Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Hazardous Chemicals and Hazardous Waste. 1970: Clean Air Act, OSHAct 1972-3: Clean Water Act, ESA 1976: TSCA, FIFRA, RCRA , HMTA 1980: Superfund 1984: HSWA 1986: SARA. Love Canal, Times Beach.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
1970: Clean Air Act, OSHAct
1972-3: Clean Water Act, ESA
1976: TSCA, FIFRA, RCRA, HMTA
Love Canal, Times Beach
Burford apptmt; Congressional hearings on haz waste programs; indictments; Ruckleshaus apptmt.
Bhopal, “Dumping in Dixie”
What is the source of EPA’s dispute with the AMC?
1. Whether materials destined for on-site recycling are hazardous wastes under RCRA. EPA wanted to assert jurisdiction over materials destined for recylcing (that is, to regulate recycling).
What is the alleged legal defect in EPA’s rule on recycling?
To be a hazardous waste, it must first be a solid waste.
Statutory definition: The term \'\'solid waste\'\' means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material …
What is “discarded material”?
Regulatory definition: any material which is abandoned, recycled, considered inherently waste-like …
Dictionary definition of “discarded”: abandoned, disposed of, thrown away …
Why not use the dictionary definition, according to EPA?
Should the court defer to EPA’s interpretation of this statutory term (solid waste)?
Listed wastes only
MSW INCINERATOR (a/k/a “RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY)
Electricity for sale
Incinerator Ash Landfill
Air pollution (stack)
Does household waste contain hazardous wastes?
What is the household hazardous waste exemption?
“[A] facility shall not be deemed to be … managing hazardous wastes … if such facility receives and burns only … household waste and nonhazardous industrial waste.”
So if Chicago’s MSW incinerator is not a TSD, what is this litigation about? Why does Chicago care about this issue?
If incinerator burning HHW is not a TSD, how can it ever be a generator of hazardous waste?
If the statute is silent on this issue, is the resolution of this issue up to EPA? Or is the Court engaging in a definitive interpretation of the statute irrespective of EPA’s opinion?
What do Stevens/O’Connor say is the purpose and meaning of the 1984 clarification?
What should owners of MSW incinerators do in the wake of this decision?
“Treatment” means any method, technique, or process, including neutralization, designed to change the physical, chemical, or biological character or composition of any hazardous waste so as to neutralize such waste, or so as to recover energy or material resources from the waste, or so as to render such waste non-hazardous, or less hazardous; safer to transport, store, or dispose of; or amenable for recovery, amenable for storage, or reduced in volume.
Statement in Federal Register (preamble to rule) + Letter to Wisconsin Co. “ruling” that generators may treat HW in containers for no more than 90 days without triggering TSD status.