Leagal Study of the Control Over the Soiled Graund

在本研究中，我们将对“CERCLA补救费用”制度进行一次粗略的研究，并考虑污染者付费原则的“真正”形式。根据CERCLA法规，应对行动可以由责任方、环境保护局（EPA）或州政府采取。如果环境保护局采取应对行动，费用由危险物质超级基金支付。反过来，环境保护局有权从责任方收回基金支出。这是因为，回收应对费用的目的之一是使基金收益最大化。另一方面，日本环境基本法中的“谁造成谁承担”制度也存在着难以发挥作用的可能性。通过对日美环境法的比较，可以对日本环境法提出一些建议。

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.