Environmental and Energy Law Perspectives Fall 2016

T H E GEORGE WA SHI NGTON U N I V ER SIT Y L AW SCHOOL

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW

Perspectives

PROGRAM ESTABLISHED 1970

PERSPECTIVES

Bridging Public and Private Environmental Governance Lee Paddock

FALL 2016 ISSUE PERSPECTIVES 1, 11–13 VIEWPOINT 1, 15 NEWS 2–5, 14 PUBLICATIONS AND WORKS IN PROGRESS 6–7 PROFILES 8–10 EVENTS 16

VIEWPOINT

Public Regulation

P

ublic environmental regulation has a long history in the United States, now stretching back 46 years. The high point of public environmental regulation in the 1970s witnessed the enactment of major national environmental regulations governing air, water, waste, toxic chemicals, pesticides, drinking water, environmental impact review, endangered species, and other issues.

These new laws resulted in burgeoning federal and state regulatory agencies that employed thousands to conduct research, write regulations, issue permits, conduct inspections, and take enforcement action.

While not discussed in these terms, the American public essentially delegated responsibility for environmental protection to the government with a strong mandate to act. The result was certainly a dramatic improvement in air quality, water quality, exposure to hazardous substances, and the clean up of major toxic disposal sites.

However, public environmental regulation has its limitations. It is quite effective in dealing with large industrial facilities where regular inspection and enforcement is feasible. It is far less effective in dealing with the tens of thousands of smaller sources of pollution, pollution that crosses international borders, continued on page 11

Building on Nearly a Half Century of Leadership in Environmental and Energy Law Lee Paddock

T

he GW Environmental and Energy Law program enters its 46th year this fall. We continue to build on the proud tradition begun by Professor Arnold Reitze in 1970 when the program was established through a $250,000 grant from the Ford Foundation. Our program now features: • outstanding teaching and leadingedge scholarship by Professors Robert Glicksman and Emily Hammond in the fields of continued on page 15

NEWS

NEWS Updates from the Sustainable Energy Initiative at GW Law

O

n October 27, 2016, GW Law’s Sustainable Energy Initiative will convene a full-day conference titled “Transforming the U.S. Electric System: Where State and Federal Initiatives Meet.” State and federal policymakers and industry leaders will consider how the various state and federal initiatives addressing the way in which electricity in the U.S. will be produced, delivered, and used in the future coordinate, conflict, or complement and how they can reinforce one another.

This particular conference will look specifically at utilities that have largely retained a vertically integrated structure.

The conference is supported by the J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Fund and will be hosted by Dentons U.S. LLP at its 1900 K Street, NW, offices in Washington, D.C. For more information, visit our webpage: www.law.gwu.edu/transforming-uselectric-system-where-federal-and-stateinitiatives-meet.

GW Law welcomed several new members to the Energy Law Advisory Board during the past year. Our newest members are Todd Mullins, JD ’89, Partner, McGuire Woods, and Emma F. Hand, Partner, Dentons U.S. LLP. The board provides the financial backbone of the Sustainable Energy Initiative, as well as advice and guidance.

In March 2016, GW Law fielded its first team in the National Energy and Sustainability Moot Court Competition.

This year’s challenge focused on addressing the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act issues arising out of a FERC-approved natural gas pipeline extension through a national forest. Our team, composed of third-year students Garrett Henderson

and Jason (“Jay”) Ross, was coached by John Shepherd, Jr., and Andrew Corcoran of Skadden Arps LLP. Skadden also provided financial co-sponsorship of this year’s team with the GW Energy Moot Court board. We look forward to returning to the competition, sponsored by the West Virginia University School of Law in Morgantown, West Virginia, in the spring of 2017.

The Sustainable Energy Initiative received several grants in 2015-2016 to further its research.

Work on the e21 Initiative, a project developing regulatory and business models for the Minnesota electric system (and as a prototype to guide similar efforts) was supported with grants from the Great Plains Institute and the Center for Energy and the Environment.

The Duke Energy Renewables Innovation Fund is a competitive grant program that promotes interdisciplinary work among GW schools and departments. The Sustainable Energy Initiative is participating in two of the three projects that received grants for 2016.

Donna Attanasio, Senior Advisor for Energy Law Programs at GW Law, leads a project team that is producing a handbook to facilitate development of

2 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

community solar projects that are affordable and accessible to lower-income residents. The other team members on the community solar project are John Forrer, Associate Research Professor of Strategic Management and Public Policy at GW’s School of Business and Associate Director of the GW Institute of Corporate Responsibility; Amit Ronen, Director of the GW Solar Institute and Professor of Practice at GW’s Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration; Scott Sklar, President of The Stella Group Ltd. and an adjunct faculty member of GW’s College of Professional Studies in the area of urban sustainability; and students from several different disciplines, including law.

GW Law and GW’s engineering school are exploring microgrid finance with the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES, formerly the successor to the Pew Center for Climate Change).

This project, led by Ekundayo Shittu, Assistant Professor of Engineering at GW’s School of Engineering and Applied Science, will develop a white paper discussing financing issues and emerging ideas based around a prototypical microgrid model. n

NEWS

2016 Jamie Grodsky Prize

T

his spring, GW Law presented LLM student Adrienne Thompson with the 2016 Jamie Grodsky Prize for Environmental Law Scholarship.

Awarded each year for the best paper written by a JD, LLM, or SJD student in the field of environmental law, the prize commemorates the innovative environmental research of Professor Jamie Grodsky, who passed away in 2010.

Ms. Thompson, who also serves as the Energy Law Scholar and Senior Research Associate for the Energy Law Program, originally submitted her paper as part of an environmental law seminar she took in spring 2015. Titled “Predicting the Energy Future by Creating It,” the paper describes a series of strategies that state public utility commissions should pursue to promote sustainable energy policies.

On the day of the ceremony, Dr. Gerold Grodsky and Andrea Huber, Jamie Grodsky’s father and sister, helped present the award to Ms. Thompson.

About “Predicting the Energy Future

by Creating It” Adrienne Thompson

S

afe, abundant, and reliable electricity is the bedrock upon which the United States has built its modern economy. Our national security, commercial activity, and day-to-day living depend on the stability of the nation’s electric system—a system facing a set of challenges unmatched by any other in the grid’s century-long history. Stringent environmental regulations, climate change concerns, waves of older generator retirements, protracted natural gas

From left: Dean Blake D. Morant, Adrienne Thompson, Dr. Gerold Grodsky, Andrea Huber

Dr. Grodsky funds the prize along with memorial gifts from generous donors.

