J. J. Keller® Compliance Network Logo
Start Experiencing Compliance Network for Free!
Update to Professional Trial!

Be Part of the Ultimate Safety & Compliance Community

Trending news, knowledge-building content, and more – all personalized to you!

Already have an account?
FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmat related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmat related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.

Hazard Ranking System

Introduction

Certain sites nationwide pose a threat to human health or the environment due to releases of hazardous substances, or the potential to release them. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) aims to cleanup these sites as best as possible and return them to productive use. The sites often affect surrounding residential and commercial areas. The Hazard Ranking System (HRS) plays a part in it all. This Fact File gives a detailed look at the HRS. It also explains the relationship between the HRS and the National Priorities List (NPL), HRS factors, and how a site gets an HRS score. 

Background

The HRS was first adopted in 1982 to meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). This is also known as Superfund. Superfund site assessments gauge site conditions to recognize responses to environmental releases of hazardous substances. The Superfund site assessment process starts with site discovery or notification of a release or possible release. Then, sites undergo Pre-CERCLA Screening to decide whether to add the stie to the Superfund Active site inventory for more assessment. Federal facilities do not need to do this step. During the assessment many entities come together to collect data to identify the waste sites based on the HRS criteria. The HRS is meant to be a simple, scoring system.

The HRS is the main instrument that the EPA uses to place uncontrolled waste sites on the NPL. Sites on the NPL are entitled to long-term “remedial action” financed under CERCLA. Remedial actions could mean containment, treatment, and disposal of wastes. The purpose of the NPL is to inform the public of sites that EPA classified as needing more investigations. In the past, EPA has added 100 to 125 sites per year to the NPL.

HRS Factors

The HRS uses a structured analysis approach to score sites. It assigns a numerical value to factors that relate to risk based on site conditions. The factors are grouped into three categories:

  • Likelihood that a site has released or may release hazardous substances into the environment;
  • Waste characteristics such as toxicity and waste quantity; and
  • People or sensitive environments affected by the release.

Under the HRS, four pathways can be scored:

  • Ground water migration (drinking water);
  • Surface water migration (drinking water, human food chain, sensitive environments);
  • Soil exposure and subsurface intrusion (population, sensitive environments); and
  • Air migration (population, sensitive environments).

After scores are calculated for one or more pathways, they are combined using a root-mean-square equation to govern the total site score.

HRS Score

The HRS is meant to be a simple scoring system. It assigns each site a score from 0 too 100. Sites with HRS scores of 28.50 or greater are eligible for the NPL. Sites with HRS scores under 28.50 do not qualify for NPS and are assigned a No Further Remedial Action Planned decision. EPA chose an HRS score of 28.50 as a cutoff for placing sites on the NPL because it first generated an NPL of 400 or more sites as suggested by CERCLA. It was not chosen because EPA thought 28.50 signified a threshold of unacceptable risks. A site with a high score does NOT necessarily come to the EPA’s attention first. The scores do not decide priority in funding for remedial actions. EPA carries out more detailed investigations to assess the nature and extent of health and environmental risks linked to the site. 

Applicable Laws & Regulations

40 CFR 300 Appendix A – The Hazard Ranking System

Related Definitions

“Environment” means the navigable waters, waters of the contiguous zone, and the ocean waters of which the natural resources are under the exclusive management authority of the United States and any other surface water, ground water, drinking water supply, land surface or subsurface strata, or ambient air within the United States or under its jurisdiction.

“Release” means any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into the environment (including the abandonment or discarding of barrels, containers, and other closed receptacles with any hazardous substance or pollutant or contaminant).

Key to Remember

The HRS is used to place uncontrolled waste sites on the NPL. Since the NPL is available to the public, cleanup steps and site details are very transparent. A wealth of knowledge can be found on each NPL site. EPA keeps records on the status and milestone for Proposed NPL Sites, NPL Sites, and Deleted NPL Sites. Citizens can even view a map of all the NPL sites in the U.S. When you click on a site on the map it lists the site’s:

  • Hazard ranking system score;
  • Site EPA ID and region ID;
  • City, state, and county;
  • Status;
  • Latitude and longitude,
  • Proposed date, listing date, construction completion date, deletion date; and
  • If the state has had a partial deletion or not.

Real World Example

Some of the sites added to the NPL in 2022 include the following:

  • Michner Plating- Mechanic Street in Jackson, Michigan
    • Site score: 39.12
    • The site is adjacent to the Grand River and has four buildings within four acres. Floor drains are contaminated with solvents and metals such as arsenic and hexavalent chromium. Volatile Organic Compounds have been found in soils near a public walkway and per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances have also been detected in groundwater under the site.
  • Bear Creek Sediments in Sparrows Point, Maryland
    • Site score: 48.02
    • The site has at least 60 acres of contaminated sediments in waters. The waters are contaminated with metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc, and oil and grease among other hazardous substances.
  • Westside Lead in Atlanta, Georgia
    • Site score: 50.00
    • The site consists mainly of about 2,097 residential properties. The soil is contaminated with high levels of lead and arsenic. The site was discovered in 2018 when a university laboratory collected soil samples from urban lawns.