Encyclopedia of Environmental Science and Engineering, Volume I and II

462 HAZARDOUS WASTES

Reauthorization Act (SARA) on October 17, 1986, creating a

hazardous-waste-site response program and liability scheme

that authorizes the government to hold persons who caused

or contributed to the release of hazardous substances liable

for the cost or the cleanup of affected sites. The president

or the delegated agency is authorized to draw funds from a

revolving trust fund (Superfund) to respond to releases of

hazardous substances: (1) the EPA can take action at the site

using Superfund money that it can recover from potentially

responsible parties (PRPs), (2) the EPA can order PRPs

directly or through a court to clean up a site, and (3) the EPA

can enter into settlement agreements with PRPs that require

them to clean up or pay for the cleanup of a site.

Superfund money can be used for sites that meet the fol-

lowing criteria:

(1) The site is listed on the National Priority List

(NPL).

(2) The state in which the site is located either con-

tributes or provides financial assurances for 10%

of any remedial costs incurred.

(3) The remedial action is not inconsistent with the

National Oil and Hazardous Pollution Contingency

Plan (NCP). The NCP was revised in 1994 to

reflect the oil-spill provisions of the Oil Pollution

Act of 1990 (OPA).

To establish that a person is liable under CERCLA, the

EPA must prove that a hazardous substance was released

from a facility that caused the government to incur costs

in responding. CERCLA imposes liability on current and

former owners and operators of a facility, persons who

arranged for treatment or disposal of hazardous substances,

and transporters of hazardous substances who selected the

disposal site.

Planning Ahead

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which became

law on October 11, 1976, authorizes the EPA to secure infor-

mation on all new and existing chemical substances and to

control any that were determined to be unreasonable risks

to public health or the environment. The Asbestos Hazard

Emergency Response Act (AHERA) amended the TSCA on

October 22, 1986, and the Radon Reduction Act amended

it in October 1988. In 1990 AHERA was amended by the

Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act,

which required accreditation for persons conducting asbes-

tos inspection and abatement activities in schools and com-

mercial and public buildings. The TSCA was amended

in October 1992 to add the Lead-Based Paint Exposure

Reduction Act.

All manufacturers and importers, processors, distributors,

and users of chemical substances may be subject to TSCA

reporting, record keeping, and testing requirements. Penalties

for noncompliance may be up to $27,500 per violation per

day. The demand for greater environmental protection at less

cost led the EPA to recommend a one-stop approach toward

controlling the release of pollutants from different types of

facilities in the May 10, 1996, Federal Register. This Public

Performance-Based Permitting Program (P3) is oriented

toward identifying the actual impact on the environment, the

compliance over time, and how well the enforcement agen-

cies perform.

The ultimate approach to the prevention of exposure of

the public and contamination of the environment by hazard-

ous wastes is to find ways to produce what we need while

minimizing the hazardous side products. The flood of legis-

lation and its costs in money and time to industry has helped

to generate a movement sometimes known as “green tech-

nology” that introduces environmental consciousness at the

early stages of product development. Industry’s aim for a

maximum yield is being tempered by the necessity to mini-

mize unwanted and costly-to-dispose-of materials that must

be classified as hazardous wastes.

The Control of Exposures

Certain factors must be understood and managed in control-

ling exposures to hazardous materials:

• Where in the environment have hazardous materi-
  als accumulated or are currently being introduced
  as a result of ignorance, carelessness, or criminal
  disregard for human health or the welfare of the
  environment?


• How much hazardous material has accumulated
  or is being released?


• What are the environmental pathways and mech-
  anisms by which these materials reach human
  receptors?


• How hazardous are specific materials and how
  can their risks be estimated?


• How can their generation be minimized?


• How can their impact be minimized?


• How best can the public be informed about the
  important aspects of hazardous material control?


• How can the credibility of the agents responsible for
  informing and protecting the public be established?


• How can the priority for control of hazardous
  materials be determined within the complex struc-
  ture of society’s problems?


• How can public outrage, often generated by media
  treatment of environmental problems, be man-
  aged so that priorities and resources are directed
  to where they are most needed?

The Effects of Exposures

The prime motivation for continuing generation of laws to

control exposures to hazardous materials has been the fear

of cancer; however, it should be noted that there are other

health perils inherent in exposures. Environmental expo-

sures pertinent to carcinogenesis include not only hazardous

materials but also diets, infectious agents, and even social

behavior, as illustrated by the summary prepared in 1981 by

C008_002_r03.indd 462C008_002_r03.indd 462 11/18/2005 10:29:02 AM11/18/2005 10:29:02 AM