“I remember attending the Grodsky Prize ceremony for Jason Hull in the spring of 2015 and being very impressed

by Professor Glicksman’s moving tribute to Jamie Grodsky and the legacy she left behind as an academic, friend, and

daughter,” Ms. Thompson said after being named the winner. “So, being the recipient of an award in Jamie’s memory is not only a tremendous honor, but it also sets a high standard to strive for as I move forward in my own career.” n

market dominance, third-party competition, as well as increasing renewables and demand-side technology integration are just some of the realities coalescing into the perfect storm for electric utilities and regulators. Although intimidating, these challenges must be addressed. With their experience and duty to regulate in the public interest, state public utility commissions (PUCs) are well-positioned to help solve these problems and guide our transitioning electric system toward a low-carbon future.

To that end, this paper explores how PUCs can influence this evolution and promote sustainable energy goals, especially in the realm of generator selection. It begins by taking the reader through the changes taking place in the

electric industry today, setting the stage for why state-level action is necessary, then briefly summarizes the development of the electric system as well as federal and state regulatory schemes. With that background information as context, the latter half of the paper sets out various options for state PUCs to pursue in advancing a sustainable energy agenda.

The difficulties facing electric utilities and regulators today bring with them a host of uncertainties about how our electric system can cope in the near term and thrive in the long term. However, by embracing the opportunities inherent in this transition to a 21st century grid, state regulators can prepare for tomorrow’s energy future by helping to create it today. n

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 3

NEWS

2016 J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Environmental Law Symposium The Electricity Mix of the Future: Environment, Economics, and Governance

T

he Environmental and Energy Law Program hosted its annual J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Environmental Law Symposium on March 10-11, 2016.

This symposium focused on environmental, economic, and governance issues for the electricity mix in the coming two-to-three decades. The two-day symposium brought together a

Charlie Berardesco, JD ’83, General Counsel at the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, delivered the keynote address for the symposium.

multi-disciplinary group of experts for a series of panels and discussions structured around the following issues: Environmental attributes of electricity fuels and their substitutes are not directly or consistently valued across the spectrum of wholesale markets, regional power pools, and state retail rates. Can (and should) electricity markets ever be up to the task of incorporating environmental attributes? What legal and governance changes would be necessary to facilitate this change, if it were to be a policy option?

At the retail level, what options are available to states, considering both the Clean Power Plan and the preemptive reach of the Federal Power Act? Many regulatory decisions are informed by modeling, as evidenced by EPA’s models accompanying the Clean Power Plan. What do various models of the electricity mix of the future predict, and how much uncertainty is embedded in those predictions? To what extent can policymakers rely on these models,

and what caveats should they consider in developing next steps? How can we structure legal regimes that are sufficiently adaptive to new circumstances to best optimize electricity resources when much of our energy infrastructure requires very long-term planning and significant capital investments?

Finally, many of the questions raised above relate to the traditional grid infrastructure. What are the implications of distributed generation, demand response, and storage in the next several decades?

As new state policies regarding these electricity services emerge, what predictions can be made regarding the need for traditional generation, infrastructure, and governance? Are our current federal regulatory regimes sufficiently flexible to account for these electricity services? Is widespread experimentation at the state level preferable? n

Groningen Summer Energy School

I

n May, GW completed its fifth annual University of Groningen—GW Law Energy Law Program. The University of Groningen is one of the leading law schools in the Netherlands, and the school just celebrated its 400th anniversary.

The program brings together students from Groningen’s Honors Program with GW students to conduct joint research projects on energy law issues, allowing students to gain a unique perspective on the similarities and differences in environmental issues in the United States and the European Union. Issues for the 2015– 2016 program included the smart grid, microgrids, community solar projects, and net metering. n

Professor Martha Roggenkamp (front left) and the students from the 2015-2016 University of Groningen—GW Law Summer Energy program

4 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

NEWS

Welcome to Caitlin McCoy

“I

am thrilled to join the Environmental and Energy Law Program and work with Dean Paddock on the Environment and Energy Policy Practicum and the Environmental Lawyering Skills course, as well as pursuing an LLM. I am Caitlin McCoy coming to GW from southwestern Pennsylvania, where I served as Legal Director of the Center for Coalfield Justice, a nonprofit organization. I worked on a variety of legal and social justice issues related to coal mining, natural gas drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and associated waste disposal.

I am licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania, and I earned a JD from Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. During law school, I interned in Santiago, Chile, for Fiscalía del Medio Ambiente, a nonprofit organization engaged in public interest, environmental legal work. I participated in the Interdisciplinary Environmental Clinic and worked as a summer clerk in the Northern California Regional Office of Earthjustice in San Francisco.

I also attended the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties 19 in Warsaw, Poland, as a student delegate

from Washington University. I graduated with a BA in rhetoric from the University of California, Berkeley. I also minored in Spanish language and literature and studied abroad in Argentina at Universidad de Buenos Aires.

My interest in environmental issues goes back to my childhood in Bakersfield, California, which is located in an oil field of Kern County, one of the largest oilproducing regions in the continental United States. I was surrounded by extraction and refining activities in a city that consistently ranks among the worst in the country for air quality. The experience of living in an environmentally degraded area with an economy built on oil extraction is a foundational part of my interest in environmental issues, particularly with regard to public health, social justice, and fossil fuel extraction and use.

When my family eventually moved to the Sierra Nevada Mountains in Northern California, I witnessed a completely different relationship to the environment.

There, the local economy and people’s lifestyles were based on whitewater rafting, kayaking, hiking, and trail running in the American River Canyon.

I look forward to spending the next two years at GW Law and exploring Washington, D.C. I enjoy hiking, biking, yoga, and spending time with my cat, Beatrice. Please feel free to stop by my office at Stuart G08 to say hello!” n

Thanks to Nick Bryner and Adrienne Thompson

N

ick Bryner, Visiting Associate Professor of Law and the Environmental Program Fellow from 2014 to 2016, recently finished his time at GW Law and has moved on to a new fellowship at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. The Emmett Institute is dedicated to creating and advancing law and policy solutions to climate change and other environmental challenges and to training the next generation of leaders to address these issues.

Adrienne Thompson, our 2014-2016 Energy Law Scholar and the 2016 winner of the Grodsky Prize, completed her work with us in May. She is now employed as an associate with Troutman Sanders in her hometown of Portland, Oregon.

