Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Environmental law isn't just about protecting nature—it's about understanding how liability, compliance obligations, and regulatory frameworks shape business decision-making. You're being tested on your ability to identify which regulations apply to specific business activities, who bears responsibility when violations occur, and how these laws create both constraints and opportunities for managers. The regulations in this guide represent the core federal environmental framework that every business leader must navigate.
These laws operate through different mechanisms: some impose strict liability regardless of fault, others require permits and ongoing compliance, and still others mandate disclosure and assessment before action can be taken. Don't just memorize statute names—know what type of obligation each creates, what activities trigger coverage, and what consequences flow from violations. That's what separates exam success from mere recognition.
These regulations target specific environmental media—air, water, and drinking water—through permit systems, discharge limits, and quality standards. The key mechanism is command-and-control regulation: set a standard, require a permit, and enforce compliance.
Compare: Clean Water Act vs. Safe Drinking Water Act—both protect water quality, but CWA regulates discharges into surface waters while SDWA regulates what comes out of public drinking water systems. If an FRQ asks about industrial discharge permits, that's CWA; if it asks about tap water standards, that's SDWA.
These regulations create a "cradle-to-grave" system for hazardous materials, tracking them from generation through disposal and assigning liability for cleanup. The core principle is that generators and handlers of hazardous waste remain responsible for proper management—liability doesn't disappear when waste leaves your facility.
Compare: RCRA vs. CERCLA—RCRA regulates ongoing hazardous waste management at active facilities, while CERCLA addresses past contamination and cleanup at abandoned or inactive sites. Think of RCRA as prevention and CERCLA as remediation. Both can apply to the same company if it operates facilities and has legacy contamination.
These regulations don't directly prohibit activities but instead require analysis, disclosure, and consideration of environmental impacts before decisions are made. The mechanism is procedural: ensure decision-makers have environmental information and the public has opportunity to participate.
Compare: NEPA vs. ESA—both require federal agencies to assess impacts before acting, but NEPA is purely procedural (consider and disclose) while ESA imposes substantive limits (don't jeopardize species). NEPA applies broadly to all significant federal actions; ESA applies specifically when listed species or critical habitat may be affected.
These provisions address the intersection of environmental protection with worker safety and establish the institutional framework for enforcement.
Compare: OSHA vs. EPA regulations—OSHA protects workers from hazards in the workplace, while EPA regulations protect the environment and public from pollution. A chemical release could trigger both: OSHA for worker exposure, EPA for environmental contamination. Managers must understand both frameworks apply simultaneously.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Permit-based compliance | CAA (Title V), CWA (NPDES), RCRA (TSDFs) |
| Strict/joint and several liability | CERCLA (Superfund) |
| Procedural requirements | NEPA (EIS/EA), ESA (Section 7 consultation) |
| Pre-market chemical review | TSCA (PMN requirements) |
| Cradle-to-grave tracking | RCRA (manifest system) |
| Quality standards | CAA (NAAQS), SDWA (MCLs) |
| Species/habitat protection | ESA (take prohibition, critical habitat) |
| Worker safety intersection | OSHA (HazCom, General Duty Clause) |
Which two regulations both address hazardous substances but differ in whether they focus on ongoing management versus cleanup of past contamination? What type of liability does each impose?
A company is applying for a federal permit to build a facility near a river that contains a listed endangered fish species. Which two statutes will require environmental review, and how do their requirements differ?
Compare the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act: what specific regulatory mechanism does each use, and what activity does each regulate?
If an FRQ describes a company that purchased an old industrial site and later discovered soil contamination from a previous owner, which statute governs liability? What defense might the company raise, and what would it need to prove?
Explain how RCRA and CERCLA work together as complementary parts of the hazardous waste regulatory framework. Which would apply to an operating chemical plant, and which would apply if that plant closed and contamination was discovered years later?