We read with great interest the comment on "Arranging for Disposal Under CERCLA."¹ The comment was generally well done, but may have missed some points of interest.

First, the discussion of United States v. A & F Materials, Inc.,² focused on that decision's holding concerning the sale of hazardous waste as opposed to disposal. At the end of the section discussing A & F Materials, the comment states that the decision "does not shed light on whether the generator must have chosen the ultimate respository of the substances."³ We disagree. In the context of explaining why the generator in A & F Materials should be held liable, the court stated its view of the test operating in §107(a)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).⁴ The court said that "the relevant inquiry is who decided to place the waste into the hands of a particular facility that contains hazardous waste . . . ," and that it is precisely this decision that CERCLA was intended to regulate."⁵ (second emphasis added). Under this test, a generator who did not decide to place the waste into the hands of a "particular facility" should not be liable for releases at that facility.