Legislation land pollution

As indicated above, national policies and international conventions have been invoked to curb known, and usually obvious, sources of marine pollution. National legislation is used to control coastal discharges of contaminants. A major problem remains owing to the inadequate treatment of sewage prior to emission from land-based sources. The most important deleterious effects in this case are with respect to microbial water quality. This can have a direct influence on bathing criteria and result in beach closures during contamination episodes. An additional problem from land-based sources pertains to transboundary effects, whereby pollution may inadvertently be exported from one country to another. 

Pollution prevention is, simply, reduction or elimination of discharges or emissions to the environment. The limits of pollutants emitted to the atmosphere, the land, and water are defined by various pieces of legislation that have been put into place over the past four decades (Chapter 5) (Speight, 1996 Woodside, 1999). This includes all pollutants, such as hazardous and nonhazardous wastes and regulated and unregulated chemicals from all sources. 

In sum, the 1970s saw a flurry of legislative action on environmental issues that was to set the framework of the nation s policies for dealing with the pollution of air, water, and land resources. Almost all of this legislation has been modified, hut the guiding principles represented by the laws continue to influence the nation s environmental policies today. 

Regulation is an important factor in shaping trends in this area. In the developed world Clean Water Acts define the water requirements, and legislation such as the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) in the USA and Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) in Europe ensures that contaminated land is reclaimed, and encourages companies to make use of licensed waste disposal sites. The practice of deep-well disposal is also less widely spread. 

The challenge of managing contaminated land is not a new one. It has been recognised by governments internationally for at least thirty years and is closely associated, technically and legislatively with the issues of waste and hazardous waste disposal, the regeneration of derelict land, groundwater pollution and... 

Assessing the extent of the problem has been hampered historically by a lack of clarity over definitions. New legislation will help clarify the extent of land that is so contaminated that it poses a risk of significant harm to human health or the pollution of controlled waters. 

The particular role of the Part IIA system is to ensure that land is suitable for use in the context of its current use and setting. Previous statutory regimes have been in place for similar purposes—most noticeably and recently, the anti-pollution works provisions in the Water Resources Act 19914 and the statutory nuisance system in the Environmental Protection Act 1990.5 But following a policy review in 1993 and 1994,6 the then Government considered that a modern, specific contaminated land power was needed,7 and legislated accordingly in the Environment Act 1995. 

Such uncertainties relating to exposure have been acknowledged in the recently introduced contaminated land legislation (see chapter by Lowe and Lowe) which describes the need for a pollutant linkage to be identified before land can be considered contaminated. In any investigation of the potential health effects of contaminated land, it is important that viable pollutant linkages are, at least, identified and, if possible, quantified to some extent. Even where an excess of disease may exist, if a specific hazardous exposure cannot be identified then no link can be made. 

The essence of the regime is that land should be fit for purpose and that substances in, on or under land should not threaten human health or environmental resources such as groundwater and ecosystems. As a result, chemical pollutants on a site are only to be regarded as an issue if they are capable of causing harm to human health or the environment, or if they have already done so. The actual wording of the legislation states that land needs to be remediated if it ... 

Having reviewed the key characteristics of major pollutants in the different compartments of the environment, it is appropriate to consider the options available for the control and for minimization of releases. Within this context, there is a need to consider waste management practices, as often the removal of a potential contaminant from the discharge, will provide a localized concentration of the material, which if not valuable for recycling, will have to be disposed of in another manner. Historically, discharges to air, water or land have only been subject to legislative control in the U.K. since the late 19th century". ... 

---