League of Conservation Voters v. Trump: A Potential Blueprint to Challenging Environmental Policy Rollbacks

This Comment examines the recently rejected motion to dismiss in League of Conservation Voters v. Trump and its potential to serve as a roadmap for environmental organizations seeking to challenge regulatory rollbacks by the Trump administration. In 2017, President Donald Trump issued an executive order reversing the designation of 128 million acres of ocean as protected from oil and gas leasing. The League of Conservation Voters, along with other environmental activists, sued to enjoin the rollback, and administration officials subsequently filed a motion to dismiss. This Comment focuses on the issue of Article III standing in the case, wherein the plaintiffs must allege (1) an injury in fact that is (2) fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and (3) that a favorable judicial decision will likely redress. Prior to League of Conservation Voters, case law had not established injury in fact on the basis of potential harm to public lands caused by government deregulation. Thus, the ruling that such an injury can be established—even over an area 128 million acres in size—reflects an opportunity for environmental activists attempting to stop rollbacks

League of Conservation Voters v. Trump: A Potential Blueprint to Challenging Environmental Policy Rollbacks

This Comment examines the recently rejected motion to dismiss in League of Conservation Voters v. Trump and its potential to serve as a roadmap for environmental organizations seeking to challenge regulatory rollbacks by the Trump administration. In 2017, President Donald Trump issued an executive order reversing the designation of 128 million acres of ocean as protected from oil and gas leasing. The League of Conservation Voters, along with other environmental activists, sued to enjoin the rollback, and administration officials subsequently filed a motion to dismiss. This Comment focuses on the issue of Article III standing in the case, wherein the plaintiffs must allege (1) an injury in fact that is (2) fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and (3) that a favorable judicial decision will likely redress. Prior to League of Conservation Voters, case law had not established injury in fact on the basis of potential harm to public lands caused by government deregulation. Thus, the ruling that such an injury can be established—even over an area 128 million acres in size—reflects an opportunity for environmental activists attempting to stop rollbacks

Improving Short-Term Electricity Price Forecasting Using Day-Ahead LMP with ARIMA Models

Short-term electricity price forecasting has become important for demand side management and power generation scheduling. Especially as the electricity market becomes more competitive, a more accurate price prediction than the day-ahead locational marginal price (DALMP) published by the independent system operator (ISO) will benefit participants in the market by increasing profit or improving load demand scheduling. Hence, the main idea of this paper is to use autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models to obtain a better LMP prediction than the DALMP by utilizing the published DALMP, historical real-time LMP (RTLMP) and other useful information. First, a set of seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA) models utilizing the DALMP and historical RTLMP are developed and compared with autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models that use the differences between DALMP and RTLMP on their forecasting capability. A generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) model is implemented to further improve the forecasting by accounting for the price volatility. The models are trained and evaluated using real market data in the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) region. The evaluation results indicate that the ARMAX-GARCH model, where an exogenous time series indicates weekend days, improves the short-term electricity price prediction accuracy and outperforms the other proposed ARIMA modelsComment: IEEE PES 2017 General Meeting, Chicago, I

The biodiversity of freshwater Crustaceans revealed by taxonomy and mitochondrial DNA barcodes

Cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) barcode sequences in this file were obtained from specimens collected by plankton net in western Lake Erie in 2012 & 2013, along with later specimens collected at various locations and times, including some collected in Belize in 2015. Methods and other details about these sequences are described in a paper by the same authors in a submitted publication (2021: URL to be given here when published). The right columns below contain additional notes on lengths of sequences, GenBank accession ID (when obtained), and annotation as to whether the sequence represents a new barcode for its genus or species taxon. According to our experience, a DNA identity of \u3e96.5% with previous GenBank barcodes is a reliable range for determining a species level barcode for that morpho species; a DNA identity of 90.5% to 96.5% with previous barcodes is sufficient to identify genus. DNA identities within these ranges are considered to be barcode confirmations. Conversely, DNA identities outside of these ranges are considered to be new barcodes for that species or genus, respectively. Contradictions with previous GenBank sequences are discussed in the manuscript. The submitted manuscript includes the highest percentage identity to a previous sequence in GenBank as determined by BLASTN in June2021. The FASTA file name given here begins with a Ram Lab ID number-location and date of collection with format varying somewhat between various collections/collectors but generally including several (usually three) location letters (e.g., BHL stands for Blue Heron Lagoon) and the date usually in a 6-character format of MMDDYY, and optionally a sample number for that date either preceding the location letters or following the date. Collection location abbreviations include the following: All sequences starting with PM, Toledo Harbor in western Lake Erie; LMUSK, Lake Muskoday, Belle Isle, Detroit; SCL, Saint Clair River; BHL, Blue Heron Lagoon, Belle Isle; LE, LakeErie; LSC, Lake St.Clair; MMLE; Metzgers Marsh, LakeErie; MM, Metzgers Marsh; LP, Leonard Preserve, Manchester, Michigan; HR, Huron River Drive, Ypsilanti, Michigan; LCL, Little Cedar Lake, Orion, MI; HLE, Harbor Lake Erie; LHLE, Lorain Harbor Lake Erie; BZEB1P, Cenote in Shipstern Reserve, Corozal, Belize, Central America

