From: | "Peter B. Meyer" <pbmeye02@athena.louisville.edu> |
Date: | Tue, 4 May 1999 16:19:54 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-brownfields |
Subject: | Re: Definition, VCPs, and Brownfields |
Lenny is 100% correct: CERCLA excludes petroleum-only sites, thus neither the NPL-related activities, nor the Brownfield Pilots, nor the Brownfield Cleanup Revolving Loan Funds can address petroleum-only contaminated sites. HOWEVER, and Kristen tried to make this point, the EPA definition of a "brownfield" does NOT make this exclusion -- and thus is a useful common frame for discussing the issue of policies toward brownfields. This subject arose from the Peter Strauss - Kristen Yount exchange that Peter broadcast, and reflects a serious confusion. Let me illustrate from that discussion: Peter Strauss noted that "As a follow-up to Peter Meyer's response, not all voluntary cleanup programs (VCPs) apply to "Brownfield" sites. I have seen many non-brownfield type sites in California where a VCP was entered into." However, under the EPA brownfield definition we have read again today, the occurrence Peter Strauss describes is simply not possible, except for previously residential sites: Q -- why would any site go through a VCP if it did not have to? A -- when its "expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or PERCEIVED environmental contamination." (-- my emphasis.) Thus, what Peter S. described involves a definition of a brownfield very different from that used by EPA (and, increasingly, by the other related agencies, both state and federal.) This discussion pivots on the definition - and it is more than mere nit-picking: in Pennsylvania, for example, many sites that they state agency said were "below their horizon" with respect to levels of pollution get pushed through the state VCP to provide extra secutiry to the buyers -- and, not incidentally, possibly get a higher sale price for the sellers. Since the state offers the VCP reivew and certification process for free, is it subsidizing land prices with dollars that should ideally go for other environmental protection purposes? Unless we are clear on what kinds of sites we are talking about, we cannot get to the position of asking the last question -- that is why EPA tried to generate a standardized definition (and why, I believe) they went beyond a definition limited exclusing petroleum-only sites. Can we move to a convention of meaning the EPA definition except when we explicitly say otherwise? (Tony - can you offer the definition in the automtic acknowledgement you send to new subscribers to CPEO-BF? It might help us all) Peter M. -- Peter B. Meyer Professor of Economics and Urban Policy Director, Center for Environmental Management and Environmental Finance Center University of Louisville 426 W. Bloom Street / Louisville, KY 40208 (502) 852-8032 Fax: (502) 852-4558 | |
Prev by Date: Environmental Justice Seminar in California Next by Date: RE: Definition | |
Prev by Thread: Environmental Justice Seminar in California Next by Thread: Re: Definition, VCPs, and Brownfields |