Satoshi Ueki* and Toshirou Kimura**

*Professor, Facultye of Law, Kansai University
**Lecture, Facultye of Law, Kansai University

+ Correspondence should be addressed to Satoshi Ueki:
(3-3-35, Yamatecho Suita-city, Osaka 565 Japan)

Abstract

In this article, we take a glance at the "CERCLA remedial costs" system and consider a "true" form of the Polluter Pays Principle. Under the CERCLA statute, response actions may either be taken by the responsible parties, by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or by a state. If EPA undertakes the response action, expenditures are made from the Hazardous Substances Superfund. In turn, EPA is authorized to recover the fund expenditures from responsible parties. This is because, an objective of the recovery of response costs is to maximize the return of revenue to the fund. On the other hand, the "Cost-Bearing by Those Who Cause" system of Japan's Basic Environmental law has the potential to not function well. From this study comparing Japanese environmental law with American environmental law, we can get some suggestions for Japanese environmental law.

Key words: CERCLA statute, polluter pays principle, soil pollution, EPA, remedial costs