Hazard ranking system

TTie U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) (1) to determine priorities among releases, or threatened releases, from remediation sites. The HRS applies the appropriate consideration of each of the following site-specific characteristics of such facilities ... 

Federal Register, Part II, Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR Part 300, Hazard Ranking System Final Rule, Vol. 55, No. 241, December 14, 1990. 

The EPA Hazardous Ranking System computes a numerical score for hazardous waste. If the score exceeds a predetermined value, the waste site is placed on the National Priority List (NPL) for Superfund cleanup. Discuss the pros and cons of such a ranking system. Describe a possible situation in which an air contaminant is controlled but the control system used transfers the contaminant problem to another medium, such as water or soil. 

WATERS, R.D., CRUTCHER, M.D. and PARKER, F.L. (1993). Hazard ranking systems for chemical wastes and chemical waste sites, pages 115 to 170 in Hazard Assessment of Chemicals,Volume 8, Saxena, J., Ed. (Academic Press, New York). 

CERCLA was passed in 1980 to provide a federally supervised system for the mitigation of chronic environmental damage, particularly the cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous waste. In 1986, CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). Each Superfund site has been assessed, characterized, and prioritized based on risk. Potential sites are first screened using a preliminary assessment (PA) sites deemed a significant threat are then evaluated using a hazard ranking system (HRS) to measure the risk of the site relative to that of other potential sites. The most hazardous sites are then placed on the NPL in the order of their potential risk. 

The legislation was amended on October 17, 1986 with the enactment of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA). One of the changes in SARA was to increase the fund from 1.6 to 8.5 billion, and SARA required the EPA to make changes to the Hazard Ranking System to more accurately note the level of danger of sites to be placed on the National Priorities List (NPL). In addition, the NPL must be revised and republished every 2 years, and informally reviewed annually. The term Superfund is derived from the fund of money that is collected by EPA to investigate sites and to... 

A spill hazard ranking system for toxic chemicals has been proposed based upon the derived equation (3.15) ... 

U.S. EPA (2004a). Hazard Ranking System Hazardous Substance Benchmarks. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Analysis of Alternatives to the Superfund Hazard Ranking System Prepared by Industrial Economics, Incorporated, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1988. 

The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) provides guidelines to improve Superfund enforcement methods and criteria. SARA also refines the Hazardous Rankings System, and by OSTRI prioritizes remediation activities. Rules and regulations under the Superfund and its SARA amendment are accessible at http //www.epa.gov/superfund/action/index.htm. 

Hazardous Ranking System (HRS) The principal screening tool used by EPA to evaluate risks to public health and environment associated with abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The HRS calculates a score based on the potential for hazardous substances spreading from the site through the air, surface water, or groundwater and on other factors such as nearby population. This score is the primary factor in deciding if the site should be on the National Priorities List and, if so, what ranking it should have there. 

CERCLA has set up a remedial scheme for analyzing the impact of contamination on sites under a hazard ranking system, from which a list of prioritized disposal and contaminated sites is compiled. This list is known as the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL identifies the worst sites in the nation, based on such factors as the quantities and toxicity of wastes involved, the exposure pathways, the number of people potentially exposed, and the importance and vulnerability of the imderlying groundwater. 

---