ny-brownfields.com

Chart #5: 

LIABILITY RE-OPENERS

 

NY

(1994)

MD

(1997)

MA

(1998)

MI

(1995)

NJ

(1998)

PA

(1995)

 

 

Four standard reopeners:

* Not sufficiently protective of public health or the environment

* Changed use

* Fraud

* Unknown environmental conditions.

-3 other reopeners sometimes show up:

*Change in scientific methods so that  remedial action taken is no longer sufficiently protective;

* migration of petroleum contamination offsite (under Art. 12 of Navigation Law)

*failure to implement the VCA to DEC’s satisfaction.                           

 

 

 

*Where necessary to prevent or abate an imminent or substantial endangerment to public health or the environment;

*Fraud or misrepresentation;

* Previously undiscovered contamination;

* Future activities result in hazardous substance contamination requiring additional cleanup.

 

 

* Violation of an activity or use limitation (AUL)

* Response Action Out-come State-ments must be submitted within a 2-year time window.

* A cleanup can be reopened based on any technical or substantive issue.

* Sites can always be audited “for cause.” Statute requires 20% routine audits by DEP.

*Eligible parties can be asked to reopen for failing to comply with the standard of care in the industry at the time the cleanup was carried out.  (PRPs  can be asked to comply with current stds.)

 

* DEQ reserves the authority to take additional response activities “if necessary.”  (§20b(7)).

* The new owner, operator, or lessee has a statutory obligation to comply with the “due care provision” (NREPA sec. 20107a).  If the lack of due care results in response costs or NRD, liability for these costs may result.

 

* For PRPs only, if a cleanup std. has decreased (become more stringent) by >10X.

* Where IC or EC is no longer protective of human health and the environment

* Newly discovered contamination--but only by RPs.  Non-RPs are NOT responsible for newly dis-covered contamination.

*Fraud

* Failure to achieve agreed-upon cleanup stds.

* Failure to complete required post-cleanup OM&M.

 

* Fraud

* Newly discovered contamination at above remediation levels.

*Remedy failed to meet prescribed cleanup stds.

* Risk level increases due to changed land use or updated exposure assumptions.

*Treatment, removal, or destruction has now become economically feasible (where original remedy relied upon ICs or ECs) [has never been used to date].