Buy Aceon | Cheap Aceon | Buy Aceon Online

ah8h6t7456

's largest offshore oil and gas fields built by CNOOC and ConocoPhillips,mercurial, a wholly owned U.S. subsidiary of ConocoPhillips China oil cooperation and development, operations side of ConocoPhillips China, ConocoPhillips China is responsible for The field of production and development. In response to this possible long-term impact on the ecology of Bohai significant environmental events, the author tries to analyze from a legal point of view of the rights and obligations of the parties and their accountability. CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China's administrative liability in accordance with the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should work together to fulfill their obligations under environmental laws, and for their own violations bear the corresponding legal responsibility. An Environmental Impact Assessment of administrative law. To strictly comply with the environmental impact assessment system. Ie, before the design of the project on the environmental impact of the project may be fully assessed, propose measures to prevent and reduce pollution. Accordance with the "Environmental Impact Assessment Law,hollister," the provisions of the environmental impact assessment report should be submitted to the National marine administrative department for approval. In that case,louboutin pas cher, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China did not prevent the generation of oil-based mud,louboutin, there is no effective control of oil-based mud and other oily wastewater pollution generated, indicating that CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China drilling platform in the construction and use of the environment impact assessment report writing aspects of a problem,tiffany, should bear the corresponding legal responsibility for the administration. (2) Acceptance of administrative law. Accordance with the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," the provisions of Article 48, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China cooperation projects run should be preceded by a "three simultaneous" acceptance that pollution control facilities, equipment, and the main project shall be designed, constructed and put into use. Marine environmental protection facilities without the approval of the administrative department of inspection, construction project may not test run; environmental protection administrative department of marine facilities without acceptance, or considered unqualified, the construction project may not be put into production or use. Dismantled or left idle environmental protection facilities, must obtain the consent of the administrative department of the ocean. According to the case can be seen, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China is not well under control the generation and spread of contamination and pollution damage to the spreading of large, shocking, indicating that the project is running before the "three simultaneous" acceptance especially the "three simultaneous" acceptance of the validity of a problem and should bear the corresponding legal responsibility for the administration. 3 marine pollution incident reporting requirements violate the administrative liability. According to report pollution incidents handled by law, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China after the accident, it should be as soon as the accident happened in the form of books and submitted to the National Marine administrative departments, but CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China did not do it . One month after the accident, the fishermen and other social public found under the accident was able to exposure, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China social pressure was admitted to the community caused by marine oil pollution. This shows that CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China a serious violation of Chinese marine pollution incident reporting requirements, should bear the corresponding legal responsibility for the administration. 4 oil-based sludge discharge administrative liability. CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should abide by prohibitions and restrictions on emissions regulations. "Marine Environmental Protection Law" Article 51 provides that the use of oil-based drilling mud and other toxic compound may not be discharged into the sea mud, mud and non-toxic water-based mud and cuttings compound emissions, must comply with the relevant regulations. From the point of view the case, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China emitted a lot of oil-based sludge, which is oil-based mud "Marine Environmental Protection Law" no emissions. Based on this, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should bear the corresponding legal responsibility for the administration. CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China's civil liability in addition, the "Tort Liability Act," Article 4 "infringer shall be liable for the same act or criminal administrative liability, tort liability law does not affect", "Marine Environmental Protection Law" 90 provides that "pollution damage to the marine environment caused by those responsible, should be excluded from harm, and damages." CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should be based on its pollution damage arising out of acts and the elimination of the hazard and the risk of bear civil liability for damages. According to "Tort Liability Act" and the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should be self-inflicted harm, regardless of whether they are at fault, should bear the elimination of the hazard and liability to pay damages. Moreover, this is not to assume responsibility for the legal premise is excessive emissions. The