ABSTRACT

This assignment provides a comprehensive analysis of federal policies on toxic and hazardous
substances, focusing on the regulatory frameworks established in the United States for managing
hazardous waste. It explores key legislation such as the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), which are foundational to the federal approach in controlling the generation,
transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. The study delves into
the policy objectives aimed at safeguarding public health and the environment from the risks
posed by toxic substances, while also ensuring the sustainable management of hazardous waste.

In parallel, the assignment critically examines the current hazardous waste management scenario
in Bangladesh, highlighting the economic challenges the country faces in dealing with increasing
volumes of industrial and toxic waste. These challenges include insufficient waste management
infrastructure, inadequate policy implementation, lack of public awareness, and the financial
burden on industries to adopt environmentally sound practices. Additionally, the assignment
discusses the role of economic incentives, regulations, and international cooperation in
improving hazardous waste handling in Bangladesh.

The analysis extends to estimating the social cost curve of hazardous waste, using models that
quantify the long-term societal impacts of improper waste management, including health risks,
environmental degradation, and economic losses. This section outlines approaches to estimating
these costs and discusses potential mitigation strategies. Overall, this assignment aims to provide
a holistic understanding of hazardous waste management policies, their economic implications,
and the importance of aligning policy and economic incentives to minimize the social costs.
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 01: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Background of the Study............................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Federal Policy ..................................................................................................................................... 6

1.2(a) Economic Policy ......................................................................................................................... 6

1.2(b) Environmental Policy ................................................................................................................. 7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 8

2.1 Federal Laws Governing Toxic and Hazardous Substances ............................................................... 8

2.1(a) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) ........ 8

2.1(b) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) ...................................................................................... 8

2.1(c) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) ................................................................... 8

2.2 Key Agencies Involved in Federal Policy ............................................................................................. 8

2.2(a) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) .................................................................................. 8

CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS & METHOD ................................................................................................ 10

3.1 The Management of Hazardous Wastes............................................................................................ 10

3.2 Principles and methods of hazardous waste management ................................................................ 12

3.2(b) Handling of hazardous wastes .................................................................................................. 13

3.2(c) Transport of hazardous waste ................................................................................................... 13

3.3(d) Disposal of hazardous waste .................................................................................................... 13

CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................... 14

4.1 Economic Issues in Handling Current Hazardous Waste in Bangladesh .......................................... 14

4.1(a) High Infrastructure Costs.......................................................................................................... 14

4.1(b) Limited Private Sector Engagement ......................................................................................... 14

4.1(c) Regulatory and Funding Challenges ......................................................................................... 14

4.1(d) Growing Burden of E-Waste and Medical Waste .................................................................... 14

 4.1(e) Informal Waste Sector Issues ................................................................................................... 15

4.1(f) High Compliance Costs for Industries ...................................................................................... 15

4.2 Development of Policy on Hazardous Waste Management in Bangladesh: ..................................... 15

4.3 Development of Rules for Hazardous Waste Management in Bangladesh: ..................................... 16

4.4 Recommendations for Economic Sustainability ............................................................................... 17

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION & REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 20

5.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 20

5.2 References ......................................................................................................................................... 21

List of Figure
Figure I : Hazardous-Waste Quantities Managed in 2011, by Major Technology Used ............................. 10

Figure II : Basic Laws Dealing with Handling, Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous Wastes .. 11

Figure III : Steps involved in hazardous waste disposal. ............................................................................. 12

Figure IV: Social Cost Curve and Market Equilibrium ................................................................................. 19

CHAPTER 01: INTRODUCTION
Sustainable Waste Management has become a longer lasting problem in Bangladesh because of
lack of proper application of management policies available nationally and internationally. At
present the waste management in urban area particularly in Dhaka the problem is being very
challenging and serious. The existing disposal methods are being futile despite the local
Government authority is attempting to ameliorate waste collection systems. The overall system is
creating threat for the city dwellers as the services of City Corporation are not adequate to meet
the expectations [1]. The regulation of toxic and hazardous substances has emerged as a
cornerstone of federal environmental policy in the United States, with the primary objective of
protecting human health and the environment from the dangers posed by these substances. Toxic
chemicals, heavy metals, and hazardous waste can lead to severe environmental degradation and
long-term health risks if not properly managed. In response to these threats, several federal laws
and agencies have been established to mitigate the risks associated with toxic materials. Key
legislation such as the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) have laid the foundation for the regulation and
remediation of hazardous substances. These policies are enforced by federal agencies like the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),[2] which plays a critical role in setting standards,
monitoring compliance, and ensuring safe disposal and cleanup of hazardous waste sites [2].
This assignment will explore the major federal policies governing toxic and hazardous
substances, examine the regulatory frameworks, and discuss the roles of the relevant agencies
involved in enforcing these regulations.

