Talk:Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 18 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Pdizaiy, JohnnyUCSD.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Article structure, Content, External links

RCRA is a major U.S. environmental law, and the current article only touches on a few aspects of it. The article should have a structure that summarizes the major sections of the law (e.g. there are 10 subchapters), with appropriate bibliographic references, as well as cross-references to related laws & programs. The intro to the article should just provide an overview of the law--it's not the place to delve into details about regulations, etc.

Additional enhancements to the article should include implementation aspects such as regulations, technical standards, permits and enforcement. If these latter topics get sufficiently expanded they can be moved to separate articles.

External links should focus on principal & unique (& non-commercial) sources of info on the program (e.g. EPA & other federal agencies, state/local agencies, research websites, etc.). Thank you in advance for your contributions! Moreau1 (talk) 03:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this could be complicated to rewrite in a manner that is both accurate and useful, because the common name for the law and the legal name for the law are different. The legal name remains unchanged - it is the Solid Waste Disposal Act (see Pub. L. 94–580, Title II, §  1001); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 is simply the name of the act that amended the SWDA. That said, the RCRA amendments were so comprehensive that even the U.S. EPA and most courts refer to the SWDA as RCRA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:117:5021:72:0:0:0:D007 (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I've checked a few of the citations and a few of the links do not work, so I think it would be beneficial to provide updated citations to maintain the credibility of this article.

Another topic of concern regarding the citations is that a majority of the information comes from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is important to pull information from a variety of sources, even though this article covers an act implemented by the EPA.

While the EPA is a governmental agency that is meant to have clear goals regarding environmental protection, there could be bias due to differing administration goals surrounding environmental policy. This statement connects to the issue with a majority of the information being sourced from the agency's website.Generally, most of the topics covered in the article don't include extensive information considering the scope and importance of this legislation to United States waste policy.Pdizaiy (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2019 (UTC)Bergmanucsd

Reliable, Appropriate Reference

In the implementation section, I noticed that the states are talked about generally. I feel as if this section should be expanded such as going more in depth on some of the states to bring a more specific view in states rather than a broad view. Also, there weren’t too many sources cited and the source pertaining to waste management was no longer available. This should be updated with a new reference to make more credible.JohnnyUCSD (talk) 15:33, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Article Relevance

When looking at the Amendments and Related Legislation section I was a little confused. The whole article focuses on the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The 1st paragraph talks about legislations which has no relation to the resource conservation and recovery act. The legislations mentioned here are just being used as a comparison. The use of legislations distracts from the main purpose of the article which is the resource conservation and recovery act.JohnnyUCSD (talk) 15:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

CERCLA and HSWA are directly related to RCRA.

• CERCLA was enacted a few years after RCRA, to clean up abandoned haz. waste sites. RCRA covers currently operating haz. waste sites, among other things.
• The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 amended RCRA. Therefore, it's related! Read the law itself (footnote 7) and you'll see all of the new things that Congress added.
• The SARA paragraph is mostly redundant with the section above on RCRA Subtitle I. It does add a mention of the UST trust fund; that could be moved to the Subtitle I section.
• The Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act of 1996 is directly related to RCRA. It affects some of the same facilities regulated by RCRA.
• "Reducing Excessive Deadline Obligations Act of 2013" is a bill from a previous session of Congress which did not pass. This para. should be deleted.

Moreau1 (talk) 01:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)