GW Law thanks Adrienne and Nick for their rich contributions to our program and sends good wishes for their future success! n

IBA Academic Advisory Group on Energy Book Launched at Columbia University

I

n April 2016, GW co-hosted a conference with Columbia University Law School focusing on the new Academic Advisory Group on Energy for the International Bar Association Section on Environment, Energy, Resources, and Infrastructure Law book Sharing the Cost and Benefits of Energy and Resource Activity. n

Dean Lee Paddock (center right) with members of the Academic Advisory Group on Energy for the International Bar Association’s Section on Environment, Energy, Resources and Infrastructure Law

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 5

PUBLICATIONS AND WORKS IN PROGRESS

Publications and Works in Progress Robert Glicksman Articles: Extent of Cooperative Enforcement: Effect of the RegulatorRegulated Facility Relationship on Audit Frequency, 5 Strategic Behavior and the Env’t 111-156 (2015) (peer-reviewed publication) (published in October 2015) (with Dietrich Earnhart)

egal Adaptive Capacity: How Program L Goals and Processes Shape Federal Land Adaptation to Climate Change, 87 U. Colo.

L. Rev. 711-826 (2016) (with Alejandro Camacho) ext Generation Compliance, 30 Natural N Res. & Env’t 22 (Winter 2016) (with David Markell) ynamic Governance in Theory and D Application, Part I, 58 Ariz. L. Rev. (forthcoming) (with David Markell) ig Data and Environmental Enforcement, B Ecology L.Q. (forthcoming) (with David Markell) Books: Developing Professional Skills in Environmental Law (West Academic 2016) (with Sandra Zellmer)

EPA Law and Litigation (Thomson N Reuters 2016 ed.) (with Daniel Mandelker and others) eleases # 24, 25, and 26 to Public R Natural Resources Law (ThomsonReuters 2d ed.) (published October 2015, February 2016, and June 2016) ncyclopedia of Environmental Law: E Environmental Decision Making (Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd., forthcoming 2016) (Robert Glicksman LeRoy Paddock & Nicholas Bryner eds.)

Other Publications: Response, United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc.: Navigating the Clean Water Act, Geo. Wash. L. Rev. On the Docket ( June 2, 2016), www. gwlr.org/united-states-army-corps-ofengineers-v-hawkes-co-inc/

aving Endangered Species Requires S a Systemic, Nationwide Approach, posted on CPRBlog (April 21, 2016), progressivereform.org/CPRBlog. cfm?idBlog=3D1271FC-D15D-615291DCCD4339A460E3 Congressional Testimony: Presentation to congressional staffers on “Reflections on Implementing Laws: Lessons Learned from the Obama Administration’s Regulatory Process as We Look Ahead to the Transition,” Russell Senate Building, Washington, D.C. ( June 28, 2016)

estimony before the Senate Committee T on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Superfund, Waste Management, and Regulatory Oversight, at a hearing on “Oversight of EPA Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Governments” ( June 7, 2016), www.epw.senate.gov/public/index. cfm/2016/6/oversight-of-epa-unfundedmandates-on-state-local-and-tribalgovernments estimony before the House Committee T on Oversight and Reform, Subcommittee on the Interior, at a hearing on “Barriers to Endangered Species Act Delisting, Part I” (April 20, 2016), oversight.house. gov/hearing/barriers-to-endangeredspecies-act-delisting-part-i/ or youtu.be/ RK2KAUeXyo4 rofessor Glicksman’s testimony before P the House Judiciary Committee was quoted and relied on in a House of Representatives Committee Report, “Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2016,” H.R. Rep. No. 114-622, at 43 (2016), www.congress.gov/114/crpt/ hrpt622/CRPT-114hrpt622.pdf Presentations: “Kelo and Horne: The Public Use and Just Compensation Limits on Takings,” participant in debate sponsored by the Federalist Society, GW Law (October 7, 2015)

I ntroduced and moderated panel on “Environmental Conventions and International Organizations” at workshop on “International Law and Wildlife Well-being: Moving from Theory to Action,” GW Law (November 13, 2015)

6 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

oderated panel on “Facilitating the M Electricity Mix: Transmission Lines and Land Use Issues” at conference on “The Electric Mix of the Future: Environment, Economics, and Governance,” GW Law (March 10, 2016) “ A Misguided Mission: Wrong-headed Regulatory Reform,” presentation at conference on “The Second Hoover Commission Anniversary: Lessons for Regulatory Reform,” The Hoover Institution, Washington, D.C. (March 16, 2016), www.youtube.com/ watch?v=KFjxExcbF5I (video link) “ The Effect of Technological Innovation on Environmental Enforcement and Compliance,” presentation at “The Data Ecosystem: Bringing Environmental Law into the Digital Age,” University of California-Berkeley (April 1, 2016) Judicial Citations: WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Forest Service, 790 F.3d 920, 929 (9th Cir. 2015), cited 3 Public Natural Resources Law § 31:8 (2d ed. 2007)

akes and Parks Alliance of Minneapolis v.

L Federal Transit Adm’n, 91 F. Supp. 3d 1105, 1123 (D. Minn. 2015), cited and quoted NEPA Law and Litigation § 4:28

Emily Hammond Publications: Judicial Review of Agency Environmental Decisionmaking in Environmental Decisionmaking (Edward Elgar, Robert L. Glicksman et al., eds., forthcoming 2016)

Linking Legal Framework Design and Risk Theory to Consumer Acceptance of the Smart Grid at The International Smart Grid Conference (Seoul National University School of Law, forthcoming 2016) (translated to Korean) (with Joel B. Eisen) Double Deference in Administrative Law, Colum. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016)

PUBLICATIONS AND WORKS IN PROGRESS

Stranded Costs and Grid Decarbonization, Brooklyn L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016) (invited symposium) (with Jim Rossi) Nuclear Power and the Clean Energy Future (2016) (with the Horinko Group, on behalf of Nuclear Matters) The Clean Power Plan: Testing the Limits of Administrative Law and the Electric Grid, 7 Geo. Wash. J. Energy & Envt. 1 (2016) (with Richard J. Pierce, Jr.) The Regulatory Contract in the Marketplace, 69 Vand. L. Rev. 141 (2016) (with David B. Spence) Public Participation in Risk Regulation: The Flaws of Formality, 2016 Utah L. Rev. 169 (2016) (invited; published in conjunction with Distinguished Young Scholar award) Nuclear Power, Risk, and Retroactivity, 48 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 1059 (2015) (invited symposium) Speaking Engagements: Panelist, ABA discussion entitled “New Life for the Congressional Review Act?”

anelist, D.C. Bar Association discusP sion titled “Administrative Law Year in Review” resented a paper on U.S. energy law’s P intersection with environmental law at a conference on regulatory governance at Tilburg University, the Netherlands. The paper is forthcoming in the conference proceedings peaker at American Nuclear Society S Utility Working Conference (August 16, 2016) anelist at ABA discussion titled “An P Energy Regulatory Perspective of EPA’s Clean Power Plan” (August 23, 2016) resented a seminar on Administrative P Law at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (August 24, 2016)