1.1 Background of the Study

The terminology hazardous waste stands for wastes which cause severe health hazard and
environmental perils consisting of liquids, solids and gases. In a nutshell, hazardous waste
contains the four basic characteristics i.e. ignitability, corrosiveness, reactivity or toxicity. Hence,
by analyzing overall circumstances of waste prevalent in a country are mainly divided into three
categories, such as, radioactive wastes, medical wastes and no radioactive industrial liquid waste.
Hazardous wastes are posing threat not only to human health but also to the environment
extremely. As a consequence, the sustainability of the global environment is as stake
undoubtedly. To protect health as well as environment national and international mechanisms are
supposed to be developed where the systems of use, storage, handling, transportation and
disposals are followed as fruitful systems of sustainable waste management. Many countries
especially less developed country like Bangladesh are indifferent enough to the principles of
protection of environment at the time managing hazardous waste. For the environmentally sound
management of waste the purposes and roles of relevant conventions have been explored in this
study so that national systems can meet challenges generated by the hazardous waste that are
conducive to human health and environment protection [1]. Azad (2017b) states that in
Bangladesh some effective master plans are being taken by Dhaka City Corporation with the
assistance from the Japan International Corporation Agency (JICA), such as, social business
enterprise and recycling programs by UNICEF have been commenced to enhance standard of
managing wastes of different relevant sectors particularly industrial and medical waste in both
city corporation and municipalities. More significantly, some potential sources of hazardous
wastes have been found where waste management mechanisms should be accelerated to get rid
of detrimental effects. As Tania (2014) mentioned source of wastes are firstly, commercial
sources: it includes wastes of garments, pharmaceuticals, company, hospital and other industry.
In fact, many chemicals are used in various industries i.e. sulfuric acid, chromium, ammonium
sulfate, ammonium chloride and calcium oxide. Additionally, manufacturers also applied
pesticide and fungicide. Hence, various solid wastes are generated by many metallic and non
metallic industries. Furthermore, medical wastes are produced by pharmaceutical industries, such
as, sharp waste i.e. needles, syringes, scalpel, saw, blades, broken glass, nails etc, infectious
waste i.e. pathological tissues, organs, body parts, blood and blood products, body fluids,
placenta, human excreta, culture materials from laboratories etc, non infectious waste i.e. expired
drugs, waste contaminated with cytotoxic drugs and leftover cytotoxic drugs and radioactive
waste etc, Domestic Waste: This is another remarkable source of waste which includes contain
paper, vegetable peelings , onion seed coat, broken plastic , spider net, soil dust, pieces of thread,
soot, small bottles etc. Hospital and clinic wastes: These include wastes from operation theatres,
laboratories which are kept in municipal bins which estimated 20 percent of hospital wastes
generated in city is detrimental to human health. Finally, Tanning waste is also derived from the
industrial waste that severely damage environmental balance. Additionally, the tannery industries
total in Dhaka city are 149 and those industries generating 18, 000 liters liquid types of wastes
and solid wastes in total 115 tonnes.

1.2 Federal Policy

Federal policy refers to the actions, strategies, and guidelines set by a central government to
regulate various aspects of the nation’s economy, public services, and social programs. In a
federal system like the U.S., policies are implemented across multiple layers of governance, with
national directives often setting frameworks that state and local governments follow or adapt.
Here are key areas federal policies address:

1.2(a) Economic Policy:

Federal economic policies aim to maintain stable growth, control inflation, and reduce
unemployment. This includes fiscal policies (taxation and government spending) and monetary
policies (interest rates and money supply, managed by the Federal Reserve). For example, during
economic crises, the federal government may introduce stimulus packages to boost demand and
employment.
1.2(b) Environmental Policy:

Federal policies also regulate environmental protection. Agencies like the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) implement federal laws, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water
Act, which set nationwide standards for pollution control and resource management. These
policies balance industrial growth with sustainability

Civil Rights and Social Policy : Policies like the Civil Rights Act ensure equality and prevent
discrimination in employment, education, and other sector.

