Extricating Membership as a PRP at Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites

Corporations often become potentially responsible parties (PRPs) at hazardous waste sites because of their past transportation or disposal of hazardous substances at such sites. Determining a PRP's potential liability for the assessment and cleanup of hazardous waste sites is a challenging effort and often results in disputes among other PRPs regarding appropriate allocation of response action costs to each party. Further, public companies have an obligation to report probable and reasonably estimable costs under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for environmental liabilities at their current or prior hazardous waste sites. The first step in such an evaluation is to determine whether or not a PRP can extricate themselves from any association with the subject site or, alternatively, demonstrate de minimis status. This article describes the methods by which PRPs can extricate themselves from liability associated with response action costs at contaminated sites, including: evaluating a PRP's prior settlements or indemnifications with other PRPs; identifying insurance coverage or other financial assurance instruments for the disposal facility; and examining applicable statutes of limitations against when a PRP received notification from the regulatory agency. The article also presents a case study discussing how a PRP with a portfolio of 72 hazardous waste disposal sites was able to extricate itself from the majority of these sites, resulting in only four sites where the PRP was determined to be a PRP and where an associated allocable share was assigned. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

How chemically stable is stabilized hazardous waste?

Bioassays can provide meaningful information about the relative toxicity of remediated soil samples, revealing the unwelcome toxic side effects produced by some cleanup projects. Section 121 of CERCLA's 1986 amendments calls for hazardous waste site remediations to permanently and significantly reduce the volume, toxicity, and mobility of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants. Traditional engineering technology has focused on reducing volume and mobility, assuming that such reduction would lead to reductions in toxicity. Environmental scientists have argued, however, that such reductions are not always the result, but lack of consensus on how hazardous waste mixtures should be measured toxicologically has slowed development of integrated assessments. The aquatic and terrestrial bioassays discussed in this article are evaluated for various chemicals, mixtures of chemicals, and actual waste site chemical mixtures at a Superfund mobility reduction project in Kent, Washington. Results suggest that although remediation accomplished the primary objective of reducing mobility, it also introduced toxic effects. These tradeoffs must be viewed holistically when the ultimate performance of cleanup measures is judged.     

A Practical Guide to Estimating Cleanup Costs

Cost estimates are frequently developed to evaluate hazardous‐waste‐site cleanup options in support of a site investigation, remedy selection decision, or assessment of environmental liabilities. The accuracy of the cost estimate depends largely on the quality of the information available at the time it is prepared. This article presents a practical guide to developing a cleanup cost estimate. It includes information on how to document assumptions, use the latest technical resources, and perform basic adjustments to account for uncertainty and the time value of money. The content is based upon a recent guidance document issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers entitled A Guide to Developing and Documenting Cost Estimates during the Feasibility Study (USEPA, 2000). © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Influences on RCRA corrective action costs for nonfederal facilities

Thousands of known hazardous waste sites across the country require remediation, with thousands more yet to be discovered, at estimated cleanup costs of billions of dollars over the next few decades. With this enormous financial burden placed on all members of society through increased prices, taxes, and lost investment opportunities, policy makers face the difficult prospect of defining cleanup standards that meet the goals of protecting human health and the environment and achieving remediation in the most cost-effective manner. Using a statistical methodology to investigate factors influencing the cost of RCRA corrective action, this article examines site characteristics that significantly affect cleanup costs and explains differences in costs among EPA's four proposed Subpart S corrective action options.     

Risk assessment and accepted regulatory cleanup levels

The determination of cleanup levels at a CERCLA or RCRA site is often the single most important decision made by risk managers. This decision can have a major impact on the costs and time required for remediation, as well as on the selection of remedial technologies. The object of this article is to provide a critical review of the methods used by regulatory agencies and the regulated community to calculate chemical-specific cleanup goals for inactive hazardous waste sites, focusing on those cleanup goals that are designed to protect human health from the effects of chemicals. In addition to this analysis of historical methods that have been used, this article discusses some innovative solutions to the problem of calculating cleanup levels and presents an analysis of controversial topics related to cleanup levels currently under debate by regulatory agencies, industry, environmentalists, and legislative bodies.     

