Explore the vast range of titles available.

Conventionally, in its decision-making, the U.S. EPA has evaluated the effects and risks associated with a single pollutant in a single exposure medium. In reality, people are exposed to mixtures of pollutants or to the same pollutant through a variety of media, including the air, water, and food. It is now more recognized than before that environmental exposure to pollutants occurs via multiple exposure routes and pathways, including inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption. Moreover, chemical, biologic, radiologic, physical, and psychologic stressors are all acknowledged as affecting human health. Although many EPA offices attempt to consider cumulative risk assessment and cumulative effects in various ways, there is no Agency-wide policy for considering these risks and the effects of exposure to these risks when making environmental decisions. This article examines how U.S. courts might assess EPA’s general authority and discretion to use cumulative risk assessment as the basis for developing data in support of environmental decision-making, and how courts might assess the validity of a cumulative risk assessment methodology itself.

The limited liability company (LLC) appears to be among the most popular forms for business conduct for small and medium sized enterprises (SME) in the EU. Due to the extreme competitiveness and challenging global market, there is a strong external, as well as internal, pressure on the executives of LLCs from various angles. Their challenging situation is projected within the legal framework of the status and the function of executives, and in particular in the regime of their legal liability. It is highly instructive to compare the Czech regime to regimes in other EU member states while focussing on the liability issue. Interestingly, there is a big diversity in modes of addressing this liability and, consequently, the very same problem of the business judgment rule and the liability coverage is resolved in a different manner. Ultimately, the insurance approach v. professional advice approach shows how the shifting of the liability of executives of LLCs is done in various legal systems and testifies about underlying concepts and particularities of conducting business in EU member states.

Not since the 1960s have U.S. politicians, Republican or Democrat, campaigned on platforms defending big government, much less the use of regulation to help solve social ills. And since the late 1970s, \"deregulation\" has become perhaps the most ubiquitous political catchword of all. This book takes on the critics of government regulation. Providing the first major alternative to conventional arguments grounded in public choice theory, it demonstrates that regulatory government can, and on important occasions does, advance general interests. Unlike previous accounts,Regulation and Public Intereststakes agencies' decision-making rules rather than legislative incentives as a central determinant of regulatory outcomes. Drawing from both political science and law, Steven Croley argues that such rules, together with agencies' larger decision-making environments, enhance agency autonomy. Agency personnel inclined to undertake regulatory initiatives that generate large but diffuse benefits (while imposing smaller but more concentrated costs) can use decision-making rules to develop socially beneficial regulations even over the objections of Congress and influential interest groups. This book thus provides a qualified defense of regulatory government. Its illustrative case studies include the development of tobacco rulemaking by the Food and Drug Administration, ozone and particulate matter rules by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service's \"roadless\" policy for national forests, and regulatory initiatives by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission.

Charter schooh are a fast-growing and hotly contested public education reform. Much of the contention around them centers on their student admissions policies, accommodations for students with special needs, and use of public space. For some of these issues, if they were to matenalize into an actual constitutional violation, students and parents might expect to be able to bung a claim against the school under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which permits pMntiffs to bung suit against anyone who they believe violated their constitutional rights while \"acting under color of state law.\" Although charter school are publicly funded and authorized, the Ninth Circuit recently held that an Arizona charter school was not a \"state actor,\" and thus was not \"acting under color of state law, \"for a teacher's § 1983 due process claim. The Ninth Circuit was the first federal court of appeals to address head-on the question of whether a charter school is a state actor for § 1983 purposes. But its opinion conflicts with preexisting district court decisions, which have found charter schooh in other states to be state actors for a variety of constitutional claims. This Note analyzes whether charter schools should be considered state actors for the purposes of § 1983 and argues that courts should apply the Supreme Court's state action doctrine to find that charter schools are state actors for most claims brought by students and parents, but not usually for claims brought by employees.