Bower v. Evans: The Court\u27s Efforts To Protect Dolphins In The Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean

The Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) erred when he issued, prior to receipt of substantiating research, an Initial Finding that a certain fishing technique did not harm dolphins. The Secretary erroneously concluded that the mere lack of evidence (without research) was sufficient to substantiate his Initial Finding that there was no evidence that the fishing technique harmed dolphins. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in its July 2001 decision Brower v. Evans, affirmed judgment in favor of plaintiff and set aside the Secretary\u27s Initial Finding. The broad implication of the holding in Brower v. Evans is that the government must comply with congressional statutes even if such laws are contrary to international trade. The narrow holding of this case is to continue efforts to protect dolphins in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP) even though such actions might conflict with international trade. The Secretary\u27s support of a less protective standard to apply to dolphin safe tuna labels apparently applies most directly to international vessels. Brower v. Evans represents an international trade issue because United States vessels do not use fishing techniques that are harmful to dolphins. The Secretary\u27s action is contrary to recent congressional acts that indicate a trend toward protecting the ETP dolphins from certain fishing practices, such as purse seine fishing. Such acts also indicate a growing awareness that fishing not only causes injuries and death to dolphins, but also causes physiological stress. This Casenote advocates for the court\u27s conclusion that the Secretary\u27s decision to allow more relaxed tuna labeling guidelines undermines the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and congressional mandates designed to protect dolphins. From a policy standpoint, upholding the Secretary\u27s decision will thwart efforts to protect ETP dolphins

Uniform Commericial Code Study as Business Career Certificate Preparation: That Cerrtified Commerical Contracts Manager (CCCM) Credential

Standard 1 of the 2013 Business Accreditation Standards of the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business International summons assessment of a business school’s mission, impact, and innovation. In light of Standard 1, meritorious might prove presentation of, e.g., undergraduate business law courses while hearkening to professional certification examinations available to business schools’ undergraduates and recent graduates. Prerequisite to the award of the Certified Commercial Contracts Managers (CCCM) credential from the National Contract Management Association is, inter alia, the passing of a professional examination substantially oriented to the Uniform Commercial Code. This CCCM examination can be undertaken immediately upon receipt of the bachelor’s degree. Its successful completion marks a near-term and attainable goal. Student alertness to undergraduate business law courses as preparation toward this examination could provide payoffs incentivewise, moralewise and careerwise

Bower v. Evans: The Court\u27s Efforts To Protect Dolphins In The Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean

The Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) erred when he issued, prior to receipt of substantiating research, an Initial Finding that a certain fishing technique did not harm dolphins. The Secretary erroneously concluded that the mere lack of evidence (without research) was sufficient to substantiate his Initial Finding that there was no evidence that the fishing technique harmed dolphins. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in its July 2001 decision Brower v. Evans, affirmed judgment in favor of plaintiff and set aside the Secretary\u27s Initial Finding. The broad implication of the holding in Brower v. Evans is that the government must comply with congressional statutes even if such laws are contrary to international trade. The narrow holding of this case is to continue efforts to protect dolphins in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP) even though such actions might conflict with international trade. The Secretary\u27s support of a less protective standard to apply to dolphin safe tuna labels apparently applies most directly to international vessels. Brower v. Evans represents an international trade issue because United States vessels do not use fishing techniques that are harmful to dolphins. The Secretary\u27s action is contrary to recent congressional acts that indicate a trend toward protecting the ETP dolphins from certain fishing practices, such as purse seine fishing. Such acts also indicate a growing awareness that fishing not only causes injuries and death to dolphins, but also causes physiological stress. This Casenote advocates for the court\u27s conclusion that the Secretary\u27s decision to allow more relaxed tuna labeling guidelines undermines the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and congressional mandates designed to protect dolphins. From a policy standpoint, upholding the Secretary\u27s decision will thwart efforts to protect ETP dolphins

Table of Contents - Issue 1

Table of Contents - Issue