Kate Bicknell, Smart Growth
America
Bob Johnson, Wildlife Habitat Council
Michael Taylor, Vita Nuova
Thomas Schruben, Vita Nuova
Christine Costopoulos, New York DEC
Devin Cahill, American Planning Association
Charlotte Bertrand, U.S. EPA AO
Greg Madden, U.S. EPA OECA
Stephen Hess, U.S. EPA OGC
Geoffrey Anderson, U.S. EPA OPEI
David Giampocaro, U.S. EPA OPPT
Annette Gatchett, U.S. EPA ORD
Jim Maas, U.S. EPA OSPS
Ben Hamm, U.S. EPA OSPS
Kathleen Atencio, U.S. EPA OSPS
Ann Carroll, U.S. EPA OSPS
Linda Garczynski, U.S. EPA OSPS |
Sven-Erik Kaiser, U.S.
EPA OSPS
Valerie Green, U.S. EPA OSPS
Karl Alvarez, U.S. EPA OSPS
Jennifer Bohman, U.S. EPA OSPS
Anthony Raia, U.S. EPA OSPS
Patricia Overmeyer, U.S. EPA OSPS
Ray Rivera, U.S. EPA OSPS
Beth Zelenski, U.S. EPA OSPS
Sara Rasmussen, U.S. EPA OSW
Michael Shapiro, U.S. EPA OSWER
Jim Woolford, U.S. EPA OSWER
Dottie Pipkin, U.S. EPA OSWER
Tom Rinehart, U.S. EPA OSWER
Larry D'Andrea, U.S. EPA Region 2
Myron Knudson, U.S. EPA Region 6
Colleen Morgan, Marasco Newton Group
Chris LaRosa, Marasco Newton Group |
Introduction:
Mike Shapiro, deputy assistant administrator of the Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response (OSWER), welcomed the participants and emphasized
the importance the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attaches
to maximizing stakeholder involvement early in the implementation process
of the brownfields law. Mr. Shapiro noted that this is the third of four
listening sessions and that EPA has recently set up its teams and structure
to develop the appropriate policies, guidance, and regulations.
EPA is looking to various stakeholder communities to identify issues
impacting their constituents. Mechanisms are in place through the implementation
work groups and other means to identify key issues as quickly as possible.
EPA's objective is to get input on major themes and issues to consider
when developing policy and guidance. By the fall of 2002, EPA expects
to have developed new funding application guidelines and various policy
documents related to implementation of the law.
Legislation Summary-Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act:
Linda Garczynski, director of EPA's Outreach and Special Projects Staff (OSPS), presented a number of elements of the law that might be of particular interest to environmental organizations:
- Nonprofit organizations are eligible for the newly created direct
cleanup grants;
- Cleanup grants can be used for green space restoration;
- Planning is an eligible activity;
- States are required to provide information to the public about the
sites being addressed in their voluntary response programs (VRPs);
- A federal safety net that allows EPA to undertake actions under specified
instances; and
- Additional types of activities can be funded under the new grants,
including institutional controls monitoring, funding insurance mechanisms,
and public health monitoring.
Identification of Specific Issues/Questions:
Ecology/Greenspace
- Interest in seeing habitats that were originally on brownfields sites
regenerated.
- Question whether ecological enhancements may be made through the
funding.
- Question whether there would be environmental considerations beyond
land cleanup and whether emphasis would be placed on activities such
as restoration of watersheds.
Smart Growth
- Importance of ensuring that the reuse of a community's brownfields fits
within the larger development plan.
- Transportation, employment, and housing should be considered when
determining how to reuse brownfields
- Local comprehensive plans should be used as guidance.
- Scoring criteria for new grants should include and give preference
to these types of considerations.
- Recommended using the 10 principles of smart growth that EPA has
cited in the past.
Direct Cleanup Grants
- Questions regarding the eligibility and use of direct cleanup grants.
- Comment that green space benefits should be part of consideration.
- Identified eligibility issues associated with site ownership.
Assessment Funding for Planning Activities
- Question about how EPA defines planning
- Question whether the available funds for planning could be used
to develop broader long-term plans and strategies for a locality's
brownfields
- Concern that federally funded planning can result in one-dimensional
economic development planning that ignores smart growth principles.
Federal funding should not complicate local planning and zoning ordinances.
By its very nature the brownfields program seeks to help cities reverse
the trend of inward decay and outward sprawl.
- Comment about mine-scarred lands being addressed through the new
law and this will have an impact on land use in many rural settings.
A mining site located south of Pittsburgh, Pa., was identified as
an example of successful cleanup and reuse.
Administrative Costs
- Concern was expressed that the inability to cover administrative costs
may limit the amount of brownfields sites reused, especially since
brownfields transactions are time consuming
- Stakeholders encouraged EPA to develop a workable definition for
indirect and direct costs associated with specific brownfields transactions
and redevelopment efforts.
All Appropriate Inquiry/Site Assessment
- Questions about the all appropriate inquiry/site assessment standard
in the bill.
- Support was expressed for using the updated 2000 ASTM Phase I standard
that is currently available while EPA develops its own standard.
Responsible Parties/Definitions
- Question whether the legislation presented any change for responsible
parties.
- A stakeholder suggested that taking title and conducting valuations
of properties before cleanup may be difficult and may deter innocent
purchasers from pursuing sites.
- Another stakeholder suggested that a profit-sharing agreement could
be executed so that site cost before cleanup is not an obstacle to
property transactions.
|