Have you technical geniuses figured out that lawyers can write restrictions in a way that sounds reasonable (to get them to pass) and then go on to enforce policy in quite a different way, much later ? Is it not obvious that 'environmental protection' costs money and may prevent some company from making more money ? The US EPA is a number-one target for decades, for these reasons. Many US lawyers are paid very, very well to represent the interests of their commercial employers, which likely does not include any consideration of actual long-term harm.