permanent damages instead of enjoining operations when the economic harm of an injunction far outweighs the plaintiff's harm.

55
New cards

Milwaukee v. Illinois (1981)

Supreme Court decision holding that comprehensive federal environmental statutes (e.g., Clean Water Act) preempt and displace federal common-law nuisance claims.

56
New cards

Preemption (federal common law nuisance)

The legal doctrine barring common-law claims when a comprehensive federal statutory scheme occupies the field and displaces federal common law on that subject.

57
New cards

Clean Air Act (CAA - 1970) – overview

Federal statute regulating ambient air quality by directing the EPA to establish NAAQS, overseeing State Implementation Plans (SIPs), setting permitting requirements for major stationary sources, and regulating hazardous air pollutants.

58
New cards

Ambient Air

The portion of the atmosphere external to buildings to which the general public has access; serves as the regulatory starting point of the Clean Air Act.

59
New cards

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

Uniform health-based air quality standards set by the EPA for criteria pollutants and reviewed every five years, without considering implementation costs or technological feasibility.

60
New cards

Criteria Pollutants (6)

The six widespread air pollutants regulated under NAAQS: lead (PbPb), carbon monoxide (COCO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2NO_2), sulfur dioxide (SO2SO_2), ozone (O3O_3), and particle pollution (PM\text{PM}).

61
New cards

Primary Standard

The NAAQS benchmark set at a level requisite to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety.

62
New cards

Secondary Standard

The NAAQS benchmark set to protect public welfare and prevent adverse environmental or property damage, distinct from public health.

63
New cards

Whitman v. American Trucking Ass'ns (2001)

Supreme Court case confirming that the EPA is legally prohibited from considering economic costs or technological feasibility when setting NAAQS.

64
New cards

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

A comprehensive, federally enforceable plan created by each state outlining emission limitations, compliance schedules, and control strategies to achieve and maintain NAAQS.

65
New cards

Attainment Area

A geographic air quality control region that meets or exceeds the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for a specified criteria pollutant.

66
New cards

Nonattainment Area

A geographic air quality control region where pollutant concentrations fail to meet the NAAQS, requiring stricter regulatory controls and mandatory offsets.

67
New cards

Major Source

A large stationary industrial facility emitting air pollutants above statutory thresholds, subject to state operating and construction permitting programs under the CAA.

68
New cards

Mobile Sources

Moving vehicles such as cars, trucks, buses, and construction equipment; subject to EPA emission standards, including greenhouse gases like CO2CO_2.

69
New cards

Massachusetts v. EPA

Supreme Court decision holding that greenhouse gases like CO2CO_2 fit the CAA definition of an air pollutant and that the EPA has authority to regulate them from motor vehicles.

70
New cards

New Stationary Source

Any factory, facility, or power plant constructed or placed into operation after the enactment of regulations in 1970.

71
New cards

Modification

Any physical change or alteration in the method of operation of a stationary source that increases pollutant emissions; causes an existing facility to be regulated as a new source.

72
New cards

Existing Stationary Source

A factory or power plant constructed and operational prior to 1970 that has not undergone a modification.

73
New cards

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)

Uniform federal technology-based emission standards established for specific industrial source categories, dictating allowable emission limits while leaving technology selection to the facility.

74
New cards

Opacity

The degree to which emissions reduce the transmission of light and obscure the view of an object in the background; used to measure smokestack emissions.

75
New cards

New Source Review (NSR)

Preconstruction permitting program for new and modified major sources: requires PSD permits and BACT in attainment areas, and LAER plus emission offsets in nonattainment areas.

76
New cards

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)

CAA program designed to maintain clean air in attainment areas by requiring new or modified sources to install BACT and verify that emissions will not exceed increments or NAAQS.

77
New cards

Best Available Control Technology (BACT)

Middle-tier emissions standard required for new/modified sources in attainment areas under PSD; allows consideration of energy, environmental, and economic costs.

78
New cards

Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER)

The most stringent technology standard under the CAA, required for new and modified major sources in nonattainment areas, reflecting the strictest limit in any SIP or achieved in practice.

79
New cards

Offsets

A mandatory requirement in nonattainment areas where a new source must obtain greater-than-equal emission reductions from existing sources in the area, creating a net air quality reduction.

80
New cards

Netting

An offset compliance method involving the reduction of emissions by closing or altering other smokestacks within the same facility.

81
New cards

Bubbling

An offset compliance approach that treats multiple emission points across common-ownership facilities as if they were encased under a single bubble.

82
New cards

Emission Credit Banking

A system allowing localities to bank emission reductions from closed facilities and reallocate or sell those credits to incoming firms.

83
New cards

Chevron v. NRDC (1984)

Supreme Court case upholding the EPA's bubble concept (treating entire industrial plants as a single stationary source for offset purposes) and establishing judicial deference to reasonable agency interpretations.

84
New cards

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)

The least stringent technology standard under the CAA, applied to existing stationary sources in nonattainment areas based on necessity, feasibility, and costs.

85
New cards

Technology-based controls ladder

The hierarchy of Clean Air Act technology standards arranged by stringency: RACT (least stringent, existing sources in nonattainment) < BACT (middle, new sources in attainment) < LAER (most stringent, new sources in nonattainment).

86
New cards

Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)

A statutory list of 190 toxic air pollutants known or suspected to cause cancer, birth defects, or severe environmental harms, regulated via technology-based MACT standards.

87
New cards

Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)

Stringent technology standards for controlling Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs), set by EPA based on the emission control achieved by the best-performing sources in an industrial category.

88
New cards

Clean Water Act (CWA)

Federal statute regulating discharges of pollutants (effluent) from point sources into the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) using NPDES permits, technology-based limits, and TMDLs.

89
New cards

Effluent

Wastewater or liquid pollution discharged into water bodies, regulated by the Clean Water Act.

90
New cards

Organic Wastes

Water pollutants composed of organic material that decompose by bacterial action, commonly quantified via Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD).

91
New cards

Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)

A measurement of the dissolved oxygen consumed by aerobic microorganisms while decomposing organic wastes in water.

92
New cards

Thermal Pollution

The discharge of heated industrial cooling water into aquatic systems, which can trigger excessive algae growth and lower dissolved oxygen.

93
New cards

Sediments

Suspended soil and mineral particles washed into waterways that, along with excess nutrients, accelerate eutrophication.

94
New cards

Eutrophication

The accelerated aging and 'dying' of a water body caused by nutrient and sediment overload leading to oxygen depletion.

95
New cards

Toxic Chemicals (Water Pollutants)

Chemical substances that cause death, disease, or birth defects in organisms, including heavy metals like lead and arsenic.

96
New cards

Point Source

Any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance (e.g., pipe, ditch, tunnel, conduit, well, CAFO, container, or vessel) from which pollutants are discharged into WOTUS.

97
New cards

Non-Point Source

Diffuse, unconfined runoff (e.g., agricultural runoff) not originating from a single discrete conveyance; excluded from NPDES permits and addressed via TMDL load allocations.

98
New cards

Waters Of The United States (WOTUS)

A statutory term of art designating the navigable water bodies and adjacent wetlands subject to federal regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.

99
New cards

United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes

Supreme Court decision upholding Clean Water Act jurisdiction over freshwater wetlands directly adjacent to navigable waters.

100
New cards

SWANCC (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County)

Supreme Court decision invalidating federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction over isolated, intrastate, non-navigable ponds used solely by migratory birds.