Donna Attanasio Publications: Co-author and editor, Energy Law Education Report, 36 ENERGY L.J. 217 (2015)

Presentations: Panelist, “Building the Bridge from Energy Law Education to Practice,” Energy Bar Association Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. ( June 7-8, 2016)

anelist, “Utility Response to Industry P Disruption,” Efficiency Exchange 2016, Coeur d’Alene, ID (April 26, 2016) anelist, “Energy Industry in Transition,” P Midwest Chapter, Energy Bar Association, Indianapolis, IN (March 8, 2016) anelist, “Innovative Approaches to P Growth,” Electric Power & Light 2016 Executive Conference, Orlando, FL (February 8, 2016)

Lee Paddock Books: Bryner, Markell, and Paddock (eds.), Environmental Compliance And Enforcement (Edward Elgar Press Encyclopedia of Environmental Law Series, forthcoming late 2016)

ryner, Glicksman, and Paddock (eds.), B Environmental Decision Making (Edward Elgar Press Encyclopedia of Environmental Law Series, forthcoming fall 2016) Book Chapters: Paddock, Environmental Justice, in Bryner, Glicksman, and Paddock (eds.), Environmental Decision Making (Edward Elgar Press Encyclopedia of Environmental Law Series, forthcoming 2016)

addock and Greenblum, Community P Benefits Agreements for Wind Farms in Context, in L. Barrera-Hernández, B. Barton, L. Golden, A. Lucas, and A. Rønne, Sharing the Cost and Benefits of Energy and Resource Activity (Oxford University Press, April 2016) addock, Regional Enforcement Networks P in the United States, in M. Faure and P. DeSmedt, Environmental Enforcement Networks: Concepts, Implementation and Effectiveness (Edward Elgar Press, 2015)

addock and Masterton, Private P Environmental Regulation and Enforcement: Using Supply Chain Requirements to Achieve Better Environmental Outcomes, in P. Martin and A. Kennedy, Implementing Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Press, 2015) Articles: Paddock, Stemming the Deforestation Tide: The Role of Corporate No Deforestation Commitments (Forthcoming, GW Journal of Energy and Environmental Law) Presentations: Standing in Environmental Law Cases, 14th IUCN Academy of Environmental Law Colloquium, Oslo, Norway ( June 2016)

overnance of Nanotechnology: An G Update, Arizona State University Conference on Technology Governance, Tempe, AZ (May 2016) rivate Environmental Governance, P Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ (May 2016) ommunity Benefits Agreements in C Wind Farm Siting, International Bar Association, Section on Environment, Energy, Resources and Infrastructure Law, New York (April 2016) Appointments: A BA representative to the World Bank Green Growth Knowledge Platform Committee

BA Section of Environment, Energy A and Resources Special Committee on Content Convergence

Steve Charnovitz Publications: Reviewing Carbon Charges and Free Allowances Under Environmental Law and Principles, ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law (Winter 2010) n

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 7

PROFILES

Profiles William Davies, JD ’17

W

illiam (Billy) Davies has long been interested in volunteerism and community advocacy and was heavily involved in working with nonprofit and local government organizaWilliam Davies tions as an undergraduate student at the University of Iowa, where he studied anthropology and economics with a focus on sustainable development and environmental anthropology.

Believing that sound environmental policy is essential to the future wellbeing of all people, Mr. Davies decided to attend law school because he believed it would give him the chance to make an impact on the improvement of human health and the environment.

GW Law was among Mr. Davies’ choices for law school, and he made his

Lee Hoffman, LLM ’16

L

ee Hoffman was 19 years old when a fellow U.S. Marine in the same barracks he lived in was diagnosed with intestinal cancer at a similarly young age.

Doctors agreed that the contaminated water on the base was probably the Lee Hoffman cause of the intestinal cancer. The river on that base contained a parasite that came from the waste lagoons at industrial hog farms. This incident significantly raised Mr. Hoffman’s awareness of how much his life could be affected by environmental pollution.

With this in mind, and after receiving his bachelor’s degree in history from the

decision to attend GW Law because of its strong emphasis on public interest work and the vast amount of opportunities both the law school and the D.C. area offer law students to immediately put into action what they learn in the classroom.

Mr. Davies has not regretted his decision to attend GW Law and was amazed at how quickly he was able to find environmental legal experience with the support of the school. “In just my first semester, third-year students and some professors pointed me in the direction of opportunities, and I was able to get a small internship during my 1L year in an environmental nonprofit legal group.” Mr. Davies especially likes how supportive students and faculty are toward each other and their willingness to help students find opportunities—whether on campus or in the workplace—that help them meet their career goals.

Mr. Davies has valued above all his experience working with student organizations and supportive faculty, and he has been an active member in the SBA’s Pro Bono and Community Services Committee, the GW Gulf Recovery Network, the Equal Justice Foundation, and the Public Interest Pre-Orientation

Program. “I’ve had three successful internships related to public interest and environmental law in the short time I have been a student at GW, and it simply would not have been possible without the mentorship I received from experienced fellow students and GW’s professors.” Mr. Davies said that with guidance from GW students, faculty, and Career Center staff, he was able to secure internships at the Chesapeake Legal Alliance in Annapolis, Maryland, and the Environmental Council of the States in D.C. He interned in the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division during summer 2016, and he is grateful for his experiences at GW Law for enabling him to reach “a dream job.”

Mr. Davies’ background in community service and advocacy has inspired him to be a litigator, and while he is open to any career path that allows him “to make an impact for the better for the most people,” he hopes to have the opportunity to continue working in the D.C. area upon graduating from GW Law in 2017. n

Ohio State University, Mr. Hoffman pursued his law degree at Whittier Law School in Orange County, California.

During his time at Whittier, he received the outstanding student in environmental law award for his graduating class of 2015, and he worked as a legal intern for an environmental nonprofit called Orange County Coastkeeper, which seeks to improve and protect the water quality of the Orange County area.

After graduating from law school, Mr. Hoffman decided to pursue an LLM degree because he “wanted to gain more exposure to various environmental law regimes that I was not able to study while getting my JD.” He decided to join GW Law’s LLM program because of the school’s “reputation and its proximity to the federal government. I want to work for the federal government and I knew that attending GW would be a great way to gain experience.”

During his time at GW Law, Mr. Hoffman recalls taking the administrative law class with Professor John F. Banzhaf as his most interesting experience.

“He (Professor Banzhaf ) was a very enthusiastic and intense instructor, and his knowledge on the various subjects was extremely impressive. He also had extensive experience participating in litigation that created many of the precedents I studied while getting my JD. It was fascinating to hear about his inside experience in these cases and come away with more confidence in my own knowledge on the subject after having completed his very difficult class.”

