Download Practice Test

Chapter 24
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Practice Test
1. Astro Circuit Corp. in Lowell, Massachusetts, manufactured printed circuit boards. David Boldt was
in charge of the production line. In theory, the company pretreated its industrial waste to remove
toxic metals, but, in practice, the factory was producing twice as much wastewater as the treatment
facility could handle. The company often bypassed the treatment facility and dumped wastewater
directly into the city sewer. Once, when caught by the city, Boldt wrote a letter implying that the
violation was a temporary aberration. Boldt felt that he was caught “between the devil and the deep
blue sea.” It was his job to keep the production line moving, but he had no place to put the waste
product. Has Boldt violated the law? What penalties might he face?
Boldt was found guilty of a criminal violation of the Clean Water Act. United States v. Boldt, 929
F.2d 35 (1st Cir. 1991).
3. In 1963, FMC Corp. purchased a manufacturing plant in Virginia from American Viscose Corp., the
owner of the plant since 1937. During World War II, the government’s War Production Board had
commissioned American Viscose to make rayon for airplanes and truck tires. In 1982, inspections
revealed carbon disulfide, a chemical used to manufacture this rayon, in groundwater near the plant.
American Viscose was out of business. Who is responsible for cleaning up the carbon disulfide?
Under what statute?
Both FMC and the U.S. government were liable for cleanup under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). FMC Corp. v. Department of Commerce, 29
F.3d 833 (3d Cir. 1994).
5. Suppose that you are the manager of the General Motors Hummer plant in Mishawaka, Indiana.
Hummers are the successor to the U.S. Army jeep and have become popular recreational vehicles
among the rich and famous. Arnold Schwarzenegger has several. The Hummer requires special
protective paint that reacts with other chemicals during the application process to create ozone, a
pollutant. You want to increase production of Hummers. Are there any legal requirements you must
observe?
The factory was required to obtain a permit from the state of Indiana ensuring that, even with the
increase in pollution from this factory, the area would still meet the national ambient air quality
standards. United States v. Am General Corp., 34 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 1994).
7. In 1991, Illinois passed a statute requiring its four largest generating plants to install scrubbers so that
they could continue using high-sulfur Illinois coal. What federal law was this Illinois statute designed
to overcome? Extra credit: On what grounds did a federal appeals court strike down the Illinois
statute?
A 1990 amendment to the Clean Air Act allowed polluters to meet federal standards four ways:
installing scrubbers, using low-sulfur coal, switching to alternative fuels, or trading emission
allowances. Illinois did not want these large plants to use low-sulfur coal from out-of-state. A federal
appeals court overturned the Illinois law on the grounds that it violated the Commerce Clause of the
U.S. Constitution by discriminating against out-of-state coal producers. Alliance for Clean Coal v.
Dan Miller, 44 F.3d 591 (7th Cir. 1994).
9. ETHICS Geronimo Villegas owned a blood-testing lab in Brooklyn, New York. He threw vials of
human blood from the lab into the Hudson River. A group of eighth graders on a field trip to Staten
Island discovered 70 of these glass vials along the shore. Ten vials contained blood infected with the
highly contagious hepatitis-B virus. Did Villegas violate the Clean Water Act? Why had Villegas
disposed of the vials in this way? Whether or not he was in violation of the statute, was his behavior
ethical? Did he violate any of the ethical tests from Chapter 2?
“Point source” means a physical structure such as a pipe, ditch, channel, or vessel–not a human
being. Therefore, Villegas is not a point source and is not liable for violating the Clean Water Act.