It seems clear, through the 1986 SARA, that Congress did not want innocent parties who conducted due diligence in inspecting the land to be liable under CERCLA. Thus, expanding CERCLA’s definition of disposal to attach liability to passive conduct is inconsistent with Congress’s intent. Therefore, in order to align enforcement of CERCLA with its dual purposes and Congress’s intent in enacting the Act, disposal should be interpreted to exclude passive migration of hazardous substances when the owner or operator knows nothing of the presence of the hazardous substance that is spreading.
"Eliminating Passive Disposal: Equalizing Liability Among Current and Prior Owners and Operators in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 2017
, Article 5.
Available at: https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol2017/iss1/5