Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Potentially responsible parties

Some sites are easy to elassify due to their inehision on the National Priorities List (NPL), state superfund, or other regulatory list. In other eases, debate ean and does arise to determine if a site should be treated as hazardous. Eor example, some sites eommonly referred to as brown fields have eontamination levels that are eonsidered low. Sometimes levels of eontamination are so low that exposure levels to workers do not reaeh aetion levels or permissible exposure levels (PEL). Some firms have ehosen to treat low-level eontaminated sites as if they fell under HAZWOPER requirements. This is a somewhat eonservative approaeh whieh provides a eomfort faetor for management and potentially responsible parties (PRP) or other entities. [Pg.5]

Site C s SSAHP elearly stated that safety and health requirements deseribed in the plan apply only to the employees of the prime eontrae-tor and subeontraetor, and to visitors under the direet eontrol of the eontraetor. As a result, the SSAHP did not eover other individuals on site sueh as EPA personnel state and loeal government personnel or employees, representatives, or eontraetors of the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP). [Pg.187]

Following the implementation of the remedy, the state or the potentially responsible party (PRP) assumes responsibility for the operation and maintenance (O M) of the site, which may include activities such as groundwater pump and treat, and cap maintenance. Once U.S. EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions have been taken and cleanup goals have been achieved, the site is deleted from the NPL through a formal rulemaking process. [Pg.469]

Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) An individual or company identified by EPA as potentially liable under CERCLA for cleanup costs at a hazardous waste site. PRPs may include generators of hazardous substances, present or former owners of hazardous substances that have been disposed, site property owners, and transporters of hazardous materials to the site. [Pg.328]

The central purpose of CERCLA is to provide a response mechanism for cleanup of any hazardous substance released, such as an accidental spill, or of a threatened release of a hazardous substance (Nordin et al., 1995). Section 102 of CERCLA is a catchall provision because it requires regulations to establish that quantity of any hazardous substance the release of which shall be reported pursuant to Section 103 of CERCLA. Thus, under CERCLA, the list of potentially responsible parties (PRPs) can include all direct and indirect culpable parties who have either released a hazardous substance or violated any statutory provision. In addition, responsible private parties are liable for cleanup actions and/or costs as... [Pg.142]

Another major concern is being named as a potentially responsible party (PRP) in a lawsuit to clean up a disposal site. Many generators have paid disposal fees to service companies to legally dispose of their hazardous wastes only to be sued by the Federal EPA. The San Francisco Examiner reported on 12-1-88 that "100 companies to pay 66,000,000 at 190 acre dump operated by Industries, Inc. located in Monterey Park, 10 miles from Los Angeles."... [Pg.261]

The USEPA has estimated that the market value for remediation of non-federal facilities is 6.7 billion (1996 dollars). This estimated cost does not include costs for site assessment and studies, design, operation and maintenance, long-term responses, site management, administrative cost, other agency support, oversight of potentially responsible parties (PRPs), and enforcement activities. The estimate was based on the assumption that PRPs will be responsible for at least 70% of the cost. [Pg.87]

The role of Federal and other public funding streams for brownfields redevelopment cannot be underestimated. In an evaluation of 107 brownfield projects nationwide, the International Economic Development Council determined that on average, 68% of the funding for brownfield remediation was derived solely from public sources, 22% came from private sector funds, and 10% were remediated using both public and private sector funds. Potentially responsible parties (PRPs) provided limited support for remediation in comparison to public sources (XL International and International Economic Development Council, 2002). It is clear that Federal and state funds have dramatically improved the abilities of communities to get sites evaluated, which has contributed gready to site remediation and redevelopment. [Pg.341]

EPA assigns responsibility by looking at all potentially responsible parties (PRPs), including current owners/operators, previous owners/opera-tors, facilities that generated the waste and transporters that delivered the waste. [Pg.655]

Reviews of Risk Assessment Generated by Others. In many cases, it will be important for EPA and state staff to review risk assessments generated by third parties (e.g., contractors or potentially responsible parties). Risk Assistant facilitates such reviews, by providing... [Pg.195]

This database contains information about potentially responsible parties (PRPs) at Superfund sites. Subfiles are available by EPA Region. [Pg.209]

Finally, if a level of 2,3,7,8-TCDD contamination requiring a cleanup response (i.e., >1 ppb) was identified, potentially responsible parties (PRPs) were encouraged to take appropriate response action. If necessary, response activities were performed under Superfund. [Pg.37]

Potentially responsible party (PRP) Any individual or company—including owners, operators, transporters or generators—potentially responsible for, or contributing to, the contamination problems at a Superfund site. Whenever possible, EPA requires PRPs, through administrative and legal actions, to clean up sites they have contaminated. [Pg.596]

As clarification of SARA Title III and CERCLA relationships, the following is provided. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is designed to help clean up inactive hazardous waste sites. It also requires industries to disclose to their communities what hazardous substances they use and store. CERCLA authorized EPA to remediate polluted sites and created the Superfund to pay for site cleanups when there is no clear-cut responsible party. EPA can pursue potentially responsible parties to make them pay for response and remediation activities. Section 313 of the Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (SARA Title III) requires EPA to establish an inventory of routine toxic... [Pg.294]

The party is included in at least one class of potentially responsible parties as defined in Section 107 of CERCLA (listed below). [Pg.539]

Serving notice to potentially responsible parties that EPA may initiate a CERCLA-financed cleanup. [Pg.540]

I960 Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation and Liability Act (the Superfund ). Extended liability for hazardous-waste disposal to include past disposal activities. The Act authorised federal contributions to cleanup costs at abandoned sites more controversially, it retroactively imposed strict and joint and several liability for clean-up costs on potentially responsible parties (PRPs), however environmentally-sound original disposal practices and irrespective of each parties contribution to wastes disposed at a given site. [Pg.256]


See other pages where Potentially responsible parties is mentioned: [Pg.806]    [Pg.823]    [Pg.80]    [Pg.279]    [Pg.23]    [Pg.477]    [Pg.598]    [Pg.662]    [Pg.10]    [Pg.80]    [Pg.806]    [Pg.823]    [Pg.33]    [Pg.475]    [Pg.36]    [Pg.12]    [Pg.594]    [Pg.437]    [Pg.323]    [Pg.538]    [Pg.539]    [Pg.284]    [Pg.233]    [Pg.291]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.469 , Pg.598 ]




SEARCH



PARTI

Party

Response potential

Responsible parties

© 2024 chempedia.info