Abstract
This paper reviews the 25-year battle to have psychosocial impacts of contamination weighed in US administrative permit decisions. Despite the establishment of a professional literature and successful application in toxic torts, psychosocial (including psychological) impacts from the siting of hazardous environmental facilities have neither been reviewed substantively in environmental impact statements nor listed as an issue for adjudication in the issuance of permits by regulatory agencies. The reasons for this lag are explored through a detailed examination of key cases according to two sets of factors: personalistic versus environmental; and professional versus paradigmatic.