Federal policies often encounter challenges during implementation. One major hurdle is the
division of authority between federal and state governments, which can lead to variations in
enforcement. For example, states may choose to challenge federal directives, as seen in recent
environmental and healthcare cases. Additionally, federal agencies must navigate bureaucratic
constraints and resource limitations, slowing down the rulemaking process. Courts and Congress
also play critical roles in shaping and reviewing policies, ensuring accountability but sometimes
contributing to delays.
 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Federal Laws Governing Toxic and Hazardous Substances

2.1(a) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

(CERCLA)
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, commonly
known as Superfund, was enacted in 1980. Its primary aim is to clean up hazardous waste sites,
and it establishes liability for parties responsible for releasing hazardous substances into the
environment. CERCLA authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take action to
address hazardous waste releases, hold responsible parties accountable, and ensure site
remediation [2].

2.1(b) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 empowers the EPA to regulate the manufacture,
import, and processing of chemicals that pose unreasonable risks to health and the environment.
TSCA requires companies to report chemical information and testing data, and it provides the
EPA with the authority to ban or restrict chemicals that are deemed hazardous.

2.1(c) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act regulates the disposal of hazardous waste.
Enacted in 1976, it governs the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of
hazardous waste, aiming to reduce waste generation and ensure safe disposal methods [2].

2.2 Key Agencies Involved in Federal Policy

2.2(a) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The EPA plays the leading role in enforcing federal laws related to toxic and hazardous
substances. The agency sets standards for pollution control, oversees cleanup efforts under
CERCLA, and regulates chemical substances through TSCA.[3]

2.2(b) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

OSHA is responsible for ensuring workplace safety by regulating the exposure of workers to
hazardous substances. It enforces standards that limit the levels of toxic chemicals in the
workplace and mandates safety procedures.
2.2(c) Department of Transportation (DOT)

The DOT plays a role in regulating the transportation of hazardous materials. It ensures that
hazardous substances are transported safely and in compliance with federal regulations to
prevent accidents or spills during transit [4].
 CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS & METHOD

3.1 The Management of Hazardous Wastes

The control of airborne and waterborne toxic residuals does not address the major issue of the
large quantities of hazardous materials that are left over after production (and recycling) is
completed, and which must then be disposed of. This is the problem of hazardous wastes.
Hazardous waste consists of a diverse set of materials. In liquid form there are waste oils,
solvents, and liquids containing metals, acids, PCBs, and so on. There are hazardous wastes in
solid form, such as metals dust, polyvinyls, and polyethylene materials. There are many
materials between liquid and solid, called sludges, such as sulfur sludge; heavy metal, solvent,
and cyanide sludges; and dye and paint sludges. Then there are a variety of mixed substances
such as pesticides, explosives, lab wastes, and the like. In legal terms, the EPA and various state
environmental agencies have power to define what is considered a hazardous waste; in past years,
the definitional net they have thrown over the full physical list of substances has left out some
significant materials (e.g., waste oil).

Figure I : Hazardous-Waste Quantities Managed in 2011, by Major Technology Used

Hazardous-waste generation is not spread evenly over the United States. The largest quantities of
hazardous waste are produced in Texas, Ohio, California, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey,
Michigan, and Tennessee. At the other end of the scale, Vermont, the Dakotas, Hawaii, Alaska,
Maine, and Nevada produce relatively small amounts of hazardous waste.

Figure II : Basic Laws Dealing with Handling, Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Hazardous
Wastes

Figure 2 shows the results of an EPA survey to find out how hazardous wastes were being
disposed of in 2005. The greatest proportion was disposed of in injection wells, that is, deep
wells driven into underground geologic formations (salt caverns and aquifers). From an industry
standpoint, this method is relatively cheap and flexible. About 10 percent of hazardous waste
generated is subject to some type of recovery (recycling) operation, and about 9 percent is
burned, roughly half of which is done to produce useful heat. Although these numbers do not
show it directly, about 80 percent of all hazardous waste generated in the United States is
disposed of on-site, that is, at the site of the industrial plant where it was manufactured and/or
used. Only 20 percent was transported to off-site disposal facilities. The two major pathways
leading to damage are through accidental releases and releases stemming from improper
handling, either at the site of use or at waste-disposal facilities. Accidents have led to severe and
obvious damages, to humans and to other parts of the ecosystem.11 It has been less easy to
document the damages coming from long-run exposure to small amounts of hazardous wastes.
Ecosystems in the vicinity of industrial waste dumps are sometimes visibly affected. Human
health effects have been harder to show, particularly when what is at issue is long-run exposure
to small quantities of hazardous materials. Much more epidemiological and laboratory work
remains to be done [5].

