page0287 |
Previous | 1 of 22 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
PRIORITY POLLUTANT PERSPECTIVES-REGULATORY ASSESSMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND WASTE TREATMENT Stacey L. Daniels, Research Specialist W. Brock Neely, Research Associate Robert E. Bailey, Senior Research Specialist Environmental Sciences Research Dow Chemical USA Midland, Michigan 48640 INTRODUCTION The control of toxic and other water-borne pollutants is now approaching new levels of sophistication and complexity as greater emphasis is being placed by interagency review groups and criteria/guideline development groups on specific chemical compounds at lower levels of occurrence. The many legislative mandates and regulatory actions promulgated in recent months demand careful and thoughtful integration and implementation to reduce unnecessary overlap and confusion. Government in all phases must distinguish those enforcement actions which are reasonable and necessary, and those which demand mid-course corrections or reductions in scope to meet health, environmental, and economical needs. The regulated community should not blindly accept such regulatory actions at face value as being scientifically justified in their entirety. It is not simply a question of putting "shoulder to the wheel" and getting "on with the job" regardless of expenditures of manpower and other resources. It is industry's right, and indeed legal privilege and social mandate, to challenge any unreasonable action and demand demonstration of sufficient justification and rationale. To achieve objective environmental regulation, a sound base of environmental data must be collected, limits of analytical detection determined, realistic hazards must be defined, and levels of treatment established as necessary. Certain perspectives for toxic pollutants, which need to be recognized in the logical development and implementation of meaningful and workable regulations, are provided within three areas: regulatory assessment, environmental evaluation, and waste treatment. REGULATORY ASSESSMENT The first set of perspectives for the toxic pollutants concerns regulatory assessment, i.e., the identification of various types of pollutants, the rationale for selection of specific toxic pollutants, the mechanisms for revision, and the development of appropriate criteria, standards, and guidelines. Types of Pollutants For purposes of regulation [ 1 ], water-borne pollutants are presently divided into three groups: (a) conventional, (b) nonconventional, and (c) toxic as shown in Table I. The conventional pollutants include many of the so-called traditional parameters of wastewater treatment. The toxic pollutants have been segregated for special attention, supposedly because of known or suspected adverse effects upon human health or the environment. The nonconventional pollutants have not yet been fully defined but apparently will include certain other pollutants which are neither conventional nor toxic. Hazardous substances by comparison [2,3] are pollutants which are intermittently "spilled" as opposed to being continually discharged. There remains some confusion since an intermittent "spill" is not a continuous "discharge," and what is "toxic" is not necessarily "hazardous" without attendant exposure. Pursuant to Section 304(a) (4) of the Clean Water Act [ 1 ], the Administrator is required to publish information identifying "conventional pollutants." This has been done [4] to include but not limited to: biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), fecal coli- 287
Object Description
Purdue Identification Number | ETRIWC197929 |
Title | Priority pollutant perspectives : regulatory assessment, environmental evaluation and waste treatment |
Author |
Daniels, Stacey L. Neely, W. Brock Bailey, Robert E. |
Date of Original | 1979 |
Conference Title | Proceedings of the 34th Industrial Waste Conference |
Conference Front Matter (copy and paste) | http://earchives.lib.purdue.edu/u?/engext,30453 |
Extent of Original | p. 287-308 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University LIbraries |
Rights Statement | Digital object copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Date Digitized | 2009-06-24 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Description
Title | page0287 |
Collection Title | Engineering Technical Reports Collection, Purdue University |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Rights Statement | Digital copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Language | eng |
Type (DCMI) | text |
Format | JP2 |
Capture Device | Fujitsu fi-5650C |
Capture Details | ScandAll 21 |
Transcript | PRIORITY POLLUTANT PERSPECTIVES-REGULATORY ASSESSMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND WASTE TREATMENT Stacey L. Daniels, Research Specialist W. Brock Neely, Research Associate Robert E. Bailey, Senior Research Specialist Environmental Sciences Research Dow Chemical USA Midland, Michigan 48640 INTRODUCTION The control of toxic and other water-borne pollutants is now approaching new levels of sophistication and complexity as greater emphasis is being placed by interagency review groups and criteria/guideline development groups on specific chemical compounds at lower levels of occurrence. The many legislative mandates and regulatory actions promulgated in recent months demand careful and thoughtful integration and implementation to reduce unnecessary overlap and confusion. Government in all phases must distinguish those enforcement actions which are reasonable and necessary, and those which demand mid-course corrections or reductions in scope to meet health, environmental, and economical needs. The regulated community should not blindly accept such regulatory actions at face value as being scientifically justified in their entirety. It is not simply a question of putting "shoulder to the wheel" and getting "on with the job" regardless of expenditures of manpower and other resources. It is industry's right, and indeed legal privilege and social mandate, to challenge any unreasonable action and demand demonstration of sufficient justification and rationale. To achieve objective environmental regulation, a sound base of environmental data must be collected, limits of analytical detection determined, realistic hazards must be defined, and levels of treatment established as necessary. Certain perspectives for toxic pollutants, which need to be recognized in the logical development and implementation of meaningful and workable regulations, are provided within three areas: regulatory assessment, environmental evaluation, and waste treatment. REGULATORY ASSESSMENT The first set of perspectives for the toxic pollutants concerns regulatory assessment, i.e., the identification of various types of pollutants, the rationale for selection of specific toxic pollutants, the mechanisms for revision, and the development of appropriate criteria, standards, and guidelines. Types of Pollutants For purposes of regulation [ 1 ], water-borne pollutants are presently divided into three groups: (a) conventional, (b) nonconventional, and (c) toxic as shown in Table I. The conventional pollutants include many of the so-called traditional parameters of wastewater treatment. The toxic pollutants have been segregated for special attention, supposedly because of known or suspected adverse effects upon human health or the environment. The nonconventional pollutants have not yet been fully defined but apparently will include certain other pollutants which are neither conventional nor toxic. Hazardous substances by comparison [2,3] are pollutants which are intermittently "spilled" as opposed to being continually discharged. There remains some confusion since an intermittent "spill" is not a continuous "discharge," and what is "toxic" is not necessarily "hazardous" without attendant exposure. Pursuant to Section 304(a) (4) of the Clean Water Act [ 1 ], the Administrator is required to publish information identifying "conventional pollutants." This has been done [4] to include but not limited to: biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), fecal coli- 287 |
Resolution | 300 ppi |
Color Depth | 8 bit |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for page0287