![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Pilot Project 2000 Summary Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative is a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) effort designed to use opportunities for statutory and regulatory flexibility in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to accelerate site cleanup, facilitate dialogue, and integrate reuse and redevelopment issues, as appropriate, into cleanup decisions. In the longer term, it is EPA's goal that this initiative will help accelerate cleanups at brownfields sites, thus enabling the creation of new jobs, businesses, and green spaces for communities. In March 2000, EPA announced four pilot projects intended to provide case studies of techniques, tools, and strategies to integrate RCRA cleanups and brownfields redevelopment. The four pilots are: 1) the CBS/Viacom facility in Bridgeport, Connecticut; 2) the Bethlehem Steel Corporation site in Lackawanna, New York; 3) the PECO-Energy (now Exelon Corporation) facility in Chester, Pennsylvania; and 4) the Blue Valley Redevelopment area in Kansas City, Missouri. The four pilots already have yielded results and innovations that can be transferred to other sites. All sites have cleanup and redevelopment plans well underway, and all have benefitted from the pilot process by eliminating unnecessary procedural steps, cutting red tape, and brokering communication between state and local governments and the community. The RCRA Brownfields Pilots illustrate how frequent communication among federal, state, and local governments, community members, owners/operators, and other stakeholders, coupled with the corrective action reforms emphasis on "results over process," can expedite cleanup. This will, in turn, allow for redevelopment at RCRA facilities.The process at all four sites has been accelerated (in some cases, dramatically) by their designation as a RCRA Brownfields pilot. The pilots demonstrate the value of broad-based stakeholder communication. They point out to methods for streamlining and accelerating the RCRA corrective action process, partnering with states and industry, focusing on results, and achieving faster cleanups that meet the redevelopment goals of the facility and community at large while ensuring protection of human health and the environment. The pilots also demonstrate that significant effort is needed to further incorporate a Brownfields approach of accommodating plans for community revitalization and site reuse into the RCRA corrective action program. This summary report provides background on the Initiative, describes the pilots and their accomplishments, and identifies the "lessons learned" that EPA and other stakeholders can use to improve cleanups by leveraging redevelopment potential at properties subject to RCRA. INTRODUCTION In an effort to prevent future brownfields(1) at RCRA sites and communicate streamlined cleanup approaches to bring land back into productive use, EPA launched the RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative in June 1998. The action was taken in response to growing recognition that the traditional Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) cleanup process could, in some instances, delay cleanup and redevelopment of abandoned or underutilized contaminated sites. RCRA primarily regulates the generation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes; however, the RCRA program also affects the cleanup of sites that are contaminated with hazardous wastes (either because the property was subject to a RCRA permit or had Interim Status, or because RCRA waste is managed during cleanup of the site). While the initial years of EPA's Brownfields program focused on issues posed by the Superfund program, EPA's review of the first several rounds of Brownfields pilot applications revealed that many of the applicants also raised RCRA impediments to redevelopment or reuse. A joint memorandum from the EPA Assistant Administrators for the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) and the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) responded to the growing issue of RCRA requirements and Brownfields redevelopment and launched the RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative with the underlying goal to "facilitate reuse of brownfields subject to RCRA."(2) A critical component of the initiative is to highlight opportunities for statutory and regulatory flexibility that currently exist in the RCRA program. The initiative is not about legislative relief or regulatory reform. Rather, it is designed to improve how federal and state governments implement the RCRA program and work with stakeholders regarding property reuse to yield more effective results for communities and for the environment. Accordingly, an important goal is to raise awareness among Regions, states, and other stakeholders of redevelopment opportunities at RCRA corrective action facilities, and thereby, where appropriate, leverage redevelopment potential to improve the corrective action process and help EPA achieve its Government Performance and Review Act (GPRA) goals. The memorandum also sets forth three primary goals of the RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative:
THE RCRA BROWNFIELDS PILOT PROJECTSRCRA Reforms In December 1999, EPA asked its Regional offices and the states to propose an initial round ofRCRA brownfields pilots to "showcase RCRA reforms" and develop solutions that take advantage of existing statutory and regulatory flexibility.(3) The RCRA Corrective Action Reforms, announced in July 1999, were a series of administrative improvements to the RCRA cleanup program designed to speed corrective action and help achieve the ambitious GPRA goals for the RCRA program. Some of the most significant reforms included:
The December 1999 memorandum called for EPA Regional offices and state agencies to submit applications for pilot projects that would pursue new approaches to cleanup of existing brownfields for reuse, as well as prevention of future brownfields at RCRA sites. Specifically, the memorandum further emphasized the goal to "identify actual or perceived RCRA barriers to reuse and develop solutions that take advantage of existing statutory and regulatory flexibility in the program to address them." An underlying message in the "call for pilots" memorandum and in the workgroup discussions was for pilot projects to "work and think out of the box" and document new approaches. These approaches could involve use of state authorities, enforcement tools such as comfort/status letters or prospective purchaser agreements, and coordination of federal, state, and local efforts to speed cleanup and allow for redevelopment. Pilot Selection Process The December 1999 memorandum included a format for applications based on the internal EPA/state workgroup analysis and review and used the earlier brownfields assessment pilot application process as a starting model. The individual pilot applications were reviewed and independently ranked by a review team of RCRA Brownfields Prevention workgroup members and EPA Brownfields staff. Once the review team ranked the pilot applications, the Assistant Administrator for OSWER selected four projects out of seven original applications. The four pilot projects covered several aspects of RCRA and Brownfields, including streamlined corrective action procedures, use of state voluntary (or alternative cleanup) authorities, and integration of brownfields redevelopment/environmental data into a portfolio. Highlights of the four pilots are set forth below. A more detailed description of each pilot's background, goals, accomplishments, lessons learned, and future plans is presented later in this report.