liability for damages, including two parts, one for the Chinese national ecological fishery resources and other property and damage to property, the second is the interests of the fishermen farming interests and capture the damage. National Oceanic and responsibilities in accordance with the administrative department "Marine Environmental Protection Law," the provisions of the administrative department of the National Oceanic undertake offshore drilling platform construction and operation of environmental supervision and management responsibilities. In that case, the state administrative department of marine CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should joint the project's environmental impact assessment books for review and approval of the "three simultaneous" system to review the implementation and acceptance,hogan, and activities of daily supervision of sewage . CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China because of a violation of the legal obligations, causing environmental pollution damages, so the National Oceanic and administrative departments shall be subject to administrative penalties for its violation. For example, for oil-based sludge discharge prohibition, CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China illegal emissions, national marine administrative department under the "Marine Environmental Protection Law" Article 73 provides that "violation of the relevant provisions of this Act, one of the following acts ,ray ban, in accordance with provisions of this law by the exercise of the right of the marine environment supervision and management department shall order rectification and impose a fine of: (a) of this Act prohibits discharge into the sea of pollutants or other substances "and" with the preceding paragraph (a), (three) one of the acts, at 30,000 yuan and 200,000 yuan fine ", be ordered to make corrections and 30,ray ban,000 yuan and 200,000 yuan fine. CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China for joint projects and other administrative violations, because it is independent of the different stages of an offense shall be punished separately. According to the current situation, the State Oceanic Administration only give "harsh criticism" and ordered to make corrections, this is not enough! In addition, the National Oceanic and administrative departments shall, according to "Marine Environmental Protection Law" Article 90 provides that "for the damage to marine ecology, marine aquatic resources, marine protected areas, causing heavy losses to the state, in accordance with provisions of this law by the marine environment supervision and management in behalf of the state responsible for damages requirements ", on behalf of the Chinese government on marine pollution accidents cause ecological damage and loss of property fishery resources and other damage caused by the exercise of the right to claim. This claim does not in pollutant emissions exceeding the premise, because "Marine Environmental Protection Law" and "Tort Liability Act" in environmental pollution requirements in respect of civil liability is not the existence of fault as a precondition. This claims to implement the principle of liability without fault, that is, even those not at fault virulence, as long as caused damage should also be liable for damages legal obligations. It is worth noting that the State's exercise of the right to claim the scope of individual citizens generally do not include the right to claim damages, that is, citizens have the right to damage to the independent exercise of their right to claim. Fishermen and other victims' rights and remedies for the damage to the interests of the fishermen, who say fishing and seaside tourism operators who, because of their interests, the right under the "Tort Liability Act" and the "Marine Environmental Protection Law "The requirement that virulence by CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China for compensation. The burden of proof, "Tort Liability Act," Article 66 provides that: "due to environmental pollution disputes, the polluter should respect the law does not assume responsibility or liability alleviate the situation and their behavior and the damage there is no causal relationship between the burden of proof responsibility. "In that case, the fishermen took evidence as long as they have been lost, and by how much damage they suspect or the specified polluters can, under no obligation to act with their virulence victimization to be a causal relationship between the results proof. Conversely, virulence by CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China should follow the "Tort Liability Act" and the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," on his own and is not responsible for acts of its own sewage and fishermen affected causal relationship does not exist between the results to be proof. If CNOOC and ConocoPhillips China can not prove that pollution is not of its own making, can not prove that he has no responsibility, they should bear the liability for damages. And litigation relating to a system that is environmental damage identification system. Since the State Oceanic Administration and conducted by ConocoPhillips China for the majority of fishermen are not identified and recognized by the community, and now the law also does not negate the other legally established environmental pollution damage were identified by the accreditation bodies legitimacy, so fishermen can delegate he trusts accreditation bodies were identified. But this may bring identification results between accreditation bodies inconsistencies. The best solution is to virulence and the State Oceanic Administration and fishermen affected joint consultation, elected a common trust environment pollution damage accreditation bodies. This avoids the identification of inconsistent