Pollution liabilities

Liability reduction. Facilities are responsible for their wastes from cradle-to-grave. By eliminating or reducing waste generation, future liabilities can also be decreased. Additionally, the need for expensive pollution liability insurance requirements may be abated. 

It must be appreciated that contaminated land sites can exhibit pollution liabilities of two basic forms. There can be liabilities arising from pollution to people and property off site—so called third party liabilities—and also liabilities relating to pollution of the site itself and the consequential need to clean up the site. The second liability may, and in some cases is likely to, lead to damage to people or property off site. 

Brussels Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage (1971) and parallel financial structures, such as TOVALOP (Tankers Owners Voluntary Agreement Concerning Liability for Oil Pollution), CHRISTAL (Contract Regarding Interim Supplement to Tanker Liability for Oil Pollution), and OPOL (The Offshore Pollution Liability Agreement). 

Other Titles - The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 continue the federal acid rain research program and contain several provisions relating to research, development and air monitoring. They also contain provisions to provide additional unemployment benefits through the Job Training Partnership Act to workers laid off as a consequence of compliance with the Clean Air Act. The Act also contains provisions to improve visibility near National Parks and other parts of the country. Strict enforcement of the Clean Air Act Amendments is the driving force behind pollution abatement. Non-compliance is simply not an option, since there are both financial and criminal liabilities that outweigh any benefits derived from a business. 

There are a variety of chemicals that are toxic and used in the drilling fluid makeup. Chromates and asbestos were once commonly used and are now off the market. A mud inventory should be kept for all drilling additives. Included in the inventory are the material safety data sheets (MSDS) that describe each material s pertinent characteristics. The chemicals found on the MSDS sheet should be compared with the priority pollutants and any material should be eliminated if a match is found. The chemicals should also be checked on arrival for breakage and returned to the vendor if defective packaging is found. All mud additives should be housed in a dry area and properly cared for to prevent waste. Chemicals should always be mixed in packaged proportions. Wasted chemicals, ejected to the reserve pit by untrained personnel, can present future liabilities to the operator. 

Significant opportunities exist for industry to reduce or prevent pollution through cost-effective changes in production, operation, and raw materials use. In addition, such changes may offer industry substantial savings in reduced raw materials, pollution control, and liability costs, as well as protect the environment and reduce health and safety risks to workers. Where pollution prevention practices can be both environmentally beneficial and economically feasible, one would consider their implementation to be prudent. 

If the program continues and additional reductions are desired, more expensive and more complex projects begin to emerge (Phase II). These are often associated with equipment modifications, process modifications and process control and may include the addition or adaptation of auxiliary equipment for simple source treatment, possibly for recycle. This phase usually has little immediate ROI, and more inclusive approaches to assessing the economics of the operation (estimating costs for waste handling, long-term liability, risk) are needed to justify the continued pollution-prevention operation. 

It is not currently feasible to achieve a zero discharge of chemical pollutants from metal finishing operations. However, substantial reductions in the type and volume of hazardous chemicals wasted from most metal finishing operations are possible.8 Because end-of-pipe waste detoxification is costly for small- and medium-sized metal finishers, and the cost and liability of residuals disposal have increased for all metal finishers, management and production personnel may be more willing to consider production process modifications to reduce the amount of chemicals lost to waste. 

Personnel. More than any other area, we are often asked "How many people has your corporation added due to TSCA " I don t know of anyone who has a concise answer to this question. Complicating the situation is the fact that the 1960 s and 1970 s saw a number of environmental and health laws go into effect the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Federal Water Pollution Control Act, TSCA, Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, to mention the major ones. This mixture of acts, with some similarities of purpose, developing within a time span of 10-15 years, has made a variety of similar demands. It is not easy at this point to attribute the addition of staff support personnel to an individual law such as TSCA. The same observation is applicable to all corporate resources which have felt the effects of TSCA however, in order to... 

A CERCLA response or liability will be triggered by an actual release or the threat of a hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant being released into the environment. A hazardous substance [CERCLA 101(14)] is any substance requiring special consideration due to its toxic nature under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and as defined under the RCRA. Additionally [CERCLA 101(33)], a pollutant or contaminant can be any other substance not necessarily designated or listed that will or may reasonably be anticipated to cause any adverse effect in organisms and/or their offspring. 

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 created a program known as Superfund, designed to clean up hazardous waste sites as well as accidents, spills, and other releases of pollutants into the environment. 

State courts continue to hold insurance firms liable for environmental damages under general corporate liability policies even when policy language specifically denies pollution coverage (Quint 1994). 

The other is to help victims of air pollution-related health damage by providing a liability regime health damage caused by air pollution from business activities. 

European law does not state anything concerning liability in the case of harm or damage by air pollution, whereas specific sections are dedicated to this question in Japanese law. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This is an attempt to deal with the many waste sites that exist across the nation. It covers remedial action, including the establishment of a National Priorities List to identify those sites that should have a high priority for remediation. This act authorizes the cleanup of hazardous waste sites, including those containing pesticides, that threaten human health or the environment. If they can be identified, the US EPA is authorized to recover cleanup costs from those parties responsible for the contamination. CERCLA provides a fund to pay for the cleanup of contaminated sites when no other parties are able to conduct the cleanup. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (1986) is an amendment to CERCLA that enables the US EPA to identify and cleanup inactive hazardous waste sites and to recover reimbursement of cleanup costs. One section of CERCLA authorizes the EPA to act whenever there is a release or substantial threat of release of a hazardous substance or any pollutant or contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to the public health or welfare into the environment. 

---