RESULTS AND "LESSONS LEARNED" FROM THE PILOTSThe pilots were launched in March 2000, and each has yielded results in a relatively short time frame. Initially, pilot team leaders and participants needed to reorient perspectives and establish communication and trust across a variety of stakeholder viewpoints. EPA encouraged stakeholders to explore innovative approaches that integrate reuse issues and corrective action to leverage redevelopment and reuse potential and hasten cleanup. Each of the four pilots has produced valuable achievements and "lessons learned." These generally fall into three categories:
Accomplishments Overall, the four pilots demonstrated that frequent communications among all levels of government and facility owners/operators, combined with the RCRA corrective action reform emphasis on results over process, can speed cleanup which will, in turn, enhance the opportunity for redevelopment. All four pilot sites had been in the RCRA corrective action pipeline for years with limited progress due, in part, to a lack of understanding and communication of stakeholder needs and views. The pilots provide a much needed forum that allow diverse stakeholder interests to start communicating while focusing on cleanup and process improvement. As a consequence, issues and problems have been clarified and possible solutions more readily identified. The more intensive stakeholder dialogue provided a climate for constructive communications that helped expedite cleanup and redevelopment. For example, at both the CBS/Viacom and PECO-Energy sites, regulatory duplication was minimized, which accelerated activity by a year or more. Developers are now involved at both locations. At the Bethlehem Steel Corporation site and Beazer East site in Blue Valley, parcels were released from RCRA oversight for subsequent redevelopment. The emphasis of the RCRA corrective action reforms on "results over process" has begun to create a climate that has allowed team members to focus on achieving desired goals by the most efficient and appropriate means, regardless of the vehicle, be it a state voluntary order, state voluntary cleanup program (VCP), or state or federal RCRA corrective action. One critical outcome of these pilots is that site assessment and cleanup activities and redevelopment plans are well underway at all four pilot sites. At the CBS/Viacom and PECO-Energy facilities, developers and both the state and federal governments are actively involved, and the owner/operators are taking steps to coordinate the planned or ongoing cleanup with the redevelopment plans. At the Bethlehem Steel site, the pilot has spurred area-wide redevelopment dialogues involving local government, academics, and urban planners. At Blue Valley Redevelopment, the pilot resulted in integrating valuable RCRA site-characterization data and related information into area-wide revitalization plans for marketing these properties, as well as helping to spur redevelopment of the Beazer East facility site. The pilots also have created generally cohesive teams with positive working relationships that bode well for further progress on cleanup and reuse in the future. Though the pilots have been relatively brief in duration, the opportunity created by the pilots has accelerated action by the teams, created a setting in which technical or legal issues are identified and resolved informally where possible (or rapidly elevated for attention), and educated team members about the needs of other stakeholders at each site. Equally important, the teams include a diverse array of stakeholders not normally involved with corrective action sites, including representatives from economic development organizations, cities, and property developers. Lessons Learned for the RCRA Program There are several lessons learned from the pilots that may have implications for the RCRA program: Better Integrate Brownfields Redevelopment Opportunities into RCRA Corrective Action Programs, as appropriate. Regional and state personnel are more empowered to incorporate redevelopment concerns into cleanups, as appropriate, but need to be more aware of the flexibility that existing Brownfields and RCRA "tools" can provide to satisfy the site-specific needs of the site. These personnel need a better understanding of development issues and how to accommodate them when using federal and state cleanup programs, thereby helping to revitalize idled RCRA properties. Applying the lessons learned from the pilots to other RCRA corrective action sites can help EPA and authorized states achieve their overall RCRA and GPRA program goals. Thus, the pilots are a good start, but much more remains to be done. As one stakeholder remarked, "Shouldn't brownfields thinking be part of every Corrective Action project?" A good example of creative thinking is at the CBS/Viacom site. The owner/operator and City of Bridgeport crafted an agreement under which CBS/Viacom would retain corrective action obligations after the City obtains title to the site and sells it to a third-party developer. CBS/Viacom and the City agreed to work the redevelopment plans around the corrective action (e.g., site cap, access to groundwater wells). The presence of a potential redeveloper spurred the pace of cleanup, and ensured that on-going remediation activities would not affect reuse. Encourage High-Quality Owner/Operator Initiated RCRA Investigations and Cleanups. The owners/operators of all four pilot sites proactively participated in a variety of activities, depending on the circumstances at their individual sites. Three submitted various work plans and conducted investigations, all four provided certain reports and data, and three conducted cleanups. It appears that the incentive to move quickly spurred owners/operators out of the