3.2 Principles and methods of hazardous waste management

3.2(a) Principles

Federal policies play a crucial role in addressing national challenges and ensuring the smooth
functioning of the economy, social services, and public welfare. While they provide a framework
for nationwide consistency, their development and implementation require coordination between
federal, state, and local authorities. Oversight mechanisms ensure transparency, but the
complexity of the process can sometimes result in delays. Effective federal policymaking
depends on balancing efficiency with accountability, ensuring that regulations meet both public
needs and legal standards.[2]

Figure III : Steps involved in hazardous waste disposal.

3.2(b) Handling of hazardous wastes: Persons handling hazardous wastes are advised to have
protective precautions to protect themselves from health effects. Exposure of hazardous waste leads to
dermatitis in the skin, asthma on long exposure, eye irritation and also tightening of the chest.

3.2(c) Transport of hazardous waste: Hazardous waste generated often requires transport to a
particular site for an approved treatment, storage, or disposal facility (TSDF). Because of potential
threats to public safety and the environment, transport is given special attention by governmental
agencies to avoid any occasional accidental spill.

3.3(d) Disposal of hazardous waste: is the final stage of a hazardous waste management system.
The different waste disposal methods includes secure landfill, deep well and bedrock disposal.
 CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION

4.1 Economic Issues in Handling Current Hazardous Waste in Bangladesh

Bangladesh faces a range of economic challenges in managing hazardous waste effectively. The
country’s rapid industrialization, combined with weak infrastructure, inadequate policy
enforcement, and informal waste handling practices, has compounded the economic burden.
Below are the key economic issues associated with hazardous waste management in Bangladesh:

4.1(a) High Infrastructure Costs

One of the biggest economic barriers is the lack of proper waste treatment and disposal
infrastructure. Building specialized hazardous waste treatment plants, such as incinerators and
chemical treatment facilities, requires significant investment. Currently, most industrial and
medical hazardous waste is either improperly treated or dumped into landfills. The government
and industries face financial difficulties in mobilizing the necessary resources to develop
adequate treatment systems.[1]

4.1(b) Limited Private Sector Engagement

Private sector participation in hazardous waste management is limited, partly due to the lack of
financial incentives. Public-private partnerships, which could improve waste management
efficiency, are underdeveloped. Private companies often find the investment in formal waste
disposal methods too costly, preferring to rely on cheaper, informal waste channels that lack
proper environmental safeguards. Moreover, the absence of clear economic incentives, such as
subsidies or tax breaks, discourages private investment.

4.1(c) Regulatory and Funding Challenges

Though Bangladesh has regulations for hazardous waste, such as the Environmental
Conservation Rules (2023) and E-Waste Management Rules, enforcement remains weak.
Regulatory bodies like the Department of Environment (DoE) face financial and human resource
constraints, limiting their ability to monitor and enforce compliance effectively. This lack of
enforcement encourages industries to evade environmental regulations, exacerbating waste
mismanagement.

4.1(d) Growing Burden of E-Waste and Medical Waste

The increase in electronic and medical waste poses another economic challenge. Managing e-
waste requires advanced recycling facilities and systems to extract reusable materials, which can
be costly to establish. Similarly, hazardous medical waste requires strict handling protocols,
including sterilization and incineration, to prevent public health risks. The costs associated with
such specialized waste management practices are often beyond the capacity of many hospitals
and industries, which contributes to improper disposal practices.
4.1(e) Informal Waste Sector Issues
A significant portion of hazardous waste is handled by the informal sector, which operates
without regulation or oversight. Informal recyclers, attracted by low operating costs and quick
profits, often recover valuable materials like metals from e-waste but discard hazardous
components improperly. This creates environmental and health hazards while undermining
formal waste management systems, which lose out on recyclable resources.

4.1(f) High Compliance Costs for Industries

The enforcement of hazardous waste regulations imposes additional financial burdens on
industries. Many companies struggle to meet the costs of compliance, including the proper
collection, storage, and transportation of hazardous waste. As a result, some industries resort to
illegal dumping to avoid these costs. Implementing Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
programs, which would require manufacturers to take responsibility for waste management, also
faces resistance from businesses due to high operational costs.

