Leagal Study of the Control Over the Soiled Graund

在这项研究中，我们简要介绍了“CERCLA补救费用”制度，并考虑了污染者付费原则的“真实”形式。根据CERCLA法规，响应行动可以由责任方、环境保护局(EPA)或国家采取。如果环保局采取应对行动，支出将从危险物质超级基金中支出。反过来，环境保护局被授权从责任方那里收回资金支出。这是因为，回收应对成本的一个目的是使基金收益最大化。另一方面，日本环境法基本法律中的“由谁承担成本”制度有可能不能很好地发挥作用。通过对日本环境法和美国环境法的比较，可以得出对日本环境法的一些建议。

In this Study 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.