normal "reactive" mode. The ability of EPA and the state to act on these owner/operator initiated efforts eliminated years of procedural time. Efforts to involve the public were enhanced by the stakeholder process as well as the pilot team's focus on public communication. Forge Cooperative Relationships between EPA and the States. All of the pilots in effect created "one stop shopping" for the community, the owner/operator, and the redeveloper to have state and federal cleanup issues resolved in a more holistic manner. For example, at the CBS/Viacom pilot, the state is not authorized for RCRA corrective action, but EPA and the State of Connecticut coordinated program requirements and work assignments smoothly. Connecticut remediation standards for industrial/commercial future land use were integrated with RCRA risk-based cleanup requirements to avoid duplication. Similarly, at the PECO-Energy pilot, EPA's partnership with the state voluntary program under Pennsylvania's Land Recycling and Reclamation Act saved valuable resources by enabling PECO-Energy to use one administrative process to satisfy both state and federal corrective action goals. All of the pilots, in effect, created "one stop shopping" for the community, the owner/operator, and the redeveloper to resolve issues. Be Receptive to "Carving Out" Portions of RCRA Permitted or Interim Status Facilities, where appropriate. At least two pilots identified RCRA cleanup liability as an issue for local governments interested in redeveloping sites. In particular, local officials are concerned about pursuing redevelopment opportunities where the property (including even a portion of a larger site) at issue is, or potentially will be, subject to RCRA corrective action because the property is a permitted facility or operating under RCRA Interim Status. In these cases, local officials are concerned that the potential cleanup liability might convey with title to the property. EPA should address how sites can be "deleted" or carved out from potential RCRA cleanup liability, and make available examples of successful approaches that have been used at particular sites. The issue has been addressed at some individual permitted facilities through permit modifications. Other approaches, such as those described in EPA's upcoming "completion" guidance, may provide appropriate "comfort" at Interim Status facilities. Encourage States to Allow Appropriate use of VCPs for Specific RCRA Sites. Some states, either by statute or policy, consider RCRA sites to be ineligible for entry into their voluntary cleanup programs (VCPs). This may be a barrier to expedited cleanup and redevelopment. Owners/operators may perceive the voluntary cleanup programs as more flexible in implementation, and in cases where a real estate transaction will occur or a loan is needed, a "no further action" letter from the state's VCP may be critical to the project. Also, these programs are independent sources of resources that can be effectively brought to bear at RCRA sites. States whose VCP meets or exceeds the substantive requirements of the federal RCRA program for cleanup and public participation might offer an expeditious complement to their authorized corrective action program. Reinforce Messages about Procedural Flexibility. Although the message from EPA Headquarters has been to use "opportunities for statutory and regulatory flexibility in RCRA" and to adopt a "performance-based approach" to cleanup, the pilots reveal that many stakeholders want to adopt process-oriented methods to the reforms rather than apply the reforms as new tools. It seems that using a new approach sometimes is "in addition to" and not "in lieu of" the old process approach. It would be helpful for EPA and the states to conduct further training and outreach to explain application of the RCRA corrective action reforms that "foster maximum use of program flexibility and practical approaches" to cleanup at RCRA sites. Form Project "Teams." Pilot experience shows that pilot teams and teamwork can create optimism within state and local governments and community interests for progress toward cleanup and redevelopment. While coordinating meetings, conference calls, and federal and state programs with the stakeholders takes time, in the end, these efforts probably save time by creating a "template" that can be used in other contexts. Encourage New Thinking by, and a Willingness to Engage with, the Regulated Community on Ways to Integrate Reuse into the Corrective Action Process. Typically at RCRA sites there is a financially viable owner/operator legally responsible for site assessment and cleanup. This means there are potential financial and technical resources that can be used for cleanup that can help create redevelopment opportunities that benefit both the owner/operator and the community. Site investigations and cleanup of facilities can be accomplished in advance of permitting, using administrative agreements or streamlined voluntary approaches under state or federal authorities, especially for less complex sites or portions of sites. Government and private parties should come to the table prepared to focus on the goal of getting property cleaned up and back into productive use. At one pilot, taking a fresh approach resulted in noteworthy and very positive shifts in attitude. At all four pilots, newly opened lines of communication enhanced working relationships between regulators and industry representatives and fostered innovative strategies to meet regulatory obligations while achieving environmental and economic success. Lessons Learned for administering the next round of pilots Pre-Application Advance Stakeholder Buy-in is Critical. EPA needs to discuss the objectives of the pilot selection process with private and public