|
|
NEWS FLASH!
The New York State Senate passed a brownfields bill (S.2935) on March 19, 2003.
The Marcellino [R-Long Island] bill was referred to the Environmental
Conservation Committee on March 11th and reported out and committed to Finance
on March 12th. Unlike the Governor's Executive Budget proposal (and the
modified Governor's program bill passed by the Senate last year), S.2935 focuses
primarily on the creation of a statutory brownfields program, makes limited
changes to the state's "Superfund" program (ECL Article 27, Title 13), and makes
no changes to the Oil Spill Program (established under the Navigation Law).
On the positive side, the bill authorizes DEC to adopt brownfield cleanup
standards that reflect historical "pervasive" soil contamination and other
site-specific factors, authorizes post-remediation liability releases for
brownfield projects, and includes targeted economic development incentives.
The bill has split the environmental community. It is supported by
Environmental Advocates of New York and the New York League of Conservation
voters. It is opposed by the New York Public Interest Research Group, the
Sierra Club, and the Citizen's Environmental Coalition.
The Business
Council of New York State, while it likes certain features of the bill (i.e.,
those described above), "strongly opposes" certain other features. These
include: new hazardous waste program surcharges "that will primarily hit the
state's manufacturing sector"; expansion of the Superfund program to include
"hazardous substance" sites, "with no countervailing superfund program reforms,"
and "excessively broad reservations on the liability releases that will be given
to brownfield program participants."
Separate Assembly bills were introduced in late April by Assemblyman Tom DiNapoli (D-Long Island), Chair of the Environmental Conservation Committee
(A. 7507), and
Assemblyman Robin Schimminger (D-N. Tonawanda), Chair of the Commitee on
Economic Development (A. 7512). (A comparison of the Marcellino bill with the
two Assembly bills can be accessed below.)
Updated 5/7/2003. The DiNapoli bill (A.7507) can be
accessed by clicking
here (4/26/2003).
The Schimminger bill (A. 7512) can be accessed by clicking
here
(5/7/2003). Both the DiNapoli and the Schimminger Bills were referred to
the Environmental Conservation Committee.
On May 6, 2003, the
Environmental Conservation Committee took action on the DiNapoli Bill (but did
not consider the Schimminger bill) and approved it on a unanimous vote. It
was referred to the Codes Committee (probably for review of various penalty
provisions) and then sequentially to Ways and Means and Rules.
It was reported by the Rules Committee
and passed by the Assembly on June 4, 2003. There may still be an opportunity to incorporate elements of
the Schimminger Bill after action by the full Assembly--when and if a conference
committee is established to reconcile competing provisions of the Senate- and
Assembly-passed bills.
---------------------------------------------
Senator James S. Alesi (R-Monroe), Chair of the Committee on Commerce, Economic
Development & Small Business, has introduced S.4996--a counterpart to the
Schimminger bill in the Assembly. The Alesi bill, which has 10
co-sponsors, was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Economic Development &
Small business. This makes the Schimminger/Alesi bills
the only legislative vehicles currently pending in both houses of the
Legislature.
Schimminger/Alesi News Release
(5/28/03)
Albany Times-Union Story (5/28/03) Latest
Developments
Comparison of
the Schimminger, Marcellino, and DiNapoli Bills
(5/7/03)
Counter-productive Features of the DiNapoli Bill
(4/27/2003)
Memo in
Opposition to the DiNapoli Bill (5/3/03)
Positions
of Interest Groups
(updated 4/24/03)
Albany Business Review article (5/2/03)
suggested Legislative
Memo on the DiNapoli Bill (5/9/03)
suggested Legislative
Memo on the Schimminger Bill (5/9/03)
|
|