The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation - is responsible for the conservation, improvement, and protection of natural resources within the U.S. state of New York. It was founded in 1970, replacing the previous Conservation Department. The Department manages the Adirondack and Catskill Forest Preserve lands, state forest lands, wildlife management areas and various other state owned public lands of New York. The Department is also responsible for regulating sport fishing, hunting and trapping within the state, and enforcing the State's environmental laws and regulations.
The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control - is the government agency responsible for public health and the environment in the U.S. state of South Carolina. It was created in 1973 from the merger of the South Carolina State Board of Health and the South Carolina Pollution Control Authority. The agency's commissioner manages the day-to-day operations of the agency, while the Board of Health and Environmental Control is responsible for supervising DHEC's operations. Each of the board's seven members is appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the South Carolina Senate.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality - is the environmental agency for the U.S. state of Texas. The commission is headquartered at 12100 Park 35 Circle in Austin. The agency was formed by act of the Texas Legislature in 1993 by consolidating the Texas Air Control Board (1965-1993) and Texas Water Commission (1985-1993) with the aim of increasing efficiency in enforcement of environmental laws, statutes, and regulations. Originally known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, it acquired its present name in 2002. It is the primary state agency charged with enforcement of environmental regulations and with issuing air and water operating permits to businesses operating in Texas. These permits typically specify the types and maximum amounts of pollutants a permit holder may legally discharge into the air or state waterways.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Barriers to EPA Enforcement
Localization - Many issues of environmental justice are localized, and are therefore hard to be addressed by federal agencies such as the EPA. Without significant media attention, political interest, or ‘crisis’ status, local issues are less likely to be addressed on local or federal level. With a still developing sector of environmental justice under the EPA, small, local incidents are unlikely to be solved compared to larger, well publicized incidents.
Conflicting Political Powers - The White House holds direct control over the EPA, and democrats and republicans have very different views. For example, while President Bill Clinton signed the executive order 12898, the Bush administration did not develop a clear plan or establish goals for integrating environmental justice into everyday practices, which in turn affected the motivation for environmental enforcement.
Authority of the EPA - Under different circumstances, the EPA faces many limitations to enforcing environmental justice. It does not have the authority or resources to address injustices without an increase in federal mandates requiring private industries to consider the environmental ramifications of their activities.
Conflicting Political Powers - The White House holds direct control over the EPA, and democrats and republicans have very different views. For example, while President Bill Clinton signed the executive order 12898, the Bush administration did not develop a clear plan or establish goals for integrating environmental justice into everyday practices, which in turn affected the motivation for environmental enforcement.
Authority of the EPA - Under different circumstances, the EPA faces many limitations to enforcing environmental justice. It does not have the authority or resources to address injustices without an increase in federal mandates requiring private industries to consider the environmental ramifications of their activities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