results caused by disputes situations. Defects in the existing law and its recommendations for improvement can be seen from the case, China's "Marine Environmental Protection Law," there are some bugs that need to take some legislative improvements: 1. Substantial increase in administrative fines limits. Current "Marine Environmental Protection Law" Article 73 to Article 91 established the following fine bands: "30,000 yuan to 200,000 yuan," "20,000 yuan and 100,000 yuan," "less than $ 20,000." "10,000 yuan and 100,000 yuan," "50,air max,000 yuan to 500,000 yuan," "50,000 yuan to 200,000 yuan," and "30% of the direct loss calculation, but not more than 300,000 yuan up "and so on. For the Chinese offshore waters under the jurisdiction of waste brought into the Chinese dumping,ralph lauren, the prescribed penalty would be "based on the harm caused or likely consequences of one million yuan more than 100,000 yuan shall be imposed." For the illegal discharge of oil-based sludge phenomenon, the National Marine administrative departments maximum penalty amount is $ 200,000. Relative to its pollution damage and the resulting offenders enormous benefits, these amounts are too insignificant, can not play an effective role in discipline, overcoming illegal low cost, high compliance costs of non-normal. Should draw on "Water Pollution Prevention Law" experience, the maximum fines up to one million, two million or even tens of millions. For causing heavy losses, fines can be raised to the maximum amount of loss of 30%, but no ceiling, no more than the number of dollars can not be specified, such as the damage of 500 billion yuan, 15 billion yuan can be fined. For continuous or ongoing environmental violations penalties, the existing "Marine Environmental Protection Law" stipulates that the standard also appears to be too low. Such as excessive discharge of water pollutants for long-term behavior of intentional acts such as waste-water treatment waste water, only in a select high part of the amplitude fine penalties, while the fines are calculated generally not high enough to combat continuous or continuous pollution marine offenses. In this regard, it should learn from foreign experience, the introduction of the number of illegal and unlawful according to the time calculated cumulatively penalty system. (2) the introduction of security detention regime. Many business leaders and business people are not afraid of fines, because the business is too rich, and now the amount of fines too, but they are afraid of being detained or sentenced. Be held criminally responsible in the "Criminal Law" Chapter VI and the "Marine Environmental Protection Law" already provided,air max 90, but the "Marine Environmental Protection Law," the lack of relevant administrative detention penalties. We need to learn from, "Water Pollution Prevention Law" experience, the introduction of security measures to detention. For those illegal sewage, environmental impact assessment does not fulfill obligations, "three simultaneous" voluntary act, for the act to conceal the accident report, if both violations of marine environmental protection laws and regulations, but also endanger public safety, contrary to "Public Security Administration Punishment Law," shall be given more than the 15th day following security detention punishment. This measure is very effective. 3 provides that the Chief Executive on behalf of the system. That is, for illegal sewage pollution damage caused by the consequences of behavior, such as the offender is not required to take control measures or do not have the capacity to govern, the competent authorities have the ability to deal with designated units took control pollution,mercurial vapor, on behalf of the full cost of governance by the offender commitment . On the other hand, for the illegal facilities can be mobilized by the police and other law enforcement departments above the county level people's government to take measures, rather than by the administrative department of marine offenders that "ordered to dismantle" requirements, such as the removal of the offender fails illegal facilities, the local people's government shall organize public security, environmental protection and other departments of power, forced removal, forced removal of the full cost of commitment by the offender. 4 clear ecological compensation standard. "Marine Environmental Protection Law" Article 90 provides: "The damage to the marine ecosystem ...... causing heavy losses to the state, in accordance with provisions of this law by the exercise of the marine environment supervision and management departments on behalf of the State responsible for damages claim." This put the ecological losses included in the scope of environmental damages. However, at present, there is no uniform, clear pollution damage to the marine environment accounting method, which makes the above provisions are often difficult to enforce. At present, China's ecological compensation for the lack of uniform standards, in some places such as Shandong provincial regulations that apply to the province's ecological compensation, ecological compensation for local standards, the country has reference. However, the ecological compensation standard is no consensus in the world,hogan outlet, each country has its own approach is that we should strengthen research, promote relevant legislation. The best way is to be published in the form of the State Council regulations. This is to resolve disputes, safeguard national security environment, the protection of national interests in the environment is very useful. (Author: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Professor of Law)
相关的主题文章:

Chinese President Hu Jintao met with former French President

Urumqi 7-5 event analysis mob locations in 50

During the Spring Festival in Guangdong Meixian oc