Hazardous Waste Site Management Water Quality Issues (1988) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5. HOW CLEAN IS CLEAN? THE NEED FOR ACTION
5. HOW CLEAN IS CLEAN? THE NEED FOR ACTION
Pages 98-109
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 98... ...
In this paper, ~ will discuss the following issues: the current legal/regulatory framework relative to cleanup levels; the cost and technical implications of various cleanup strat egies; the balance of today's cleanup costs versus future liabilities; and who ultimately pays. CURRENT IEGAI/REG=ATORY FRAMEWORK EPA has taken the position that a cleanup conducted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act's (RCRA)
|
From page 99... ...
Agency spokesmen explained: "The Agency's goal is to develop RCRA corrective action requirements that remove inconsistencies between remedial actions performed under CERCLA and corrective actions performed under RCRA." In practice, it may be difficult to achieve consistency between the two statutes because cleanup authority under RCRA and Superfund is not sirn~lar; in addition, each statute includes important elements that may have significant impact on the cleanup decisions. As a general rule, RCRA requires that cleanups protect "human health and the environment." Because RCRA is much more of a hazardous waste management statute than a hazardous waste
|
From page 100... ...
Now, under SARA, the Superfund scheme includes additional guidance and constraints on the selection of remedial actions. Specifically, Section 121 of SARA includes a strong bias in favor of permanent remedies and onsite remedies and requires that applicable or relevant and appropriate state and federal standards be applied.
|
From page 101... ...
; cleanup to background, holding other responsible parties accountable for the contamination they caused on the property; and care. human health and environmental protection standard of COST VERSUS CIEANUP [EVEIS The two parameters most significantly affected by cleanup levels are the costs of the cleanup and the time required to accomplish the remediation.
|
From page 102... ...
EPA has estimated that the cleanup requirements in SARA would drive the cost of a Superfund cleanup from its present average of about $8 million-$9 million per site to between $25 million and $30 million per site. States are responsible for paying 10 percent of the cleanup costs at fund-financed sites, and many state officials have expressed concern about the increased cost potential.
|
From page 103... ...
Thus, additional pumping had arrived at a point of decreasing benefit because with time the concentration was asymptotically approaching a nonzero value. The estimated costs to reach various cleanup levels are given in Table 5-3.
|
From page 104... ...
Table ~4 shows various cleanup options for PC~contaminated soil and their costs. BALANCING CLEANUP COSTS VERSUS FUTURE LIABIIITIES In today's litigious society, more people are suing companies over environmental contamination-related issues (e.g., drinking water, property devaluation, illness, etc.~.
|
From page 105... ...
On the other hand, lower cleanup standards may also result in lower future liabilities for responsible parties with respect to the site being remediated. Clearly, when responsible parties are evaluating what constitutes an adequate cleanup level, consideration should be given to the impact of the cleanup on future liabilities.
|
From page 106... ...
CONCH REMARKS AND RECOM~NDATIONS In the arena of hazardous waste site cleanup, the price we pay for inaction is elevated risk to the impacted population. The decisionmaking process is often prolonged by the desires of certain interested parties to achieve the ultimate solution, despite the necessity of working from an imperfect data base and using complex yet unverified modeling systems.
|
From page 107... ...
As a practical result we end up having a few big sites treated to a large extent, and we lose efficiency in the course of that. We might do better with less treatment and more sites and quicker treatment.
|
From page 108... ...
Probabilistic assessment of systematic error is often lacking in current risk assessments. We often substitute analyses of measurement error for analyses of the assessment of systematic error.
|
From page 109... ...
If you think of what it takes to identify a source, it may be easier in the arena of ground water protection than it is in the air, and that may help explain why there is greater political salience for one rather than the other. These three things our current approaches to liability, uncertainty, and distributional criteria- can be added to the obvious fourth factor, the traditional conflicts between the potential gainers and losers from any collective decision.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.