Re: LAND USE PROPOSAL

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

LAND USE AND REMEDY SELECTION: A PROPOSAL

The following is the draft of a letter that I intend to circulate soon 
for support from (signatures by) public stakeholders, local government 
representatives, and others. The letter will be sent to state and 
federal policy-makers, including elected officials, with an interest in 
or jurisdiction over cleanup policy.

Right now, I am looking for comments. When I circulate the next draft, 
I will be seeking signatures.

Lenny Siegel

 Dear _______:

We are writing to draw to your attention a significant issue in the 
development of risk management strategies for hazardous waste cleanup: 
the relationship of cleanup standards to anticipated future land use. 
Remedies based upon institutional land use controls often curtail local 
planning prerogatives simply to benefit responsible parties, and those 
controls provide uncertain or temporary protection for public health 
and the environment. Nevertheless, remedies are increasingly being 
linked to the future use of the contaminated property.

We believe that it is both possible and imperative to build safeguards 
into the decision-making process, both to recognize that land use 
planning generally is and should remain a local prerogative and to 
ensure that the local community is prepared to enforce whatever 
controls are necessary. Specifically, we recommend:

* The appropriate regulatory agency(ies) shall not approve any remedy 
or response that incorporates or requires institutional controls on 
future land use without full public review (notice and hearings) and 
approval by the applicable local land use planning authority. 

* Where, through a formal finding of technical impracticability, it is 
found that the property cannot be cleaned to the level desired by the 
community, the local jurisdiction still should be directly involved in 
the determination of institutional controls, for which in the long run 
it may bear the responsibility of enforcement.

* Review and approval by the local land use planning authority should 
not diminish the ability of the general community and community working 
groups or advisory boards to oversee the remedy selection process, 
including the adoption of land use or other controls necessary for 
remedies to be effective.

* While the level of public involvement in the cleanup decision-making 
process often diminishes once remedies are selected, it's essential to 
maintain continuing channels for public oversight wherever those 
remedies require long-term institutional controls or active operation 
and maintenance.

We believe that this approach will increase the likelihood that land 
use controls will be both appropriate and effective. Anything less 
passes the economic, health, and natural resource cost of the 
contamination to the site's neighbors and the community in general.