Another Great Post by Larry!!!!!
Larry Schnapf
ASTM Phase 1 Group On Verge of Adding New Term "CREC" to Phase 1 Standard
As we have previously reported,
the ASTM E1527-05 is undergoing its five year review (see discussion
about the proposed revisions about requirements for agency review in the
"manager's choice" column to the right) .
One of the proposed changes is to add a new term "Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition" or "CREC". This new term is being considered because of confusion about the HREC term. The HREC (Historic Recognized Environmental Condition) was added to E1527 in 2000 to address contamination that was remediated in accordance with applicable standards. The HREC term is important because it can signify to purchasers and lenders that previously-identified contamination has been adequately remediated so that it no longer poses a risk to the property, borrower or owner.
The objective of the Phase 1 E1527-05 process is to determine if a property has an Recognized Environmental Condition (REC) which is defined as conditions suggesting the presence or threatened release of a hazardous substance or petroleum. The REC term does not apply to a "de minimis condition" which, in turn, is defined as a condition that does not pose a risk to human health or the environment, or would not result in enforcement action if brought to the attention of the appropriate regulator.
The REC term was established before the era of risk-based cleanups. Thus, there was confusion among many consultants if a REC that was remediated to a risk-based cleanup should still be considered a REC because contaminants remained above the unrestricted cleanup standards. There was also confusion if the HREC term could apply to "self-directed" cleanups (cleanups done without state oversight) or under the supervision of a licensed site professional. Moreover, many high-volume or commodity shops frequently simply mention in their reports that the database indicates an NFA was issued but do not review the actual NFA letter or review the agency files to determine if there are post-remedial institutional or engineering controls that must be maintained. Failure to comply with such requirements could result in a reopener of the NFA or otherwise expose the owner/purchaser/borrower to cleanup or toxic tort liability for exposure to contaminants.
To help clarify the confusion, the ASTM phase 1 group has proposed to modify the HREC term so it only would apply to "clean closures" (i.e., cleanups that remove all of the contamination). If the cleanup uses a risk-based cleanup that involves the use of institutional or engineering controls, the CREC term would be used. This would help alert purchasers, lenders and other users of the phase 1 report that the property is subject to ECs/ICs, that they should determine if those conditions or restrictions have been properly implemented and that they should determine if the cleanup remains protective of human health or the environment.
Do you like this concept? Let us know and we will share your thoughts with the ASTM committee. The revised standard will be sent to ballot at the end of February.
One of the proposed changes is to add a new term "Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition" or "CREC". This new term is being considered because of confusion about the HREC term. The HREC (Historic Recognized Environmental Condition) was added to E1527 in 2000 to address contamination that was remediated in accordance with applicable standards. The HREC term is important because it can signify to purchasers and lenders that previously-identified contamination has been adequately remediated so that it no longer poses a risk to the property, borrower or owner.
The objective of the Phase 1 E1527-05 process is to determine if a property has an Recognized Environmental Condition (REC) which is defined as conditions suggesting the presence or threatened release of a hazardous substance or petroleum. The REC term does not apply to a "de minimis condition" which, in turn, is defined as a condition that does not pose a risk to human health or the environment, or would not result in enforcement action if brought to the attention of the appropriate regulator.
The REC term was established before the era of risk-based cleanups. Thus, there was confusion among many consultants if a REC that was remediated to a risk-based cleanup should still be considered a REC because contaminants remained above the unrestricted cleanup standards. There was also confusion if the HREC term could apply to "self-directed" cleanups (cleanups done without state oversight) or under the supervision of a licensed site professional. Moreover, many high-volume or commodity shops frequently simply mention in their reports that the database indicates an NFA was issued but do not review the actual NFA letter or review the agency files to determine if there are post-remedial institutional or engineering controls that must be maintained. Failure to comply with such requirements could result in a reopener of the NFA or otherwise expose the owner/purchaser/borrower to cleanup or toxic tort liability for exposure to contaminants.
To help clarify the confusion, the ASTM phase 1 group has proposed to modify the HREC term so it only would apply to "clean closures" (i.e., cleanups that remove all of the contamination). If the cleanup uses a risk-based cleanup that involves the use of institutional or engineering controls, the CREC term would be used. This would help alert purchasers, lenders and other users of the phase 1 report that the property is subject to ECs/ICs, that they should determine if those conditions or restrictions have been properly implemented and that they should determine if the cleanup remains protective of human health or the environment.
Do you like this concept? Let us know and we will share your thoughts with the ASTM committee. The revised standard will be sent to ballot at the end of February.
