BerkeleyLaw Library

Compiles programs, government documents, and web and other media resources.

"The global trade in wildlife provides disease transmission mechanisms that not only result in human disease outbreaks, but also threaten livestock, international trade, rural livelihoods, native wildlife populations, and the health of ecosystems. Global movement of animals for the pet trade is estimated at some 350 million live animals, worth approximately US$20 billion per year. Approximately one-quarter of this trade is thought to be illegal, hence not inspected or tested. Disease outbreaks resulting from trade in wildlife have caused hundreds of billions of dollars of economic damage globally. Rather than attempting to eradicate pathogens or the wild species that may harbor them, a practical approach would include decreasing the contact rate among species, including humans, at the interface created by wildlife trade. Wild animals are captured, transported, and sold either live or dead and commingled throughout the process in a system of scale-free networks with major hubs rather than random or evenly distributed supply systems. As focal points for distribution and sales, the hubs provide control opportunities to maximize the effects of regulatory efforts as demonstrated with domestic animal trading systems (processing plants and wholesale and retail markets, for example). Focusing efforts at markets to regulate, reduce, or in some cases, eliminate the commercial trade in wildlife could provide a cost-effective approach to decrease the risks for disease in humans, domestic animals, wildlife, and ecosystems."—Abstract.

"Hurricane Katrina's overriding lesson for environmental law is no less than our environmental lawmaking institutions require fundamental reformation. Otherwise, the nation's tragic failure not only to enact laws that anticipate the obvious risks presented to the Gulf Region by hurricanes, but perversely to increase those risks by destroying the ecosystem's natural protections, will inevitably be repeated with even more devastating results." —Abstract.

"The Corps' decisions to acquire the 34 hydraulic pumping systems were focused on satisfying its commitment to have pumping capacity on the drainage canals in place by June 1, 2006—the start of the 2006 hurricane season. In order to increase the likelihood that pumping capacity would be in place when needed, the Corps utilized several tools to expedite and streamline the acquisition process. The Corps appears to have had a valid reason for each of the iterative decisions it made at each stage of the procurement process. The cumulative effect of these decisions resulted in one supplier—Moving Water Industries Corporation—being in the strongest competitive position to receive the contract for the pumping systems."—Summary.

"America builds on the edge of disaster prone areas: on moveable barrier islands, fragile coastal ecosystems, shorelines subject to inundation, and next to flammable forests. Ferocious storm events focus local and national attention in the tragic moment and during short-term recovery efforts; then, too often, we return to business as usual, continuing to build and rebuild on the edge. 'Losing Ground' provides effective perspectives and prescriptions for longer-term disaster mitigation planning and action. Authors from a variety of disciplines (including law, history, geography, environmental science, and urban planning) review past policies and practices, the lessons learned from previous disasters, current approaches to disaster planning and recovery, an assessment of the proper roles and responsibilities of various levels of government in the federal system, new legal and technological tools, and a review of innovations in disaster mitigation.

"Oliver A. Houck, a renowned professor of law from Tulane University, provides a preface from the perspective of a post-Katrina New Orleans: 'Perhaps, the most striking aspect of the post-Katrina Gulf Coast, from Alabama to Texas, is the rush to rebuild in exactly the same places, a few feet back, a few feet higher, more high priced investment than ever before. Two lane bridges are replaced by six lane bridges. Modest beach homes are replaced by condominiums. The hurricane has led to a construction boom. As the Gross National Product measures these things, the hurricanes were a huge success. What is wrong with this picture?.' "—Publisher's Description.

"Emitters of greenhouse gases externalize the true costs of their contribution to climate change. Efforts to recover these costs, which manifest both through the costs of impacts and the costs of efforts to prevent impacts, can take the form of insurance claims as well as legal remedies. The most widely discussed insurance-related consequences of climate change are the impacts of property damage from extreme weather events. However, there is increasing awareness of the relatively subtle but equally important dimension of liability. Liability insurance risks - risks to insurers from claims of third-parties who allege injury or property damage that may be the fault of the insured - are rising as scientific uncertainty surrounding climate change declines. This Article explores three major dimensions of the issue: (1) sources of climate-change-related legal liability to third parties and their nexus with insurance and law, (2) new liabilities associated with potential technological responses to climate-change, and (3) potential roles for insurers, reinsurers, and other industry actors in proactively managing climate change-related liability insurance risks for themselves and their customers. Because the insurance sector is the world's largest industry, the response of insurers to the broader climate-change challenge will no doubt be key to the ultimate success of society's overall response."—Abstract.