Risk Assessment in Remediation: Accurately Accounting for Uncertainty

Cleanup levels at hazardous waste sites are typically developed based at least in pan on either generic or site-specific risk assessments. Risk assessment in its purest form should be a measure of the potential for a site to cause adverse effects and therefore should be used as the basis for cleanup. However, the process of risk assessment continues to be subject to problems, primarily related to inherent uncertainties in the exposure parameters and toxicity criteria that are the building blocks of the risk assessment. Criticism of risk assessments and risk-based decisions range from comments that the process inadequately protects human health to comments that the process is overly protective, and examples of both ends of the spectrum are readily available. Site remediation professionals should be aware of the issues related to uncertainty and understand the potential problems in order to ensure appropriate and effective site cleanup. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Risk assessment: A site-specific approach to establishing acceptable soil cleanup levels

In 1980 the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) was passed to instigate the cleanup of uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. CERCLA necessitated the development of a set of criteria for estimating the severity of the contamination at these sites, the potential impact on human health and the environment, and establishing appropriate cleanup levels for the contaminated media. The risk assessment (RA) format was developed to meet these challenges. Though RAs vary dramatically in their scope, emphasis, and regulatory application, there are two primary objectives common to all RAs: (1) to evaluate potential risks to human health and the environment posed by the release of hazardous substances and (2) to evaluate and establish safe cleanup levels based primarily on the number and type of potential receptors, the toxicity and mobility of the contaminants, and the types of exposure pathways present. Achieving these objectives may be a relatively simple task or an extremely complex and difficult one depending on the type of material released and our understanding of its behavior in the environment, the site conditions, and the governing regulations. This article presents an approach for establishing acceptable cleanup levels for subsurface soils and illustrates the application of this approach to three different regulated sites.     

Systematically selecting an alternative to remediate soil contaminating groundwater

Contaminated soil is a continuing source of ground water contamination at some hazardous waste sites. Even if that soil does not pose a threat to human health or the environment, soil remediation may benefit ground-water cleanup in terms of time, money, or protectiveness. A method has been developed to provide a systematic manner to select a soil cleanup alternative. Using commercially available Windows-based software, the method consists of the development of a decision tree whose chance nodes are the restoration time frame probability distributions. Uncertainty associated with site data is quantitatively evaluated using Monte Carlo analysis to develop the probability distributions. The decision tree selects the alternative with the lowest cost. Data from an actual remedial investigation/feasibility study demonstrate the ease and practicality of the selection method.     

Integrating Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Environmental Cleanup Activities at CERCLA and RCRA Sites

Although the release or threatened release of hazardous substances into the environment often creates liability for both cleanup costs and natural resource damages liability, the process of planning and conducting cleanup and the process of assessing natural resource damages are most often conducted separately. However, the substantial similarities between the two processes often present opportunities to integrate significant steps in each. Such integration has the potential to reduce both the cost of measuring and, often, resolving the full range of environmental claims at a given cleanup site and the time it takes to do so. It can also lead to faster restoration of injured natural resources and the services they provide to the public and the environment. One key reason for the lack of integration is the fact that cleanup managers generally know little if anything about the natural resource damage assessment process, while the public officials authorized to assess damages to natural resources know little about the cleanup process. This article identifies the similarities between the cleanup and natural resource damage assessment processes and provides guidance on when and how to integrate the two. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Radiolytic decomposition of environmental contaminants and site remediation using an electron accelerator

Halogenated and nonhalogenated hydrocarbon contaminants are currently found in natural waterways, groundwater, and soils as a result of spills and careless disposal practices. The development of proper treatment methodologies for the waste streams producing this environmental damage is now a subject of growing concern. A significant number of these waste stream compounds are chemically stable and are thus resistant to environmental degradation. Numerous researchers have investigated the use of ionizing radiation to decompose chlorinated hydrocarbons in diverse matrices and have proposed various free-radical-induced reaction mechanisms. This article is divided into two sections. First, we present data on experimentally measured, radiolytically induced decomposition of hazardous wastes and toxic substances using accelerator-generated bremsstrahlung sources and gamma radiation from cobalt-60. Data are presented on the radiolytically induced reduction in concentration of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) dissolved in water and in air, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) dissolved in oil, high explosives dissolved in groundwater, and chemical weapon surrogates. The results of these studies suggest the potential use of ionizing radiation as a method of hazardous waste treatment. The second section of this article describes the technical aspects of a field-scale radiolytic decomposition site cleanup demonstration using an electron accelerator. A portable, commercially available electron accelerator was set up at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL's) Site 300, a Superfund site, where vacuum extraction wells were removing trichloroethylene (TCE) vapor from a ground spill into the unsaturated soil zone. The accelerator was retrofitted into the existing vacuum extraction system such that the extracted TCE-containing vapor passed through the accelerator beam for treatment. The concentration of TCE in the vapor was reduced by an amount dependent on the accelerator beam power. Production of reaction products in the vapor was measured as a function of absorbed dose.     

Accounting for Science and Uncertainty in Cleanup Levels: The Use of 1 μg/kg as the Cleanup Criterion for Dioxin in Soil

At hazardous waste sites, a 1 μg/kg (ppb) cleanup level has commonly been used for dioxin in residential soil. This article outlines reasons for the continued use of this value in site remediation. Dioxin, one of the most toxic compounds known, has been a focus of scientific study for many years. However, controversy continues to surround its regulation, with some scientists arguing that new scientific results support decreasing risk estimates for dioxin and others taking the opposite view. Part of this controversy appears to involve a decreasing emphasis on cancer and an increased concern about non-cancer and ecological impacts of dioxin. The 1 ppb soil cleanup level represents a reasonable generic value for dioxin, with higher or lower values required on a case-by-case basis to protect specific populations.     