After earning his LLM degree in May 2016, Mr. Hoffman seeks to work for the federal government or for a California state agency involved in protecting the environment. n

8 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

PROFILES

Lawrence R. Liebesman, JD ’73

L

awrence R. Liebesman is of counsel at Smouse & Mason with offices in Annapolis and Towson, Maryland, and is also a Senior Advisor at the Washington, D.C., government relations firm of Dawson & Larry Liebesman Associates. He serves as an adjunct faculty member at GW Law, where he teaches a course on wildlife and ecosystem law.

A 1973 GW Law graduate with honors, Mr. Liebesman’s interest in environmental law began at a young age while living in his hometown of Asbury Park, New Jersey. “As a kid I was drawn to the amount of pollution that was coming from the ocean, especially from oil spills in the late 1950s, early 1960s. This was before environmental law really hit; there wasn’t much out there. There was a fair amount of oil pollution that was occurring along the coast of New Jersey and New York… I used to see these oil slicks and a lot of wildlife was affected…

It was a constant struggle to renourish the shore and beaches to prevent this from happening. I was initially drawn to this conceptually, and I thought it would be nice to be part of this and combat that kind of activity.”

Presently, Mr. Liebesman is a nationally recognized environmental lawyer and litigator with more than 40 years of experience. His practice emphasizes wetlands, water pollution, coastal, environmental impact assessment, and endangered species law. He represents a range of clients in the public, private,

and nonprofit sectors on a broad range of environmental issues at the federal and state levels. Mr. Liebesman is especially involved in Chesapeake Bay cleanup issues. He advises clients on storm water permitting issues and sits on the Maryland State Water Quality Advisory Committee, which provides advice to the Maryland Secretaries of Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture on Chesapeake Bay water quality issues.

Prior to entering private practice, Mr. Liebesman spent 11 years as a senior trial attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), including a one-year detail to the President’s Council on Environmental Quality during the Carter administration, helping to develop regulations to implement the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). While at the DOJ, he handled landmark cases under the Superfund, the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Clean Air Act (CAA) and NEPA. Prior to his work at DOJ, he spent two years at the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Federal Activities, the agency’s NEPA oversight office.

Mr. Liebesman has participated in landmark CWA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) cases and has authored amicus briefs in seven major environmental cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

These included a brief in the Rapanos case regarding the geographic reach of CWA jurisdiction and submitted comments on the highly controversial EPA and Corps regulation defining Waters of the United States in response to Rapanos. Furthermore, Mr. Liebesman has testified before the House Natural Resources Committee on proposed legislation to reform the ESA. He coauthored the Endangered Species Act Desk Book: a Guide to Endangered Species Law for the Environmental Law Institute (2nd Ed., 2010) and authored The Water Suppliers Guide to Wetlands Regulation

and Management for the American Water Works Association (1996). He is listed in “Chambers USA-America’s Leading Business Lawyers guide for Environmental Law” and as a D.C. “Super Lawyer” published by The Washington Post.

Mr. Liebesman holds a bachelor’s degree in history from Rutgers University, where he was a member of Phi Beta Kappa and, as previously mentioned, a Juris Doctor degree from GW Law. For students looking to pursue a career in environmental law, Mr. Liebesman advises them to “get as much course background as you can while in law school, and GW probably has the best environmental law program anywhere in the city, maybe the best in the country. There are so many courses you can take… Most of the faculty members and adjuncts are all excellent and they bring great experience… Also, it’s important to have a well-rounded background in other areas of the law, such as administrative law.” n

Environmental and Energy Law Perspectives Environmental and Energy Law Perspectives is published annually by the Environmental and Energy Law Program at the George Washington University Law School.

Editor: Lee Paddock, Associate Dean for Environmental Studies Assistant Editor: Caitlin McCoy, Visiting Associate Professor of Law and Environmental Program Fellow Send questions or comments to: Lee Paddock lpaddock@law.gwu.edu 202.994.0417 The George Washington University Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program 2000 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20052 www.law.gwu.edu/ environmental-energy-law bit.ly/linkedin_gwlaw_eelaw

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 9

PROFILES

Andreia Bonzo Araujo Azevedo, LLM ’16

A

ndreia Azevedo, from São Paulo, Brazil, has been passionate about the environment ever since she can remember.

Growing up in Brazil, home to one of the richest biodiversities in the world, Ms. Azevedo Andreia Azevedo quickly became conscious of the changes in land use, deforestation, and an increasing demand for food and water. As a result, she decided to pursue a law degree as a way to contribute to various environmental and energy causes.

Ms. Azevedo began her legal studies at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica of São Paulo, with a specialization in Environmental Law and Sustainability Strategic Management. In 2015, after nine years as a practicing attorney, she joined GW Law’s LLM program in International Environmental Law. “I chose GW Law because of the high rating of GW’s environmental

Addison Miller, JD ’16

A Addison Miller

s an undergraduate student at Colgate University, Addison Miller developed a passion for energy and environmental law through coursework on environmental justice and climate change.

After receiving her BA

courses, the fact that they are led by the well-known Dean Paddock, and the international law courses. The fact that it’s located in D.C. was definitively another point in my decision because D.C. is a global political center and I am highly interested in environmental policy design, besides the networking opportunities and possibility of being close to federal agencies, international organizations, and other institutions that lead environmental policy globally,” said Ms. Azevedo on her decision to enroll in GW Law’s LLM program.

During her time at GW Law, Ms. Azevedo served as the LLM Representative for the GW Environmental Law Association and did pro bono work with Southeast Louisiana Legal Services and Habitat for Humanity as part of GW’s Gulf Recovery Network in New Orleans. Furthermore, she interned with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Compliance, specifically with its water division.

After earning her LLM degree in fall 2016, Ms. Azevedo’s biggest goal is to “apply environmental law and policies associated with sustainable development in a global dimension, preferably in a public interest institution as I always felt it was my great life project.”

Before enrolling in GW Law’s LLM program, Ms. Azevedo was a Senior Associate Attorney and Head of the Environmental, Sustainability, Urban and Third Sector Department at Gasparini de Cresci e Nogueira de Lima Advogados (GCN), a Brazilian law firm based in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

During her time at GCN, she provided specialized environmental services, specifically in areas regarding forests and forestry, regulation and policy design, impact studies, water, waste, indigenous peoples, climate change, biodiversity, energy, and contamination. As the Head of the Environmental, Sustainability, Urban and Third Sector Department, she also rendered legal advice to the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions Drafting Committee of a Brazilian coalition to define and negotiate proposals from major NGOs, companies, and political and civil representatives to the Brazilian Government toward the goals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change for the COP21.

Prior to working at GCN, Ms. Azevedo worked at Lobo & Ibeas Advogados and Koury Lopes Advogados, Klabin Investimentos, and Baker & McKenzie International. n

in international relations and French, Ms. Miller interned with Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. As the candidates debated the collapse of Solyndra and the Keystone XL Pipeline, Ms. Miller solidified her desire to attend law school and knew the Environmental and Energy Law Program at GW Law would provide an unparalleled opportunity.

“For a student interested in energy or environmental law, GW’s offerings are endless. There is an incredible network of students, professors, and alumni, which provides an educational experience that carries far beyond the classroom.”

While at GW Law, Ms. Miller interned at the North American Electric Reliability Corporation and served as Editor-in-Chief of the George Washington Journal of Energy & Environmental Law. Her student note on Minnesota’s Value of Solar Tariff is forthcoming, and she is currently researching feed-in tariffs in sub-Saharan Africa in coordination with David John Frenkil, JD ’10, founder of Centennial Generating Co., a solar company located in Kigali, Rwanda.

Ms. Miller will join Troutman Sanders energy practice in Atlanta, where she was previously a Summer Associate. n

1 0 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

PERSPECTIVES

Environmental Governance from page 1

the impact of disposing of consumer products, fisheries deletion, deforestation, or habitat destruction, all of which are increasingly significant problems.

Furthermore, government regulation, once a bipartisan issue, has become the subject of partisan disputes resulting in few changes in major national environmental laws in almost 35 years, with the single exception of the recent reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act. This political stalemate means some problems like the scope of the Clean Water Act’s jurisdiction over sources of pollution nearby, but not adjacent to, “navigable waters” are difficult to resolve, leaving many wetlands in the country with little protection. In addition, effective regulation of diffuse sources of water pollution, often from farmland or that result from land development activities, has remained elusive. It also means that major new issues like management of electronic waste are not addressed at the federal level, leaving a patchwork of state legislation across the country. And it means that some issues like greenhouse gas emissions must be addressed using statutory tools that were not designed for regulating ubiquitous sources of pollution that do not have the same kind of health impacts as other air pollutants. Finally, in a globalized economy where many of the sources of pollution associated with manufacturing have been off-shored or outsourced, public regulation has little ability to address the resulting pollution.

Furthermore, we have come to recognize that the scope of public regulation is not sufficient to achieve the newer goal of sustainable development. Some

of this shortfall comes from the fact that public regulation may not be sufficiently stringent to keep pollution levels or natural resource destruction within the long-term carrying capacity of the Earth.

Other aspects of the shortfall come from the inability to update our environmental laws, the fact that a significant number of environmental issues are not subject to comprehensive regulation, the public unwillingness to further extend environmental regulation, and the globalized nature of the economy.

Private Environmental Governance A new form of environmental governance has emerged over the past decade that is addressing environmental problems in different ways and for different reasons.

The rapid emergence of private environmental governance through such mechanisms as green supply chain management, greening corporate operations, and the relatively recent concept of a circular economy has added a different dimension to the environmental landscape, one which is beginning to have an impact on environmental outcomes. Companies are pursuing private governance for a variety of reasons including building and protecting brand identity and corporate reputation, investor concerns and pressure, customer desires, resource efficiency and the desire to better assure resource availability, liability mitigation, product differentiation, access to markets, employee recruitment and retention, the changing personal values of corporate leaders, insurance availability and cost, the ability to compete for business that is subject to green procurement standards, the requirements of corporate customer supply chain specifications, and other factors.

Private environmental governance is most visible in a variety of green supply chain initiatives. For example, companies like Nike, GE, Walmart, Target, McDonald’s, Herman Miller, Home Depot, Google, Apple, and many others have established elaborate green supply chain contract requirements that are often anchored in sustainability-related continued on page 12

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 1 1

PERSPECTIVES

Environmental Governance from page 11

goals. Green supply chain requirements may include detailed auditing, monitoring, reporting, and compliance provisions that mimic some aspects of the tools used in traditional government regulation. Many of these corporate sustainability goals are quite aggressive. For example, Google has established a $2.5 billion renewable energy “Beyond Zero” carbon footprint program, having already achieved a zero carbon footprint through the use of renewable energy and carbon offsets. Walmart’s sustainability goals include 100 percent renewable energy and zero waste (81% of the materials that flow through Walmart stores in the United States are diverted away from landfills).

GE’s goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and water use by 20 percent from its 2011 baseline by 2020.

In addition, trade associations have taken a leadership role in a number of green supply chain initiatives. For example, the Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition has developed a code of conduct with a special focus on conflict minerals. Today over 170 companies participate in the Conflict Free Smelter Program. The environmental focus of the coalition’s work is on greenhouse gas reduction, water use, and product lifecycle assessment.

Another important example has been the work of the Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) which represents 400 companies in 70 countries and covers 10 million employees and $2.5 trillion in sales. CGF companies include Unilever, 3M, Cargill, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Tesco, and many others. The association has adopted a goal for its members of “no net deforestation” by 2020 resulting from members’ activities in sourcing soya beans, palm oil, beef, and paper products. The effort is part of a much broader campaign driven by NGOs and taken up by many of the world’s largest corporations to end deforestation from soya, cattle, palm oil, and pulp and paper operations.

The effort has resulted in more than 60 percent of all palm oil production being subject to deforestation commitments. This accomplishment would be hard to achieve but for the corporate

commitments, albeit that these commitments are being driven by substantial public pressure to stop deforestation.

A new direction in private environmental governance is emerging in the form of corporate “circular economy” initiatives. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation defines the circular economy as “one that is restorative and regenerative by design, and which aims to keep products, components and materials at their highest utility and value at all times, distinguishing between technical and biological cycles.”1 Philips Corporation, an early adopter of the circular economy approach, has asserted: For a sustainable world, we see the transition from a linear to a circular economy as a necessary boundary condition.

A circular economy aims to decouple economic growth from the use of natural resources and ecosystems by using those resources more effectively.

By definition it is a driver for innovation in the areas of material-, component- and product reuse, as well as new business models such as solutions and services. In a circular economy, the effective use of materials enables... [the creation of]...more value, both by cost savings and by developing new markets or growing existing ones.2 Green supply chain requirements, corporate environmental goals, and corporate initiatives such as the circular economy address many of the deficiencies of the governmental regulatory system. They can reach all corners of the world, they can deal with issues such as deforestation or habitat destruction that are not subject to extensive or effective public regulation, they deploy a new workforce in creating and enforcing environmental standards, they are likely less subject to political pressure and political stagnation, and they can more easily embed the cost of environmental protection in product prices. And the companies are engaging in these sustainability-related activities for very practical, economics-based reasons that are likely to help ensure that consistent

1 2 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

progress is maintained over time. While private governance is not a panacea for the world’s environmental problems and the results of these activities are inherently less predictable than well-enforced government regulations, they can and need to make substantial contributions to improved environmental outcomes.

