Environmentally Acceptable Endpoints

The Scientific Approach to Clean-up Levels
  • Hon Don Ritter
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 54)


The following question has baffled many in making environmental decisions: How clean is clean? Decision-makers engaged in answering this question ranged from the White House to the State House to the school house—with Congress in between—and was especially an issue during the reauthorization of Superfund, the Clean Air Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). In the process of answering this question, another question is raised: What will it cost? In other words, how many hundreds of billions of dollars must this nation spend to meet the requirements of these acts? This, in turn, brings about a third question: What government or societal programs will suffer if we spend these huge amounts of money on environmental cleanup? Originally, most of these costs were borne by industry. With the requirement that federal facilities meet the same requirements, billions and billions of dollars of costs are now allocated to the taxpayer. The Department of Energy (DOE) alone had a $6.6 billion dollar remediation budget for 1996. They are forecasting that remediation of their sites will take 30 to 75 years. In times of limited budgets, do these funds come from Social Security, Medicare, education, crime control, or defense? If not, where do the funds come from, when many feel that the citizenry is already overtaxed?


Risk Assessment Soil Removal Reform Bill Federal Facility Acceptable Endpoint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. National Academy of Public Administration, April, 1995. “Setting Priorities, Getting Results: A New Direction for EPA,” 1120 G street, NW, Suite 850, Washington, DC, 20005-3801.Google Scholar
  2. NEPI, Summer 1995. “Reinventing the Vehicle for Environmental Management.” NEPI, 1995. “How Clean is Clean?” September 1995 First Phase Report, National Environmental Policy Institute, 1100 17th NW, Suite 330, Washington, DC 20036.Google Scholar
  3. ASTM, 1994. Emergency Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action Applied at Petroleum Release Sites, ES 38-94, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  4. USDOE, June 1995. “Office of Environmental Management,” Risks and the Risk Debate: Searching for Common Ground.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hon Don Ritter
    • 1
  1. 1.National Environmental Policy InstituteWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations