VIRGINIA ENVIRONMENTAL LAW JOURNAL
  • Home
  • In Print
    • Forthcoming
    • Current and Past Volumes
  • Events
    • Symposium
    • Former Symposia
  • Submissions
  • Staff & Alumni
    • Masthead
    • Alumni
    • Senior Managing Board
    • Advisory Board
  • ELRS
  • About Us
  • Subscriptions
  • Membership
  • Contact
  • Notes Pool
  • Blog
  • Home
  • In Print
    • Forthcoming
    • Current and Past Volumes
  • Events
    • Symposium
    • Former Symposia
  • Submissions
  • Staff & Alumni
    • Masthead
    • Alumni
    • Senior Managing Board
    • Advisory Board
  • ELRS
  • About Us
  • Subscriptions
  • Membership
  • Contact
  • Notes Pool
  • Blog

Pipelines, Protests and General Permits 

10/31/2016

0 Comments

 
Samantha L. Varsalona
Georgetown University Law Center, Class of 2018
Staff Member, Georgetown Environmental Law Review
This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate.  Please post all comments on the original article, which can be found here.
 
Abstract
 
The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) has become a contentious topic in recent months. The controversy centers around Dakota Access, LLC[1], a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC, and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota[2] (the Tribe or Sioux), a federally-recognized Indian tribe.  The Tribe’s reservation, Standing Rock Indian Reservation, is half a mile upstream from where DAPL’s crude oil pipeline would cross the Missouri River underneath Lake Oahe in North Dakota.[3]  While much of the recent media attention surrounding Dakota Access and the Tribe has focused on the destruction of the Tribe’s ancestral burial grounds, the underlying issue can be traced back to the nationwide permits issued by the Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) in 2012.[4] More specifically, this article will examine Nationwide Permit 12 (NWP 12), which was one of the fifty NWPs issued by the Corps in 2012[5] and is at the heart of the current legal battle between Dakota Access and the Tribe.

Read More
0 Comments

Science And Deference: The “Best Available Science”  Mandate is A Fiction in the Ninth Circuit

10/25/2016

0 Comments

 
By Elizabeth Kuhn. Ms. Kuhn is a J.D. candidate at Lewis & Clark Law School. ​Please send correspondence to elizabethkuhn@lclark.edu.

Read More
0 Comments

An Ecology of Liberation: The Shifting Landscape of Environmental Law in an Era of Changing Environmental Values

10/20/2016

0 Comments

 
By Michael Zielinski
William & Mary Law School, Class of 2017

This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate. The original can be found here.

Read More
0 Comments

WWII-Era Government Contractor Indemnification Clauses Come to the Fore in CERCLA Litigation as Other Grounds to Shift Costs to the Government Narrow

10/12/2016

0 Comments

 
Hume Ross is a member of the Georgetown Environmental Law Review.  This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate.  Please leave any comments on the original post, which may be found on Georgetown Environmental Law Review's webpage.

Read More
0 Comments

    About the ELRS:

    The Environmental Law Review Syndicate (ELRS) is a collaborative effort of the nation’s leading environmental law journals that provides an outlet for student scholarship and fosters academic. ELRS operates as a cooperative syndicate: each week a different student submission is selected for publication on the websites of all member law reviews. ​

    Archives

    April 2019
    March 2019
    November 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.