Sunday, November 08, 2009
NJDEP publishes new rules for site remediation
Click here for NJDEP’s new Administrative Requirements for the Remediation of Contaminated Sites (ARRCS) Rule.arrcs_rule.pdf
Sunday, October 25, 2009
NJDEP posts Guidance for Implementation of Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA)
See the following NJDEP Guidance documents regarding New Jersey’s new Site Remediation Reform Act, which “privatizes” approvals of site remediation activities in New Jersey. Qualified private consultants can become Licensed Site Remediation Professionals, who will assume many of the oversight responsibilities formerly carried out by NJDEP, including issuing what were formerly known as No Further Action Letters (NFA) and will now be known as Response Action Outcomes (RAO).
Guidance regarding Immediate Environmental Concern (IEC) which must be reported to NJDEP and triggers other requirements: iec_guidance_draft.pdf
Guidance on the issuance of Response Action Outcomes (RAO’s):rao_guidance_draft.pdf
Guidance on rendering property unusable, which is grounds for NJDEP to invalidate a RAO:unusable_properties_draft.pdf
Guidance for presumptive remedies - NJDEP approval is required if selecting an alternative: presumptive_remedy_guidance_DRAFT.pdf
Guidance on when NJDEP may undertake “direct oversight”. This still requires retaining a LSRP and additionally requires posting a remediation funding source, requires NJDEP to review and approve/comment/disapprove each document prepared by the LSRP and requires NJDEP, not the LSRP, to select the remedial actions, and imposes other requirements.direct_oversight.pdf
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
NJDEP Site Remediation Public Notification Requirements Go Into Effect
NJDEP’s Site Remediation Public Notification requirements are in effect for all site remediation cases. The rules were published and effective September 2, 2008 and existing cases had until September 2, 2009 to comply. Now all cases are covered, and anyone responsible for a site remediation case must notify the public by letters or signs and implement other requirements of the public notification regulations. See NJDEP’s website for Public Notification and Outreach requirements and tools. http://www.state.nj.us/dep/srp/guidance/public_notification/
Monday, November 24, 2008
NJDEP sets new soil cleanup standards
NJDEP has promulgated new soils remediation standards. Some of the standards have become more stringent by an order of magnitude, which allows NJDEP to reopen cases involving those constituents (even a case which has previously received a No Further Action Letter). Some of the new standards are less stringent than those being replaced. Click here for an article explaining the new standards and their implications.
Soil_Standards_article.pdf
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Financial Assurance for Non-Permanent Environmental Remedies
Steve Barnett addresses financial assurance requirements for non-permanent environmental remedies such as caps and deed notices. Financial assurance is an enforcement priority for federal and state regulators for 2006 and 2007. New Jersey regulators and legislators are looking at ways to discourage nonpermanent remedies by increasing financial assurance requirements. Read the article, which was published in the April 2, 2007 New Jersey Law Journal, here.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
"The Brownfield Priorty – Brownfield does not only mean grants, loans and tax credits”
“The Brownfield Priorty – Brownfield does not only mean grants, loans and tax credits,” by Steve Barnett, New Jersey Law Journal, December 4, 2006
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Form of Prospective Purchaser Agreement used by NJDEP
Click here for a form of Prospective Purchaser Agreement which has been used by NJDEP in the past to help protect purchasers of contaminated properties from particular future liabilities and may be able to be adapted for use at your site
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Governor Corzine Highlights Brownfields in Economic Growth Strategy for the State of NJ, 2007
Click here for the full report. An excerpt from the Report, Priority #3, Support Smart, Sustainable Growth and Infrastructure, follows:
Encourage brownfields redevelopment. Scores of once-thriving industrial and commercial facilities, commonly known as brownfields, now sit idle or abandoned, draining surrounding neighborhoods of vitality. Fearful of costly cleanup, owners often choose not to investigate or sell their properties, and as a result they sit idle for years. In order to encourage the redevelopment of the state’s urban centers and other highly developed communities, the state must coordinate its policies and resources to foster the redevelopment of brownfields. This redevelopment must include both industrial and mixed-use development.
Brownfield properties provide unique opportunities for the state’s economy. Usually located where key infrastructure elements are already in place, with access to water, sewer, and utility lines, and proximity to roads, highways, and public transportation, the redevelopment of these properties helps to attract private reinvestment in urban centers, stimulating additional redevelopment, housing, and jobs. Encouraging the redevelopment of these properties requires dealing with a number of obstacles, including liability risk, regulatory uncertainty, difficulty finding financing, and the need for informed community involvement in planning.