"The 1997 flood on the Red River was one of the worst natural disasters in recent history for many people and communities in the Red River of the North Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), one of the principal Federal agencies responsible for the collection and interpretation of water-resources data, works with other Federal, State, local, tribal, and academic entities to ensure that accurate and timely data are available for making decisions regarding public welfare and property during natural disasters and to increase public awareness of the hazards that occur with such disasters."

This web page links to a 209MB PDF full-color poster depicting images and data regarding the April 1997 flood in North Dakota.

"FEMA needs to prepare a single comprehensive document for monitoring debris removal operations. FEMA also needs to define better the requirements for contracting debris-removal monitoring services.

"We reviewed the adequacy of FEMA guidance for monitoring Hurricane Katrina debris removal operations in Louisiana (LA) and Mississippi (MS). Debris removal monitoring is a process of observing and documenting debris removal operations to ensure that FEMA funding is provided for only those activities that conform to and are consistent with requirements of FEMA's public assistance program."

Final rule published by the EPA on March 22, 2007, which excuses violations of air quality standards for major air pollutants that are due to "exceptional events," including natural events, such as hurricanes and other natural disasters.

"While EPA provided useful environmental health risk information to the public via flyers, public service announcements, and the EPA Web page, the communications were at times unclear and inconsistent on how to mitigate exposure to some contaminants, particularly asbestos and mold. Further, the usefulness of three key reports on EPA's environmental sampling in New Orleans—developed with, among others, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality to address potential health risks from exposure to floodwaters, sediments, and air—was limited by a lack of timeliness and insufficient disclosures about EPA's sampling program. For example, EPA did not state until August 2006 that its December 2005 report—which said that the great majority of the data showed that adverse health effects would not be expected from exposure to sediments from previously flooded areas—applied to short-term visits, such as to view damage to homes.

"Mitigating several challenges EPA faces addressing Hurricane Katrina could better protect the environment in the future. First, EPA did not remove hazardous materials from national wildlife refuges in a timely manner as part of its response in part because disaster assistance funding generally is not used for debris cleanups on federal lands. Second, because states generally have authority over landfill decisions, EPA does not have an effective role in emergency debris disposal decisions that could cause pollution. Finally, lack of clarity in federal debris management plans and protocols precluded the timely and safe disposal of some appliances and electronic waste."—What GAO Found.

"Six years after the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC), concerns persist about health effects experience by WTC responders and the availability of health care services for those affected. Several federally funded programs provide screening, monitoring, or treatment services to responders. GAO has previously reported on the progress made and implementation problems faced by these WTC health programs."—-Why GAO Did This Study

"This hearing is to examine EPA's response and future preparedness and to receive testimony on the Test and Clean program EPA is conducting in Lower Manhattan.

"Following September 11th, EPA was highly involved conducting air, water, and dust monitoring in Lower Manhattan for environmental hazards. EPA vacuumed street debris and disposed of hazardous wastes. EPA also conducted a voluntary clean up program from 2002 to 2003 that served more 4,100 residents in Lower Manhattan. Although EPA does not ordinarily administer worker protection regulations, it provided respirators and protective gear for workers at the World Trade Center site....

"In January 2007, EPA opened the public registration for a new Lower Manhattan Test and Clean Program. This program is designed to test for elevated levels of four contaminants associated with dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center. FEMA has provided $7 million to EPA for this work. I understand that members of the expert panel CEQ and EPA convened for this purpose are dissatisfied that a more exacting program could not be developed. However, I have an August 2006, letter from New York City Health Commissioner Frieden stating, 'The environmental investigations and testing conducted in lower Manhattan indicates that potential health impacts from any remaining [World Trade Center] dust are extremely low or non-existent.'"— Statement of Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.)

Includes an archived webcast of the hearing.