Optimization of regional hazardous waste management systems: an improved formulation

The planning and design of regional hazardous waste management system (RHWMS) involves selection of treatment and disposal facilities, allocation of hazardous wastes and waste residues from generator to the treatment and disposal sites and selection of the transportation routes. An improved formulation based upon multi-objective integer programming approach is presented to arrive at the optimal configuration of RHWMS components. This formulation addresses important practical issues like unique characteristics of the hazardous wastes reflecting on waste–waste and waste–technology compatibility. A utility function approach is presented to integrate both cost and risk related objectives. An illustrative case example is presented to demonstrate the usefulness of the improved formulation as a tool which can be used by environmental planning agencies in regional planning for hazardous waste management.     

Defining a successful superfund clean-up: A community representative's perspective

The successful use of the Superfund program involves developing partnerships with all of the stakeholders early in the process. Citizens living near Superfund sites are the primary stakeholders, falling victim to many health risks and economic costs. When equipped with technical advisors, citizens can play a primary role in the remediation decisions being made at hazardous waste sites. This article illustrates the important role and impact of concerned citizens living near the Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Superfund site in Saratoga Springs, New York. The Superfund program was used successfully at this site in a number of ways, mainly in that it provided technical advisors through a technical assistance grant (TAG) for the citizens, which resulted in a thorough and conclusive remedial investigation.     

Institutional controls for future land use at active installation restoration program (IRP) sites

One of the strategies now in vogue in hazardous waste cleanup is basing remedial strategies on future land use. The initial thrust of CERCLA for permanent and complete remedies has given way, pushed by concepts like “brownfields” and base closure and reuse, to strategies often based on “institutional controls” that attempt to stabilize future land uses at a site based on residual risk. The heart of this concept is that instead of removing all wastes from a site, some wastes can safely remain so long as in the future the site is not used in such a way that the residual contamination poses an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment. “Institutional controls” is a term for land use management strategies that do not rely on engineering approaches to reduce risk, but rather seek to ensure that the site is not used in an inappropriate way in the future. This article cautions that such a strategy has inherent residual risks that must be understood by those involved in implementing hazardous waste cleanups and those responsible for future uses of contaminated property. Simply put, institutional controls are only as good as the processes that are in place to ensure they are respected in the future. This presents particular problems for active duty installations because most of the protections commonly available to private sector sites are not useful at active installations. This article discusses an initiative by the Air Combat Command to develop a handbook on instituting and maintaining land restrictions. It will also discuss that effort in light of the April 21 EPA Region IV guidance on assuring Land Use Controls at Federal Facilities. This article is based on a paper and presentations given at the 1998 ACC Environmental Training Symposium.     

New paradigms for hazardous waste engineering

Today's hazardous waste engineering practice is based on the premise that the current technologies for conducting hazardous waste remediation are sufficient to solve most problems. The premise is false: Except for simple sites, the current practice cannot deliver answers with the required accuracy and precision. This article describes the huge uncertainties present in complex hazardous waste remediation efforts. It also discusses the “observational” method, which originated in the geotechnical engineering field, as a means of coping with these uncertainties during site characterization and remediation. The article includes case-study examples illustrating the use of the observational method at hazardous waste sites.     

Approaches for assessing hazards and risks to workers and the public from contaminated land

Many public agencies and private entities are faced with assessing the risks to humans from contamination on their lands. The United States Department of Energy (US DOE) and Department of Defense are responsible for large holdings of contaminated land and face a long‐term and costly challenge to assure sustainable protectiveness. With increasing interest in the conversion of brownfields to productive uses, many former industrial properties must also be assessed to determine compatible future land uses. In the United States, many cleanup plans or actions are based on the Comprehensive Environmental Responsibility, Compensation, and Liability Act, which provides important but incomplete coverage of these issues, although many applications have tried to involve stakeholders at multiple steps. Where there is the potential for exposure to workers, the public, and the environment from either cleanup or leaving residual contamination in place, there is a need for a more comprehensive approach to evaluate and balance the present and future risk(s) from existing contamination, from remediation actions, as well as from postremediation residual contamination. This article focuses on the US DOE, the agency with the largest hazardous waste remediation task in the world. Presented is a framework extending from preliminary assessment, risk assessment and balancing, epidemiology, monitoring, communication, and stakeholder involvement useful for assessing risk to workers and site neighbors. Provided are examples of those who eat fish, meat, or fruit from contaminated habitats. The US DOE's contaminated sites are unique in a number of ways: (1) huge physical footprint size, (2) types of waste (mixed radiation/chemical), and (3) quantities of waste. Proposed future land uses provide goals for remediation, but since some contamination is of a type or magnitude that cannot be cleaned up with existing technology, this in turn constrains future land use options, requiring an iterative approach. The risk approaches must fit a range of future land uses and end‐states from leave‐in‐place to complete cleanup. This will include not only traditional risk methodologies, but also the assessment and surveillance necessary for stewards for long‐term monitoring of risk from historic and future exposure to maintain sustainable protectiveness. Because of the distinctiveness of DOE sites, application of the methodologies developed here to other waste site situations requires site‐specific evaluation © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Improving decision quality: Making the case for adopting next‐generation site characterization practices

