Back to our Stormwater Home page Finally --- a high-quality professional publication, exclusively for surface water-quality professionals! All of our current editorial content is available for you to read at not cost. Back issues are also available. A limited number of complimentary subscriptions are available for surface water professionals. Subscribe today --- FREE!Check out the latest news on surface water and stormwater management. Take a look at what Storm Water-related events are happening - and make sure to list your own - FREE!Alphabetical listing of Storm Water-related terms, abbreviations & commonly used phrases. Help us to keep this current. Talk to us, to other storm water managers + engineers, contractors, whoever. Here's your soap box. Current regs got you down? Express yourself! We're building an on-line image library for everyone to view. If you've got storm water-related images, share them with all of us! Reach more buyers --- and reach them faster --- by advertising in Stormwater, the Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals and on stormh2o.com! Do you have a question? Want to suggest an artcile topic? Here's how to get in touch with us. If your're seeking for something that relates to surface water quality management, look here first. Check your local weather forecast - find a consultant in your area - meet our staff - view industry links - find or announce a job ... Important email addresses are just a click away.

Search the Buyers Guide

Don't Miss StormCon '03 - San Antonio, TX - July 28-31 2003

 

 

 

 

 

Subscribe

 

 

 

   


By Janice Kaspersen
Janice Kaspersen
Nonpoint-Source Responsibility After the Fact

On July 23, USEPA announced it had reached an agreement with General Electric Company to take the first actions in cleaning up PCB-contaminated sections of the Hudson River. This highly publicized, decades-long case has held the attention of many in the surface-water-quality community. As sampling and sediment-characterization efforts–paid for by GE–get underway, this site and others like it could hold far-reaching implications for how other types of pollutants are handled. Conceivably, the model at work here could one day apply to nonpoint-source pollution as well.

As with other companies in similar circumstances, GE has argued that dumping PCBs was not illegal when its plants were operating, and that PCBs' effects on human health were not understood at the time. However, 1980's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, commonly called the Superfund law) included controversial provisions to hold polluters retroactively liable for hazardous waste discharges, as is happening now with GE. Although most nonpoint-source pollution–and much of the point-source pollution implicated in impairing surface waters, for that matter–isn't classified as hazardous waste and doesn't fall under the same regulations, the costs associated with combating NPS pollution problems are immense. Perhaps more importantly, these costs are ongoing. While public funding is being used now, mostly at local levels, to catch NPS pollution and deal with the water bodies it impairs, cash-strapped municipalities are constantly seeking revenue. Rather than impose additional new taxes or utility fees on their own residents, they could eventually delve for what, by definition, NPS pollution doesn't have, but what retroactive responsibility might nevertheless provide–a source.

Suppose, for example, a particular metal used in automotive brake linings–or more conveniently still, in one manufacturer's brake linings–is found in high concentrations in some places, and it's reasonably certain that there is no other major source in the environment. Or suppose specific pesticides–now legal, but perhaps one day banned as they already have been in some areas–are identified as a major source of contamination, or as the one factor that limits beneficial use of a water body. Suppose these substances are found to pose definite health threats (as PCBs in fact have not, although evidence points to their being potential carcinogens, causing neurological problems, and affecting human fetal development). Might a local government be able to recover some of the costs of its local water-quality efforts from a manufacturer, even though actually releasing the pollutants into the environment was accomplished little by little–and legally–over widespread areas by the consumers of the company's products? If more than one pollutant affects a water body, cleanup costs could be prorated among several companies–or, along the lines of CERCLA, we might see a new Superfund-like tax spread among certain types of industries, even those that are now unregulated, specifically to cover the costs of NPS pollution. Stranger things have happened in the legal system.

GE's electrical capacitor plants operated for 30 years along the Hudson–long enough to discharge at least a million pounds of PCBs into the river, but still a finite period of time in a single location. Although it might run to hundreds of millions of dollars, the cleanup work will eventually end; the mapping and sampling now underway is helping to determine exactly what the extent of the effort will be. In contrast, intercepting NPS pollution and dealing with the water bodies it impairs is an endless process. That's a tremendous incentive for those who are now financially responsible to take a look over their shoulder for someone to bear, or at least share, the fiscal burden.

 

Correction

The article "Street Sweepers: Picking Up Speed and Quieting Down" in the July/August 2002 issue should have identified the Tymco sweepers used in West Palm Beach, FL, as model 600.

Send Janice an email

SW - September/October 2002



About + Current Issue + Subscribe + News + Calendar + Glossary
Talk + Images + Advertise + Contact Us + Search + Email + Services

Erosion Control Magazine | MSW Management Magazine
Grading & Excavation Contractor | ForesterPress | StormCon
| Forester Media

© 2000-2002 FORESTER MEDIA, INC.