The state’s approach to dealing with these obstacles has become fragmented, with many departments and authorities tasked with similar functions and missions. To eliminate duplication and to maximize the opportunities to put these properties to productive use, the Office of Economic Growth will lead the creation of a state strategy on brownfield redevelopment. The state’s resources and efforts will be evaluated and prioritized by the Office of Economic Growth, with steps to improve outcomes for the redevelopment, the environment, and the state’s cities. The Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will remain responsible for setting the policy and regulations for cleanup standards.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
NJDEP publishes new Guidance for the Sampling and Analysis of Concrete Designated for Recycling
Click here for the guidance document which resulted from experiences with rpotential issues regarding ecycled concrete from the Ford Motor Company’s Edison Assembly Plant.
Friday, February 10, 2006
NJDEP Sheen Remediation Policy, February 1, 2006
NJDEP Site Remediation and Waste Management issued this
memorandum describing NJDEP requirements to
address residual sheen on the water table resulting from discharges of
#2 fuel oil.
Monday, October 24, 2005
New Soil Remediation Standards in New Jersey - NJ Law Journal article by Dave Mairo
NJDEP has proposed Soil Remediation Standards (SRSs) and indicated it plans to adopt as soon as possible. If adopted, the SRSs will replace the Department’s current Soil Cleanup Criteria (SCC) guidance. In many cases the SRSs may not allow engineering or institutional controls where the guidance would have allowed them. Instead, the SRSs stricter impact to groundwater standards in many cases will require remediation unless the Department approves Alternative Remediation Standards. Dave Mairo reviews the various concerns related to the new standards and how, if implemented, they could affect various parties. The entire article ("Regulated Community Faces Stricter Controls,” New Jersey Law Journal October 24, 2005) is available here. http://www.connellfoley.com/articles/mairo-njlj-102405.pdf
Friday, September 16, 2005
Amendment of Rules Governing the Hazardous Discharge Site Remediation Fund
September 15, 2005. Amendment of Rules Governing the Hazardous Discharge Site Remediation Fund established by the Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act
Today Senate Bill No. 277 was approved, amending the Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10B-1, et seq. As a result, Municipalities, Counties and Redevelopment Authorities (MCR’s) now have greater access to the Hazardous Discharge Site Remediation Fund, primarily because the MCR no longer needs to own the property for which it receives funds. Another significant and related change is that grant monies spent by an MCR to remediate a property which it does not own become a lien on the property. Changes include:
• MCR’s do not need to own the property in order to receive grants from the Fund;
• Any expenditure by a MCR of grant monies for remedial action on a property which it does not own shall constitute a debt of the property owner to the Fund and a lien shall be placed on the property;
• Grants to MCR’s capped at $3 million annually and 75% of the total costs the remediation at any one site;
• Innocent Party Grants available to MCR’s and the cap on IPG’s raised to $250,000;
• Remedial Action grants available to MCR’s up to 50% of remedial action costs for properties to be used for housing and up to 75% of remedial action costs for properties to be used for recreation and conservation;
• Notwithstanding any other limitations, additional $2 million annual grant available to MCR’s for remedial actions in Brownfield Development Areas (BDA’s)
• Pilot program established to grant up to $5 million total to nonprofits for assessment and investigations of properties contaminated by discharge of hazardous substances.
See the approved statutory amendment by clicking here.
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Proposed New Penalties for Violations of NJDEP Site Remediation Requirements
August 15, 2005 (comments due to NJDEP by October 14, 2005). Proposed New Penalties for Violations of NJDEP Site Remediation Requirements under UST Rules, ISRA Rules, Oversight Rules, and Technical Requirements for Site Remediation Rules
NJDEP has proposed rules specifying over 400 violations with penalties ranging from $2,000 to $20,000. Currently penalties are triggered only after expiration of a time period set forth by NJDEP in a written notice of violation as per NJAC 7:26C-10.4. However, penalties under the proposed rule would be triggered automatically and immediately for non-minor violations. Examples of non-minor violations include failure to properly perform a well search ($20,000), failure to conduct the RI, RA, etc. in accordance with the approved Work Plan and schedule ($8,000), etc.
For minor violations, the proposal would establish grace (compliance) periods, after which time penalties would be assessed if compliance is not achieved. Commissioner Campbell said “these rules will bring more discipline to the program and will have a significant impact on the voluntary cleanup program.”
Comments on the proposed rule are due to NJDEP by October 14, 2005. See the Grace Period Rule Proposal by clicking here.
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
Senators Lautenberg and Corzine Announce 800 Thousand Dollars for Brownfield Sites in New Jersey
Click here for the press release:
Copyright Connell Foley LLP 2007