From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 23 Oct 2003 18:12:21 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-brownfields |
Subject: | Re: [CPEO-BIF] Cal-EPA Brownfields proposal |
I've read through Cal/EPA's draft Brownfields legislation, and I'm only prepared to make preliminary observations. That's because I don't know exactly how it meshes into existing state laws and regulations. I suspect that potential Brownfields developers will seek changes that limit the reservations of power written into the language, but I think the proposal forms the basis for a bi-partisan bill that may be approved in 2004 if the new governor's appointees have sufficient time to feel comfortable with the work that has gone on thus far. The draft appears designed to clarify and simplify state oversight of VOLUNTARY brownfields cleanups, regardless of which agency represents the state, but it does not reduce oversight or weaken environmental standards. A Brownfields Project Sponsor may enter into an Environmental Oversight Agreement with either the Department of Toxics Substances Control or the Regional Water Control Board serving the region in which the property is located. The Sponsor shall submit a Site Assessment Plan , and following approval, a Response Action Plan. The Response Action Plan may include land use controls which, under the proposed law, would run with the land. The state will issue a Certificate of Completion when short-term responses have been conducted and long-term operation and maintenance plans, with financial assurances, are in place, but the proposed legislation specifies six narrow conditions under which the state may still require additional responses. Public involvement is currently written into each step. In fact, the Response Action Plan must include "a description of how the public has been involved to date" as well as plans for continuing public participation. The California proposal contains liability limitations that are designed to parallel federal law, applying to Innocent Landowners, Bona Fide Prospective Purchasers (if they conduct cleanup), and Contiguous Property Owners. Under certain circumstances, however, the state may still require a response, if other parties do not take action as "the conditions on the property pose a threat to tenants or occupants of the property." Lenny Lenny Siegel wrote: > > It's too soon to know how the California gubernatorial recall and > election will impact ongoing policy discussions at Cal-EPA, but the > agency is still working on Brownfields legislation which may have > national significance. See > http://www.calepa.ca.gov/Brownfields/Updates/2003/Legislative%20Proposal.pdf > > "Dorothy Rice of DTSC, in her presentation to the [Brownfields] Working > Group in June, discussed ideas for legislation that would provide DTSC > with flexibility and a cleanup authority that is not confined to Health > and Safety Code Chapters 6.5 or 6.8. DTSC has since developed language > for legislation. > > "Using DTSC’s proposal as its core, Cal/EPA has expanded the legislative > proposal to include elements that would create in California law > limitations to liability for innocent landowners, bona fide prospective > purchasers, and contiguous property owners. An overview of the proposal > is attached, as is a very rough draft of the language that we believe > accomplishes these goals in ways that serve to both relieve liability > concerns, but also ensure protection of public health and the environment." > > -- > -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CPEO: A DECADE OF SUCCESS. Your generous support will ensure that our important work on military and environmental issues will continue. Please consider one of our donation options. Thank you. http://www.groundspring.org/donate/index.cfm?ID=2086-0|721-0 | |
References
| |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-BIF] Visit CPEO at Brownfields 2003 Next by Date: RE: [CPEO-BIF] Vapor Intrusion Policies Fall Short | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-BIF] Cal-EPA Brownfields proposal Next by Thread: [CPEO-BIF] EJ/Community Caucus Plans Two Evening Sessions |