ny-brownfields.com

Chart #12: 

SPECIAL FEATURES

 

NY

(1994)

MD

(1997)

MA

(1998)

MI

(1995)

NJ

(1998)

PA

(1995)

 

 * Program seems to be driven more by remedia-tion object-ives than by impetus for econ-omic revital-ization.

*Has a well-finan-ced munici-pal BF (environ-mental restoration) program ($200M), but requires very costly cleanups.

*After publishing little public guidance on its VCP for >6 yrs., DEC has now released a Draft Volun-tary Cleanup Program Guide for public review and comment (May 29, 2002).

 

 

 

 Purpose of VCP:

- Investigation of eligible properties with known or perceived contamination

- Protection of public health and the environment

- Accelerated cleanup of eligible properties

- Provide predict-ability and finality to the cleanup of eligible properties.

* Liability release is particularly strong and unqualified for the innocent purchaser (“Inculpable Person”).

* Special simplified procedures for obtaining a “No Further Require-ments letter” where a brownfield site merely carries a perception of contamination, or any contamination falls below applicable standards or risk thresholds.

*To save time and money, MDE guidelines now allow for and encourage the use of field screening technology for site assessment--e.g., immuno-assay field screening and X-Ray fluorescence field screening  (in conjunction with limited fixed labora-tory analysis).[1]

*Will be doing more field screening with gas chromat-ograph / mass-spectroscopy equipment to cut cost and time.  Wants to create a "backlog" of assessments.

* Has been the “trend-setter” in “strong state-local partner-ship in urban revitali-zation as an alternative to sprawl.”  (Paull and Bartsch, 2001).

* Has a pre-packa-ged environ-mental insurance program under which the state pays 50% of the cost of private

environmental insurance.[2]

* Uses Licensed Site Profes-sionals to facilitate and accel-erate VCP clean-ups.

*Developing innovative

U-CIP computerized inventory system.

*Is proud of its Site Assessment Program in which both municipalities and private parties participate.

Key compon-ents:

-Causation-based system for owner/ operators

-BEA provisions to provide liability protection to new owner/ operators

-Due care provisions to ensure that contaminated property is used safely

-Land-use based cleanup stds.

* Elimination of strict liability eliminates the reluctance of innocent owners to do site testing.  (IL has a similar causation-based liability scheme.)

*Unique finality provisions in liability releases provided to non-liable parties—i.e., no re-opener for newly discovered contamination.

*Presumptive remedy (allowing containment) for “historic fill”.

* Marketing database and mapping system: Brownfield Site Marketing Inventory (BSMI),

 I-Map; operates as a brownfields Multiple Listing Service.

*Has developed an extensive  “Cookbook” of Technical Regulations on how to do a cleanup.

* Program won Council of State Government’s Innovation Award.

* Environ-mental Guardian Trust – proposed program to privatize post-remediation long-term stewardship of ICs and ECs.

*Plan to post on the web sites with ongoing ICs and ECs.

* PA Site Finder website.

* 4 cornerstones of program: uniform cleanup stds., liability relief, standardized reviews and time limits, and financial incentives.

*Cleanups completed in 2001 = 181

*Cleanups in progress = 423

* Cleanups completed previously = 790

* 1,500 Notices of Intent to Remediate (NIRs).

* Allows cleanup of specific contaminants or partial site cleanups, avoiding the need for time-consum-ing full-site character-izations.  (IL has a similar program.)

* Cleanups in “Special Industrial Areas” are required only to avoid imminent health threats.


[1] Paull and Bartsch, 2001, supra.

[2] California, Connecticut, and Wisconsin have also adopted some type of subsidized insurance pool.