The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of "Get the Dirt Out" Citizen Training
On Monday, November 2, 2009, I attended a “Get the Dirt Out” training session taught by members of the Potomac Riverkeeper. The goals of these training sessions are to teach citizens how to identify and report potential construction site erosion and sediment control violations. The Potomac Riverkeeper organization has developed a Construction Site Report for public use that asks witnesses to potential sediment and erosion control violations to assess sites based on criteria including (1) stormwater appearance; (2) construction entrances and exits; (3) perimeter controls; (4) storm drain and inlet protection; (5) soil stabilization and cover; (6) sediment traps and basins; (7) outlet protection; and (8) encroachment on water bodies. The organization encourages citizens to take numerous photographs of the perceived violations, to submit those photographs to agencies responsible for inspecting the site, and then to follow-up with inspectors to make sure the compliant has been received and the identified issues addressed.
The motivations of this program (to keep responsible parties accountable for implementing best management techniques on their sites) are good, but I can think of a couple of concerns this raises from an industry perspective:
- Lack of Knowledge of Applicable Laws: For the most part, your average person does not know the laws and regulations governing stormwater management BMPs and sediment control on construction sites. If you’re not aware of the law, it’s difficult to know when the law is being violated. In the scenario in which a developer or construction site manager is complying with the law, but the citizen files a report mistakenly believing that the law and/or regulation has been violated, the developer may incur additional administrative expenses (i.e., time expended to meet with inspector; time expended to meet with citizen; cost of creating and supplying response material to counter complaint filed by citizen). It seems to me like it would be a good idea for construction site managers and developers to become proactive about photographing their own sites and updating their logs with measures taken in anticipation of such reports being filed.
- Trespass and Liability Issues: The Potomac Riverkeeper members at the particular training session that I attended were careful to warn citizens not to trespass on private construction sites; however, some of the criteria identified on the Construction Site Report sheet seems to invite a more detailed exploration of the premises. This could in turn raise liability issues if a citizen is harmed while evaluating the site.
I thought it interesting that the Riverkeeper instructors echoed a theme that I also heard last week at the EPA meeting on the Draft 202(a) Report: even though sediment and other pollutants are known to come from sources such as agriculture and farming practices, construction sites are targeted because, due to the existing regulatory scheme, it’s easy for citizens to affect change.
To me, this is a double-edged sword. It’s great that we, as citizens, can enforce accountability when needed; however, it also becomes unfair if we can only hold a fraction of those responsible accountable for their actions.
