Fourth, it increased the focus on human health problems posed by hazardous waste sites. Fifth, it encouraged greater citizen participation in making decisions on how sites should be cleaned up. Last and most important, it increased the size of the trust fund to $8.5 billion (EPA). Two other important parts of Superfund are the National Priorities List (NPL) and Construction Completion List (CCL). NPL was amended to the NCP on September 8, 1983. Sites are listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) upon completion of Hazard Ranking System (HRS) screening, public solicitation of comments about the proposed site, and after all comments have been addressed (EPA). CCL was added to Superfund on February 11, 1991. EPA developed a construction completion's list (CCL) to simplify its system of categorizing sites and to better communicate the successful completion of cleanup activities (EPA). Sites qualify when: any necessary physical construction is complete, whether or not final cleanup levels or other requirements have been achieved; EPA has determined that the response action should be limited to measures that do not involve construction; or the site qualifies for deletion from the NPL (EPA). These are the major component of Superfund.
There are many pros and cons to Superfund. A lot of the determining factors depend on which side of the Superfund program one is involved. For the EPA the pros are that it keeps concentrations of dangerous materials low. This program can also be very cost effective because the toxic waste generators pay for the costs. This also brings in some of the cons. Sometimes there is a problem determining who is responsible for the waste. In West Plains, Missouri a small town was charge with having to pay the EPA $26,000 for selling seven electric transformers to Missouri Electric Works in 1950. This town believes this is unfair for several reasons. First, when these transformers were sold there were no waste disposal laws at the time.