A critical question going forward is whether—and, if so, how—public and private governance can be better linked to accelerate desired environmental outcomes.

Building Bridges Between Public and Private Environmental Regulation Interestingly, there has been little work done to explore the possible interconnections between these two important forms of environmental governance.

The EPA and a number of states have periodically experimented with voluntary programs that have been designed to encourage corporate leadership both in adopting better systems to assure compliance with existing regulation, such as EPA’s audit policy, and to set environmental goals that exceed regulatory minimums, such as EPA’s Performance Track program. Some bridging efforts, such as EPA’s Performance Track (and earlier efforts such as the Common Sense Initiative and Project XL), have long since been abandoned. Others, including the EPA Center for Corporate Climate leadership and EPA’s Natural Gas Star program, are actively promoting voluntary leadership efforts.

New bridging possibilities have emerged over the last few years. Early steps have been taken to coordinate public and private green procurement through the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council. The Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council is a “nonprofit organization whose mission is to support and recognize purchasing leadership that accelerates the transition to a prosperous and sustainable future.” 3 The council includes a wide variety of stakeholders, including

PERSPECTIVES

Paris opens the door for thinking about new ways to bridge between public and private regulation to achieve common goals. This is especially true in the context of the circular economy where governments have traditionally played the central role in managing waste generated in the linear economy but held only a very limited role, especially in the United States, in product design and stewardship that can enable a circular economy. As the circular economy idea expands, it will be important to link end-of-life managers with producers to help close the loop in life cycle product management.

Professor Michael Vandenbergh sums up the situation well in his article on “Private Environmental Governance.”

several federal agencies, state and local governments, private businesses, and nonprofit organizations.

The U.N. Global Compact is a leading bridging mechanism at the international level. The U.N. Global Compact is an international governance initiative that has attracted commitments from CEOs of over 8,000 businesses and 4,000 non-businesses to “align strategies and operations to universal principles of human rights, labour, environment, and anti-corruption.” U.N. member countries, including the United States, have supported the compact.

Perhaps the most significant bridging process has occurred in the climate context. The Paris Agreement clearly recognized that achieving long-term climate goals requires commitments from all sectors to significant greenhouse gas reductions. While the principal focus of the Paris Agreement was the commitments by almost all countries to greenhouse gas reductions, the importance of reductions from corporations was very publicly recognized and supported by governments such as the United States, and a significant number of corporate GHG reduction commitments were made in connection with the Paris Agreement.

Similarly, commitments by local governments were seen as essential to achieving international climate goals.

For many issues, public governance remains the dominant or sole influence on environmental behavior and environmental conditions, and theoretical and applied approaches to environmental law proceeds as if environmental law is a positive field waiting for another period of government activity. Proposals have focused on new or modified public law remedies and avenues for government to adopt them.

Although the standard model of environmental law as a positive field accurately described the first two decades of environmental law, it is no longer sufficient to assume that government is the only or even the best actor for many environmental problems. The available environmental instruments are not limited to those that governments have the legal authority, expertise, and political will to implement.

Positive law and government action are still very important, but private environmental governance is surprisingly important for many of the most pressing environmental problems.

The key conceptual step offered by private governance is that public action is not the only way to achieve public ends. This is a deceptively simple proposition, but it is remarkable how often the question asked in public debates is “what can government do?” The existence of private

governance suggests that the question should be whether a public or a private actor can be mobilized and whether a public or private governance option, or a mix of the two, will produce the desired outcome.

As societal values continue to evolve in ways that support sustainable outcomes, this idea of a mix of public and private governance becomes more realistic.

But much research remains to be done to find better ways to coordinate and integrate public and private governance to maximize sustainability outcomes that include better environmental, social, and economic results. In particular, two strands of research are especially important. The first is to more closely examine a cross section of current private environmental governance programs to look at the governance tools, the oversight mechanisms, and the outcomes produced by these programs. The second strand is an in-depth examination of the ways that private and public governance mechanisms can be mutually supportive.

As part of this effort to identify the most fruitful linkages between public and private governance, GW, in collaboration with Vanderbilt University Law School, will hold a symposium on March 2–3, 2017, that will bring academics, corporate leaders, NGOs, and government officials together to discuss how public and private governance mechanisms can be mutually supportive without putting traditional regulatory approaches at risk.

More details about this program can be found at the end of the newsletter. n

Endnotes 1

w ww.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ circular-economy.

2

w ww.philips.com/a-w/about/ sustainability/sustainable-planet/ circular-economy.html.

3

w ww.sustainablepurchasing.org/about/.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 1 3

NEWS

GW Joins Nuclear Science and Security Consortium

T

he U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Energy Security Administration has awarded a grant of $25 million to a consortium of eight universities, including GW, for research and development in nuclear science and security. Emily Hammond, Professor of Law, will work with three other researchers from the Elliott School of International Affairs, the School of Engineering and Applied Science, and the Columbian College’s Department of Chemistry to create educational programs using the $1.7 million that GW will receive.

“I’m proud of the depth and breadth of expertise in nuclear energy here at GW. This is truly a cross-disciplinary effort and it is exciting to be part of such a diverse and intellectually dynamic team,” Professor Hammond said about GW joining the consortium, which will be led by the University of California, Berkeley.

“The grant positions GW to collaborate with a number of other universities’ nuclear research efforts.”

Professor Hammond will primarily focus on educating nuclear scientists about law and policy in their field. She will teach a course this fall with Allison M. Macfarlane, a former Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and current GW professor. Other GW researchers include Philippe Bardet, a nuclear engineer, and Christopher Cahill, a nuclear chemist.

The faculty is also developing the curriculum for a summer boot camp that will bring nuclear scientists and

engineers from across the consortium to Washington, D.C. The students will make the most of their time in the nation’s capital by visiting Capitol Hill and relevant agencies to supplement their classroom experience.

