The Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant located just thirty-four miles from New York City in Buchanan, New York, has recently been the subject of intense debate.  On March 1, 2012, the Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School hosted a forum on the future of Indian Point.  Paul Gallay of Hudson Riverkeeper and Ashok Gupta of Natural Resources Defense Council spoke in opposition to Indian Point.  Arthur "Jerry" Kremer of the Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance (New York) and John Kelly, the former Director of Licensing at Indian Point, spoke in support of relicensing the plant.  Michael Gerrard, the Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice and Director of the Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, moderated the panel discussion at the forum.  This Report reviews and analyzes the claims made during the forum, highlighting the conclusion that Indian Point presents serious risks that must be addressed before the plant is relicensed.

On October 25, 2011, the Ninth Circuit handed down the latest decision in the Sarei litigation.  The British and Australian governments jointly submitted an Amicus Brief, which focuses on whether local remedies in the state in which the alleged wrongs occurred must be exhausted before a U.S. court can exercise jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute.  This report argues that the position of the British and Australian governments has significant merit as a matter of international law and as a question of policy.

Natural gas leaseholders and industry have sued at least two municipalities, challenging recently enacted zoning ordinances that remove natural gas extraction as a permissible land use-in effect banning fracking within municipal borders.  State courts are now poised to decide whether localities in New York have the power to ban fracking locally, or if ordinances banning fracking are preempted by state law.  The question presented is whether the Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining Law (OGSM) preempts a generally applicable zoning ordinance that bans natural gas extraction.  This Field Report discusses the factual and legal context in which this question arises, and argues that the OGSM does not preempt a general zoning ban on natural gas extraction.

The world continues to step into space, but the rise of a commercial space tourism industry threatens our planet's climate.  The most recent research suggests that even a conservative estimate of the number of rocket launches possible in the coming years and decades will drastically affect the earth's climate.  Neither space law nor current environmental law respond sufficiently to the environmental threat posed by the nacent space tourism industry.  This Field Report discusses the threat and the United States' opportunity to problem-solve at the industry's birth, before the damage is done.

This past November, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case Friends of the Everglades v. South Florida Water Management District.  That case was the first in which a federal appeals court accepted the "unitary waters" theory, an interpretation of the Clean Water Act that treats all bodies of water in the United States as a single body.  This Field Report discusses the background and aftermath of the Bush administration's adoption of the unitary waters theory.  Although Friends of the Everglades was a troubling development, subsequent decisions have limited the damage.

The Third and Ninth Circuits are split as to whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is required to analyze the environmental impacts of a terrorist attack on a nuclear facility.  This Field Report explores possible reasons (beyond the rather obvious observation that the courts disagreed regarding the applicable law) why the Third Circuit believed it to be appropriate to split with the Ninth Circuit and exclude the public from participating in the NRC’s consideration of an issue vital to public security.

Pollution from pharmaceutical end products is a widespread and under-regulated source of environmental contamination.  This Field Report examines the regulatory framework currently in place and its limitations and suggests that: (1) more detailed chemical analyses should be required on pharmaceutical pollutants, (2) infrastructure improvements on wastewater treatment should be made, and (3) short-term mitigation steps are possible through increased regulation of medical facilities.   

America’s regulation of toxic substances through the Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”) should be reformed to require greater testing and disclosure of information about chemicals, and to allow EPA to more easily regulate these substances.

 The apportionment formula originally used by the district court and upheld by the Supreme Court in Burlington Northern cannot be justified mathematically and, in fact, drastically distorts a defendant's true share of liability.

Existing authority  under the Clean Air Act--particularly § 115 on "International Air Pollution"--could provide for the establishment of a cap-and-trade program without further Congressional action.