Better site characterization is critical for cheaper, faster, and more effective cleanup. This fact is especially true as cleanup decisions increasingly include site redevelopment and reuse considerations. However, established attitudes about what constitutes “data quality” create many barriers to exciting new tools capable of achieving better characterization, slowing their dissemination into the mainstream. Traditional approaches to environmental “data quality” rest on simplifying assumptions that are rarely acknowledged by the environmental community. Data quality assessments focus on the quality of the analysis, while seldom asking what impact matrix heterogeneity has had on analytical results. Assessments of data quality typically assume that chemical contaminants are distributed nearly homogeneously throughout environmental matrices and that contaminant‐matrix interactions are well behaved during analysis. Yet, these assumptions seldom hold true for real‐world matrices and contaminants at scales relevant to accurate risk assessment and efficient remedial design. For the site cleanup industry to continue technical advancement, over‐simplified paradigms must give way to next‐generation models that are built on current scientific understanding. If reuse programs such as Brownfields are to thrive, the scientific defensibility of individual projects must be maintained at the same time as characterization and cleanup costs are lowered. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) offers the Triad Approach as an alternative paradigm to foster highly defensible, yet extremely cost‐effective reuse decisions. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Rocky Flats,plutonium, and controversy: Citizen activists provide institutional memory

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) selected Rocky Flats, east of the Rocky Mountains, as the site to fabricate “plutonium pits,” triggers for H‐bombs, and operations began in 1952. Press reports revealed the plant's connection to atomic weapons in 1956. Denver is downwind and “downslope” by about 16 miles. As western suburbs moved closer to Rocky Flats over time, plant accidents sent plutonium and other contaminants offsite. In 1989, armed agents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the facility, and the plant operator, Rockwell International, subsequently pleaded guilty to criminal environmental violations. By this time, the U.S. Department of Energy had inherited responsibility for Rocky Flats and atomic weapons production. In 1993, the primary mission at Rocky Flats became cleanup of contamination from plutonium and other hazardous substances. Under Energy's “Accelerated Cleanup” plan, remediation was certified complete in 2005 by the Department's cleanup regulators, EPA, and the Colorado Department of Public Health. But planned uses for the “buffer zone” around the facility's central industrial area, and for off‐site areas continued to generate public controversy. This article examines the controversy and reports on general “stewardship” concepts for long‐term waste management.     

The active role of state laws in superfund cleanups

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) did not ignore the fifty individual states when establishing responsibility, authority, and liability for cleaning up hazardous waste sites. Although CERCLA gives EPA the ultimate authority to select a remedy for a contaminated site, the law was drafted not only to allow for state activity without EPA, but also for significant state input when EPA is involved. The relationship between a state (and its environmental laws) and EPA can help decide the remedial and financial interests of any potentially responsible party (PRP). This article discusses the relevant CERCLA provisions, recent court decisions, and resolved and unresolved issues in federal-state Superfund involvement, and recommends several common-sense strategies for PRPs when working with a state in a Superfund cleanup.     

Hazardous industrial waste management in Vietnam: current status and future direction

This article concentrates on the existing situation of hazardous industrial waste management in Vietnam. To realize the importance of the development of a Vietnam national strategy based on the reduce, reuse, recycle (3R) concept to the year 2020, the author summarizes the practice of recycling activities of hazardous industrial waste and discusses the challenges arising from increases in the quantity and types of waste and the level of hazard of the waste generated considering that the technical infrastructure for handling and managing the waste is inadequate and the legal system on environmental protection is lacking. In order to improve the existing situation of hazardous industrial waste management, the Vietnamese Government recently has played an increasing role in promoting regional and international cooperation on environmental protection through ratifying the international conventions on the environment including the Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Waste and their Disposal and the International Labor Organization Convention on Safety in the Use of Chemicals at Work and by adhering to the concept of the material-cycle society. These steps are key opportunities for applying the principles of 3R to the recovery of value from hazardous waste in the future.