“The nuclear energy and security fields are tightly intertwined with law and policy issues,” Professor Hammond said. “I hope that our nuclear scientists and engineers will gain law and policy literacy through the boot camp, and I look forward to learning what issues are of most relevance to them.” n

Energy Program Advisory Board Members Chair Charles A. Berardesco, JD ’83 Senior Vice President, Corporate Secretary and General Counsel North American Electric Reliability Corporation ——————————————————————————— Kathleen L. Barrón Senior Vice President of Federal Regulatory Affairs and Wholesale Market Policy Exelon Corporation Noel W. Black Vice President, Federal Regulatory Affairs Southern Company

George D. Cannon, Jr., JD ’94 Partner Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Douglas E. Davidson, JD ’71 Partner Morgan, Lewis & Bockius David J. Dulick, JD ’78 General Counsel Allegheny Electric Cooperative Inc. Eugene R. Elrod Partner and Co-head, Global Energy Practice Sidley Austin Kevin C. Fitzgerald, JD ’91 Executive Vice President and General Counsel Pepco Holdings Inc.

1 4 THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL

Robert S. Fleishman Senior Of Counsel Morrison & Foerster Emma F. Hand Partner Dentons U.S. Sanford L. Hartman Vice President and Managing Director, Law Pacific Gas and Electric Company Todd Mullins, JD ’89 Partner McGuire Woods Diane Munns Senior Director, Clean Energy Collaboration Environmental Defense Fund

J. Andrew Murphy, JD ’87 Senior Managing Director Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets Earle H. O’Donnell, JD ’75 Partner Chair, Global Power Industry Group Chair, Global Industry Group Council White & Case Daniel J. Oginsky, JD ’99 Executive Vice President U.S. Regulated Grid Development ITC Holdings Corp.

Daniel F. Stenger, JD ’80 Partner Hogan Lovells U.S.

VIEWPOINT

Leadership from page 1

•

•

•

•

•

•

environmental, energy, natural resources, and administrative law the wide-ranging scholarship of Associate Dean Lee Paddock, whose work has focused on “Next Generation” enforcement, private environmental governance, environmental justice, public engagement, hydraulic fracturing regulation, demand response, and issues related to siting renewable energy facilities innovative energy law research led by Donna Attanasio and our Sustainable Energy Initiative focusing on integration of distributed energy into our national electricity system our highly regarded annual Shapiro Symposia that have brought close to 100 environmental, resources, and energy law faculty over the past 10 years from across the country and around the world to the GW campus to discuss critical issues a curriculum that now features 21 classes in environmental law and eight in energy law, many of which are taught by leading environmental and energy attorneys from government agencies, NGOs, and law firms in D.C. an annual enrollment of more than 75 JD students (this year, more than 100) in each entering class who have indicated an interest in environmental and/or energy law, and an LLM program that includes another 20 students in addition to dozens of book chapters and journal articles, eight books produced by the environment and energy law faculty and staff in the last two years including: • Robert Glicksman, LeRoy Paddock & Nicholas Bryner, eds., Encyclopedia of Environmental Law: Environmental Decision Making (Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd., October 2016)

• Robert Glicksman, Developing Professional Skills in Environmental Law (West Academic, June 2016), ISBN # 978-0-314-28078-7 (with Sandra Zellmer) • Robert Glicksman and Emily Hammond, Environmental Protection: Law and Policy (7th ed. Wolters-Kluwer Law & Bus./Aspen Casebook Series) (with David Markell, William Buzbee, Daniel Mandelker, & Daniel Bodansky) ( January 2015), ISBN # 978-1-4548-4935-3 (website at lawstudy.law.ku.edu/ glicks/envprot) (previous editions published in 1999, 2003, 2007, and 2011) • Robert Glicksman, Administrative Law: Agency Action in Legal Context (2d ed. Foundation Press ( January 2015), ISBN # 978-1-60930336-5 (with Richard Levy) (previous edition published in 2010) • Robert Glicksman, Statutory Analysis in the Regulatory State (Foundation Press) (November 2014), ISBN # 978-1660930-432-4 (with Richard Levy) • Emily Hammond, Energy, Economics, and the Environment.

St. Paul, MN: Foundation Press, 2015 (With Eisen, Joel B., et al.)

• LeRoy Paddock and Nicholas Bryner, eds., Environmental Compliance And Enforcement (Edward Elgar Press Encyclopedia of Environmental Law Series, forthcoming late 2016) (with David Markell) • LeRoy Paddock and Jessica Wentz, eds., Next generation Environmental Compliance and Enforcement (ELI, 2014) Over the next few years, we will continue to build on this foundation,

focusing on the challenges of governance in the context of environmental and energy sustainability driven by developments such as the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Climate Agreement, as well as the many domestic environmental and energy challenges we face such as adapting to a changed climate, protecting endangered species, moving toward a lower carbon economy, assuring the supply of clean water, and improving the quality of our water resources, among others. These challenges will require new forms of governance that include a strong government presence but, increasingly, significant contributions from the private sector and from individuals to achieve societal goals.

We are already working with the George Washington University Sustainability Collaborative to meet this challenge through interdisciplinary programs that focus on energy and climate, food and nutrition, urban sustainability, and water, with an overarching emphasis on governance. We are pleased to welcome Scott Schang to GW Law as a Visiting Scholar. Scott will be working with us in developing our initiatives in sustainability governance.

We look forward to building on the long tradition of leadership in environmental and energy law as we move towards the 50th anniversary of our program. n

ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY LAW PERSPECTIVES 1 5

Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program 2000 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20052

FIRST CLASS U.S. Postage PAID Washington, D.C. Permit #593

EVENTS

Events Private Environmental Governance Symposium March 2017

T

he George Washington University Law School, the George Washington School of Business, Vanderbilt University Law School, and the Vanderbilt Department of Sociology are planning an interdisciplinary symposium on private environmental governance for March 2 and 3, 2017, in Washington, D.C.

What is private environmental governance?

We think of private environmental governance as occurring when private organizations take actions in order to supplement the traditionally governmental functions of reducing negative externalities, managing common pool resources, and producing public goods.

Examples include reliance on private standards and certification systems (e.g., the Marine Stewardship Council and Forest Stewardship Council), commodities roundtables (e.g., Green Palm), use of private carbon disclosure and reduction initiatives (e.g., CDP, CERES), development of supply chain contract goals or specifications, associational commitments such as the Consumer Goods Forum’s no net deforestation initiative, toxics reduction initiatives by individual retailers sometimes in coordination with advocacy groups (e.g., the Target

“Sustainable Product Standard” and the Walmart “Sustainable Chemistry Implementation Guide”), private building standards (e.g., LEED), and many others.

Scholars across many fields have studied private environmental governance at the international level using terms such as non-state market-driven governance, private transnational regulatory organizations, private politics, and private regulation. Our goal is to identify common research questions across disciplines, to discuss what we know about the reasons private governance is being pursued and the structure of these programs, to better understand how companies monitor performance of private governance systems, to explore whether and how private governance is or is not contributing to better environmental outcomes, and to examine how linkages between private and public governance systems might produce better outcomes. n