4.2 Development of Policy on Hazardous Waste Management in Bangladesh:

The rapid increases in HW identified in Bangladesh in the years leading up to the 2008 inventory
may not be repeated in the next few years due to economic market forces but HW generation is
not likely to decline either so long as the industries maintain their market position. Government
of Bangladesh faces very significant environmental problems including waste management and
has therefore taken steps to manage hazardous wastes through the development of a draft policy.
During discussions carried out in the stakeholder workshops in Dhaka in March and May 2009,
the strengths and weaknesses of various policy options and strategies for HWM were discussed
and reviewed. Overall the strategy of pursuing public private partnership for the off site
management of HW was preferred by the stakeholders. The Bangladesh policy will provide an
enabling environment. Publicizing the policy will help to raise the awareness and bring together
management of hazardous wastes issues. [6]

The objectives of the policy can be summarized as follows:

i) Create enabling legal environment to encourage cleaner production for HWM;

ii) Collection, transportation, treatment and disposal (off-site management) of HWM;

iii) Enable and facilitate public and private sector investment in HWM based on 3Rs;

iv) Promote appropriate, efficient environmental technology for HWM;

v) Provide training to facilitate cleaner production practices

 vi) Promote development of local technology in HWM;

vii) Promote CDM/private sector investment in HWM.

The institutional arrangements envisaged include a high level committee on HW formed to

coordinate the implementation of the policy and to provide technical guidance for a Hazardous
Waste Management Cell (HWMC) to be established in the Department of Environment, as a
focal point for HWM and promotion of cleaner production practices. HWMC will be guided by
an inter-ministerial committee comprising of representatives of government, financial business
community, academics and civil society. The HWMC responsibilities will include but not
necessarily be limited to:

i) Identifying hazardous wastes and recording wastes governed by the Rules;

ii) Coordinating HWM with action plans including a National 3R Strategy;

iii) Auditing HW waste generation and illegal imports;

iv) Enabling systematic development of and creating opportunities for all aspects of HWM

v) Developing mechanisms for public and private sector investments of HWM

vi) Supporting research and development of HWM technology and cleaner production:

vii) Building capacity for HWM based on 3R and related principles; and

viii) Implementing policies to reduce and control pollution from re-use of hazardous
waste.[6]

4.3 Development of Rules for Hazardous Waste Management in Bangladesh:

In early 2009 the gross lack of management of HW gained significant attention and the Supreme
Court instructed the DoE to frame rules for HWM.

The draft rules include but are not limited to:

i) Transboundary import and export of hazardous materials;

ii) Prior informed consent and clearance from department of environment;

iii) Freely importable materials for recycling;

iv) Procedures for handling hazardous materials;

 v) Procedure and standards for recycling of hazardous materials;

vi) Conditions for sale or transfer of hazardous materials for recycling;

vii) Guidelines from the Department of Environment;

viii) Treatment, storage and disposal facilities for hazardous wastes;

ix) Packaging labeling and storage of hazardous materials;

x) Transportation of hazardous materials and manifest systems;

xi) Reporting, keeping records and returns;

xii) Legal liabilities, legal provisions and appeals; and

xiii) Schedules of HW and HM forms for registration etc.[6]

4.4 Recommendations for Economic Sustainability

To address these economic challenges, Bangladesh could adopt several measures:

 Public-Private Partnerships (PPP): Encouraging collaboration between the government

and private sector through PPPs could improve waste management infrastructure.

 Financial Incentives: Offering tax breaks, subsidies, or low-interest loans could promote
investment in waste treatment facilities.

 Stronger Enforcement: Increasing the budget and capacity of the DoE could enhance
monitoring and enforcement efforts, reducing illegal disposal.

 Formalizing the Informal Sector: Integrating informal recyclers into formal systems
through training and support programs could improve efficiency while ensuring
environmental safety.

Managing hazardous waste in Bangladesh involves substantial economic challenges due to the high cost
of infrastructure, limited private sector involvement, regulatory weaknesses, and the prevalence of
informal waste management. Addressing these issues requires policy reforms, financial incentives, and
greater investments in infrastructure and regulatory frameworks to ensure sustainable waste
management practices.
4.5. Social cost curve
The social cost curve represents the total cost to society of producing a good or service, which
includes both private costs incurred by producers and external costs imposed on third parties
(such as pollution). The concept of the social cost curve is important in environmental economics
as it highlights the negative externalities, such as environmental degradation or health impacts
from pollution, that are not reflected in the private market costs.

