Superfund Site Essay

Although drinking water is not yet known to have been affected, the groundwater was contaminated with volatile organic compounds and heavy metals (5). Both of these types of contaminants have been linked with one or several of the following: cancer, liver, kidney, and nervous system problems (4). In July 1979, the State Court required that all material be removed from the site by July 1980 (5). The state has spent over $300,000 cleaning this site (5). According to EPA standards, this site is in the "construction completed" stage of clean up. This does not mean, however that actual cleanup is complete because groundwater may need to be treated more than 30 years before contaminants are at accepted levels (5).

(i) Under IFRSs, Energy should recognize a provision for the cleanup costs in its 20x1. IAS 37-14 states a provision shall be recognized if “(a) an entity has a present obligation, (b) it is probable that an

The paper provides vital information on the implementation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and how the act has served as the hallmark for hazardous waste management in the United States. Created in the late 1970s, the RCRA has provided generators of hazardous with policy guidelines and how these processes are implemented to protect public health. As an article review, this paper will address the implementation and the challenges associated with the RCRA and how the Act continues to experienced tremendous changes since its foundation. The paper will also examine the RCRA contingency plan that seeks to address and minimize public health hazards in the environment.

I searched high and low to find a social situation that is important not only to my family but to my community. Areas like politics, and religion are a large aspect of my family but I decided to go in a different direction and speak on behalf of the environmental issues that plague my community, but one federal program in particular; the superfund program. In this essay I will present

The first agreement, in 1995, was successfully accomplished at a cost of nearly $3 billion. Due to their achievement on the first contract, they were picked up for the second phase which started in 2000 and they were supposed to close the project by the end of 2006 within a budget of nearly $4 billion. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) anticipated at the beginning that the project would require $36 billion and almost 70 years to be completed; however, the cleanup was finished with a total cost of about $8 billion. The project was named the PMI’s Project of the year in 2006 and received many other awards such as “Project Merit Award from the Environmental Business Journal in 2005” (Hunsberger, 2007). This project was considered a very successful one since it was finished almost half a billion under budget and more than a year earlier than the promised schedule on October 2005. There are a large number of lessons learned that could help every project specifically contamination cleanup projects. All the very on time planning and scheduling, well defined project scope, correct budget planning, and many others have helped this project to be an example project. In the following report we will explore thirteen lessons learned from the closure project (the second phase

Additionally, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a response update to assess potential impacts to human and aquatic life (2014). The method the EPA employed was to analyze surface water and sediments for contaminants and compare those results to its screening levels. To assess impact to human health, the EPA compared the sediment data to health risk screening levels and compared drinking water samples to Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as well as to other indicators. Overall, the EPA found those levels found in sediment data and water samples to not exceed human health screening levels and thus determined that there wasn’t significant risk to human health, although the EPA did recommend that people do not come in direct contact with coal ash as it could still pose health risks. These findings were consistent with that of Dr. Shea.

Each of these steps includes an element of site characterization and the potential for future use. These steps include: Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection (PA/SI) which investigates the site conditions, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) which determines the nature and extent of the contamination, Record of Decision (ROD) which explains the cleanup technologies that will be used at the site, Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) which is the final step in preparation for the implementation of site remedies, and then post cleanup activities, such as the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) which is conducted for many years after the site is remediated to ensure that the remedy remains effective. (EPA 2000)

The land is relatively flat with only a few dilapidated structures and trees that will require removal. Off-site disposal of all demolished items and other construction debris resulting from activity related to the work shall be the responsibility of Contractor. Contractor shall take care to minimize any disturbance within the community while performing the work, and upon completion of the work shall ensure that the job site is clean and orderly.

The purpose of CERCLA would not be eviscerated if the EPA is forced to litigate each detail of its removal and remedial plans before implementing them. The EPA could still implement removal and remedial plans with the landowners’ compliance so that the hazardous waste could be properly taken care of. The responsibility for the cleanup should be on the land owners and not the taxpayers, but a new process needs to be established. For example, it would be great if the EPA and the landowner worked together to pursue a cleanup strategy, whereby the landowner would be able to pick the way it will be performed to keep the costs as low as possible with the EPA approving the type of clean-up that needs to be performed to ensure that it will be performed adequately so that all of the hazardous waste will be removed efficiently.

"Suitable and sufficient" assessment includes determining the hazardous substances that are to be encountered, assessing the risks they present to health, calculating the quantity the duration and how frequently the substances are used, how hazardous they are and what the exposure routes and finally deciding on the action needed to prevent exposure or to reduce it as far as is reasonably practicable. This will also include the actions to be taken in an Emergency, to clear up any spills and to safely dispose of any residues. Except for the most trivial cases, the conclusions of this assessment must be recorded, made readily accessible and reviewed regularly.

Enacted in 1972, the Clean Water Act was formulated with the goals of putting the end to the discharging of high quantities of contaminated materials into water resources, and further prevent pollution of water , and making sure that surface waters met the standards needed to support human and agricultural usage. Essentially, the Clean Water Act stipulates the fundamental structure used in the regulation of discharges of toxic pollutants into water resources of the US and ensuring conformance of quality standards for groundwater (Environmental Protection Agency). The Clean Water Act was draws based on the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948, which was later developed and revised in 1972 to the Clean Water Act. Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is authorized to implement programs to control pollution example being the establishment of standards for wastewater discharge for various industries. In addition, the CWA establishes the water quality standards applicable to all groundwater contaminants. The Clean Water Act makes it illegal to unload any contaminant material from a point source into navigable water bodies without acquiring permit from EPA. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program, under the EPA, helps in controlling discharges (Environmental Protection

Hazardous waste and its proper disposal have become a major sociological problem today due to its capability of contaminating the area in which we live and its potential to be lethal to all living things. In order for the United States and the rest of the world to save itself from a potentially life threatening problem they must fix the causes which lead to the improper disposal of hazardous wastes and like materials. Some reasons that hazardous waste has become a problem in the United States today is due to the breakdown in enforcing laws for the proper disposal of such wastes, a lack of initiative on big companies behalf to spend money on proper disposal, and the ease of disposing of such wastes illegally.

Dirty energy production in the United States has disastrous environmental impacts thanks to a broken regulatory system. Environmental devastation from coal extraction is unmatched. The most popular form of coal mining is mountaintop removal mining, a form of surface mining which removes mountaintops to reach coal. The popularity of mountaintop removal mining is due to the cost-effectiveness of the process; unfortunately, the only one saving on costs is the miners, and at the expense of the environment. Deforestation; harm in aquatic communities; accelerated sediment and nutrient transport; increased algal production, as well as possible human health impacts from poorly regulated remediation requirements by SMCRA, results in gross environmental degradation. This essay proposes an amendment to section 515 (the approximate original contour requirement) of SMCRA; restoration should require the reclaimed area to have the same environmental utility it had prior to the mining operation.

GHD Services Inc. (GHD) prepared the Draft Feasibility Study (FS) Work Plan on behalf of the potentially responsible party (PRP), Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. (Clean Harbors), at the Devil’s Swamp Lake (DSL) Superfund Site (Site), located in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana. Clean Harbors submitted the document to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on 1 March 2016.

Pollution is the introduction of harmful substances or products into the environment. It is a major problem in America and as well as the world. Pollution not only damages the environment, but damages us also. It has cause many problems ranging from lung cancer to the greenhouse effect. It is all among us but we continue to live in our own filth. What is the reason behind this flawed logic? In this paper I will examine the problems and solutions for this issue.