Practical environmental law

OBJECTIVE 1.
In order to avoid responsibility for a simple tank with emulsol, which is a type of oil products, the foreman of the transport department of the Zhilstroy SMU in Dubinsk, Khromov, instructed the workers to drain 16 tons of emulsol into a ravine, along the bottom of which a stream flows into the pond. In turn, the pond through the river communicates with the Volga River. Thus, the Volga River was polluted. According to experts, the damage amounted to 220 million rubles.
What kind of responsibility can Khromov be held liable to?
Are there grounds for initiating a criminal case?

OBJECTIVE 2.
In the course of prosecutorial inspections, carried out by the regional prosecutor's office together with district prosecutors in agricultural firms of the region and other agricultural enterprises, the following violations were revealed in most of the checked farms: wastewater from livestock and poultry farms enters water bodies, polluting them; there are no special manure storages and treatment facilities; manure accumulates in the zones of water intake and flows into water bodies; pesticides and fertilizers are stored in the open air, which is why they fall into water bodies during the rainy season. As a result, the number of pathogenic microbes and the concentration of various kinds of harmful substances that pose a danger to human health have sharply increased in the water.
Tell me, about non-compliance with the norms of what legislative acts in this case are we talking about?
What measures of influence can be applied to the heads of agricultural firms and other enterprises who have violated the water legislation?

OBJECTIVE 3.
During the inspection at the "Polymer" plant, the state inspector of the Committee for Environmental Protection established that at this enterprise: the ecological passport is not established and, therefore, is not kept; a sanitary protection zone has not been established around the plant, although it should be; no automated accounting of discharges and emissions of pollutants is kept; no responsible person has been appointed for compliance with environmental standards and rules at the enterprise.
What laws are violated in this case?
How should a government inspector respond to these violations?

OBJECTIVE 4.
The district administration made a decision on the construction of a road and the withdrawal of land for these purposes without conducting an environmental impact assessment at the state nature reserve of 10 hectares. and the farmer Motalov V.M. 0,8 hectares.
What general violations of land and environmental legislation can you give?
Describe the general requirements for the protection of specially protected objects.

OBJECTIVE 5.
When the court was considering the criminal case of the chief engineer of the plant, the question arose of how to qualify the air pollution of the working area of ​​industrial premises with substances harmful to human health above the maximum concentrations: as a violation of environmental protection rules or as a violation of labor protection rules?
Please provide clarification on this issue.
What are the legal criteria, in the presence of which air, water and soil will be protected through legislation on environmental protection?

OBJECTIVE 6.
Citizen Fedotov SS, being a supporter of the ecological organization "Clean Forest", decided to seek help from the state authorities, fighting against pollution in forests.
How is the delineation of powers in the field of relations related to environmental protection between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation?

OBJECTIVE 7.
Citizen Mamaev S.P. decided to undertake an environmental impact assessment for one of the construction projects.
What is environmental impact assessment?
What does the legislator mean by "environmental requirements"?

OBJECTIVE 8.
As a result of the forest burning, the forestry enterprise suffered large material damage.
What methods of compensation for harm are provided for by Russian law?

OBJECTIVE 9.
As a result of the discussion at the extended meeting of the village administration, a dispute broke out between the citizen A.P. Pakhomov. and Sergeychuk R.D. on the ownership of the subsoil and the right to subsoil use.