Key Concepts:

 Private Cost (PC): The cost directly incurred by producers in the production process.
 External Cost (EC): The cost imposed on third parties (society), such as pollution.
 Social Cost (SC): The total cost to society, which is the sum of private cost and external
cost: Social Cost=Private Cost+External Cost\text{Social Cost} = \text{Private Cost} +
\text{External Cost}Social Cost=Private Cost+External Cost

Social Cost Curve and Market Equilibrium:

In a free market, firms base their production decisions on private costs only, without considering
the negative externalities. This leads to overproduction and excessive pollution compared to the
socially optimal level. The market equilibrium based on private cost leads to a higher quantity
produced, but at a lower price than what would be ideal for society. The social cost curve
corrects for this by adding the external costs to the private cost, leading to a higher price and
lower quantity at the socially optimal equilibrium.[5]

Sketch Explanation:
Below is a general description of the social cost curve sketch:

1. Private Cost Curve (PC): This upward-sloping curve shows the private cost to
producers at different levels of output.
2. Social Cost Curve (SC): This curve is above the private cost curve and reflects the total
cost to society, including the external costs.
3. Demand Curve (D): A downward-sloping curve representing consumers' willingness to
pay at different quantities.
4. Market Equilibrium (E1): The intersection of the private cost curve and the demand
curve. At this point, the quantity produced (Q1) is higher, and the price (P1) is lower than
socially optimal.
5. Socially Optimal Equilibrium (E2): The intersection of the social cost curve and the
demand curve. At this point, the quantity produced (Q2) is lower, and the price (P2) is
higher, reflecting the true cost to society.
 Figure IV: Social Cost Curve and Market Equilibrium

It seems there was an issue generating the sketch. However, you can easily create a graph with
the following components in MS Word, Excel, or any other graphing tool:

1. X-axis (Quantity of Goods Produced)

2. Y-axis (Price or Cost)
3. Private Cost (PC) Curve: An upward-sloping curve representing the cost to producers.
4. Social Cost (SC) Curve: Another upward-sloping curve that lies above the PC curve to reflect
external costs.
5. Demand (D) Curve: A downward-sloping curve representing consumer demand.
6. Market Equilibrium (E1): Where the PC curve intersects with the demand curve.
7. Socially Optimal Equilibrium (E2): Where the SC curve intersects with the demand curve.

At E2, the price is higher and quantity is lower, representing the socially efficient output level.
This setup helps visualize the impact of externalities and the need for considering social costs
when regulating environmental policies.
 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION & REFERENCES
5.1 Conclusion: The federal policy on toxic and hazardous substances plays an essential role
in protecting both human health and the environment from the adverse effects of chemical
exposure and hazardous waste. Through key legislation such as the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the U.S. government
has established a comprehensive framework to regulate toxic chemicals, manage hazardous
waste, and ensure the safe cleanup of contaminated sites.

These policies, enforced primarily by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), have
contributed significantly to reducing the risks posed by toxic substances. However, challenges
remain, including ensuring compliance, addressing emerging toxic threats such as PFAS, and
enhancing environmental justice by protecting vulnerable communities disproportionately
affected by hazardous waste.

In summary, the success of federal toxic and hazardous substance regulations underscores the
importance of strong enforcement, continuous regulatory updates, and a commitment to both
economic development and environmental sustainability. As industries evolve, ongoing efforts
will be needed to maintain effective pollution control and ensure the safe management of toxic
materials.[5]
5.2 References
[1] M. I. Hossain, O. T. San, M. I. Tabash, and S. M. Ling, “Systematic Review: Identifying
Drivers of Environmental Sustainability Practices in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises
(SMEs),” International Journal of Sustainable Economy, 2021.
[2] “Superfund: CERCLA Overview,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2020, [Online].
Available: https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview
[3] “The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act,” U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Jun. 2016, [Online]. Available: https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-
managing-chemicals-under-tsca/frank-r-lautenberg-chemical-safety-21st-century-act
[4] “Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
2021.
[5] B. C. Field and M. K. Field, Environmental Economics, 7th ed. New York, NY 10020:
McGraw-Hill.
[6] M. H. Howlader and M. Ashikuzzaman, “Sustainable Solid Waste Management in
Bangladesh: Issues and Challenges,” ResearchGate, pp. 35–55, 2020, doi: 10.4018/978-1-
7998-0198-6.ch002.