Many, if not most, adjusters may feel confident that they rarelywill have to deal with serious hazardous material claims. Afterall, unless their insurers write environmental impairment liabilitycoverage or their self-insured clients are in businesses that mightinvolve chemicals or other pollutants, there are those delightful“absolute pollution exclusions” in the policies. Right?

Not always. It is true that those exclusions are pretty solid.The one in the CGL policy goes on for more than a full page of fineprint defining and listing exceptions to the exclusion of any“bodily injury or property damage arising out of the actual,alleged, or threatened discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration,release, or escape of pollutants.”

Back in the 1970s, when I taught a coverage class, I used tohave the pollution definition memorized. I called it the McDonald'sExclusion. It includes “any solid, liquid, gaseous, or thermalirritant or contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes,acids, alkalis, chemicals, and waste,” to which I always added(reflecting the then current McDonald's ad), “on a sesame seedbun!” Come to think of it, some fast food I have encountered doesresemble that definition, considering what goes into the meat,lettuce, catsup, pickle relish, and mustard.