The objective of the survey was to update information about state boards of health throughout the United States and, based on the results of the survey, to determine how the National Association of Local Boards of Health can serve as a resource to assist state boards in fulfilling their responsibilities and duties. Design: A written survey was developed to collect information about the composition, organizational structure, statutory authority, roles, responsibilities, concerns, and needs of state boards of health. Setting: Information specific to state boards of health has not been collected on a routine basis by any organization, therefore the National Association of Local Boards of Health sought to compile current information on these boards that will be maintained and updated on a routine basis. Participants: Surveys were mailed to 31 contacts for state boards of health. Main Outcome Measure: After follow-up attempts, responses (n = 27) were received from all but four boards for a response rate of 87.1 % with one indicating no board. Results: Consumers and physicians were most frequently reported as required members of the boards. Board members were appointed solely by the governor in 21 (80.8%) states. Nine boards (34.6%) indicated an advisory only capacity regarding statutory authority while the others were governing, policy making, or had multiple authorities. Specific responsibilities of all of the boards included, regardless of statutory authority, advising the state chief health officer (84.6%), advising the governor (42.3%), and adopting and enforcing statutes (38.5%). Conclusions: State boards of health have undergone changes and likely will continue to evolve in their role in public health governance as demonstrated by this survey. This repository of current data on state boards of health could be of use to public health researchers, boards of health, and national public health organizations in strengthening public health governance.

Purpose – Singapore is a small, densely populated city-state, which has become a prosperous global trading, investment and communications hub. In light of this, particular challenges have arisen in the development of its infrastructure to meet its needs. These challenges are met by harnessing private capital in the design, building, management and funding of the infrastructure. The purpose of this paper is to examine various arrangements in using private capital within key infrastructure sectors: mass rapid transit, roads, water supply, electricity generation and transmission, maritime ports and airport, ITC services, and industrial infrastructure, and to consider how full privatization, limited privatization (government-linked companies), direct government provision through statutory authorities (relying partly on private borrowing), and a mix of the above arrangements require infrastructure providers, even statutory authorities, to follow business practices. Design/methodology/approach – This paper adopts an empirical, discursive and critical approach. Findings – The Singapore government has continued to see its role as steering the economy into niche sectors where Singapore can acquire a competitive edge, and to overall facilitate economic development through active intervention. This includes, amongst other things, state-sponsored training and education, capital grants to start-ups, trade promotion, various fiscal incentives to businesses, guarantees for bank credit, etc. (Ghesquiere, 2007). This twin-pronged approach has been reflected in the development and management of the infrastructure. In line with the creation of a strong free enterprise economy, privatization and private capital has been a central feature of infrastructure investment and management. Originality/value – The paper shows how private capital can be used through privatization and borrowing from the private sector to manage the infrastructure. This may be considered an appropriate means to meet the needs of a densely populated small state which is also a global hub for trade, research, investment and communications. It also shows how the harnessing of private capital can be combined with continued government control to ensure that the infrastructure development reflects public policy and adheres to required standards.

The Hong Kong Hospital Authority is the main provider of public health care services in Hong Kong. It operates 41 public hospitals, 74 general out-patient clinics and 45 specialist out-patient clinics. This article examines the reason for its establishment as a statutory body in 1990 and offers an assessment of its success in meeting the goals of the reformers. A belief that health care service delivery would be improved is largely supported by the evidence, but this may have more to do with budget and policy consistency than management autonomy and flexibility. Statutory independence, with its promise of improved efficiency, has its limits in the highly complex field of health where there are multiple players and where professional autonomy remains a key claim. In recent times, the authority has been subject to several reform attempts and, together with the SARS epidemic in 2003, these have had a significant impact on its organizational structure and practices, in particular, on its degrees of autonomy.

Statutory authority for public health surveillance is necessarily broad as previously uncharacterized diseases are regularly discovered. This article provides specific information about general disease reporting provisions in each state. The intent of these reporting laws and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy Rule is to support this critical disease surveillance function for the benefit of the entire population.