stakeholders before the pilot application. This consultation did not happen in all cases. Some private interests were worried about being "singled out" or stigmatized. Some local interests also expressed concern at being "left out" and theorized it was due to RCRA not being flexible. Solicit Applications from External Stakeholders. The first round of pilots were solicited from EPA Regions and states. One pilot stakeholder suggested that EPA solicit future ideas from external stakeholders, such as community groups, local governments, and owner/operators. This would require some advertising, but could bring a wide range of opportunities to EPA's attention. Establish Expectations Up Front. EPA RCRA and Brownfields program staff need to discuss the scope, new approaches, and outputs up front. Even with RCRA corrective action reforms, the RCRA regulatory requirements are complex and often not well understood by specialists in brownfields programs. Similarly, Superfund Brownfields approaches are not always well known to RCRA staff. All four pilots benefitted from exchanges of viewpoints, ideas, and information through the workgroup, but advance staff-level discussions could help the participants and help streamline the process. Enlist Senior Management Support. Senior Regional and RCRA program management in EPA Regions and the states should be "on board" before submission of applications to ensure the commitment to trying out new approaches. In three pilots, it was necessary to elevate issues to Regional and state management officials. In each case, management made decisions instrumental to trying new approaches. At the Bethlehem Steel site, for example, it was necessary to enlist both state and Regional management to approve use of a voluntary order to address issues related to use of the New York voluntary cleanup program at a RCRA Interim Status facility. At the PECO-Energy site, EPA senior management met with the state and local officials to speed the pilot's progress. Application Process Streamline the Applications. The application/submission process itself proved workable, and the project application seemed to provide most of the necessary information. A relatively succinct writeup seems sufficient, as long as the issue/problem, objective(s), stakeholder interest/involvement, and outputs are clearly delineated. Provide an Informal Feedback Loop for Pilot Applicants. The pilot review and selection process worked smoothly and fairly, and should remain within the workgroup framework. While the workgroup ranking and discussion of applications resulted in thorough analysis of applications, there was no mechanism to provide feedback about weaknesses, suggested points of emphasis, or questions for clarification to applicants once final selections were made. Pilot project implementation Continue and Build on the Team Approach. For purposes of project management and to assist communications across many areas of interest, a pilot "team" process was instituted for each pilot. The teams included participants from state/local governments, EPA (both Headquarters and Region), company representatives in both technical and legal services, and community interests. The pilots reinforce the importance of forming a pilot team for each site to work on issues, formulate solutions and approaches, and build consensus. The pilots also demonstrate the value of a team leader to help manage the team process and push resolution of issues. Suggested "Model" Team Composition
While somewhat dependent on the scope of the pilot, weekly or twice-monthly conference calls involving all the players helps assure success. Pilots with routine and significant communications with all team members have achieved fairly dramatic and substantially accelerated progress toward cleanup and reuse. DESCRIPTION OF THE PILOTSThe following is a detailed description of each pilot, including background information, goals, innovations tested, results to date, lessons learned, and future plans: CBS/VIACOM BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT PILOT Background The CBS/Viacom site in Bridgeport, Connecticut(4) was in use from 1888 until 1988. The site was formerly the Westinghouse Electric Corporation Bryant Electric facility, which manufactured electrical components. Longer-term plans are to transfer the site to the City of Bridgeport, which will transfer the site to a third party who will develop it for a new industrial use. The city identified a local manufacturer who proposes a new manufacturing plant that would be more than 200,000 square feet in size. The goal of the site clean-up is to comply with both the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP) Property Transfer Act program and EPA RCRA Corrective Action program requirements. A key challenge in this pilot is integrating state and federal cleanup requirements to avoid duplication and ensure the cleanup is protective of human health and the environment considering the (industrial use) site- redevelopment plans. The future plan is to develop a light manufacturing facility. Planned Short-Term Goals and Results to Date
Successes and Innovations
Lessons Learned EPA RCRA Corrective Action guidance contains recommended approaches that differ in both breadth and scope from the requirements of the Connecticut Property Transfer Act. The pilot successfully showed that EPA and a non-delegated state program can work together cooperatively to streamline different program approaches. The goals of EPA's RCRA Corrective Action program, the Connecticut property transfer program, the City of Bridgeport's redevelopment office, the facility owner/operator, and the community all are being achieved. Future of Pilot EPA will work with the pilot stakeholders to achieve Environmental Indicators at the site and to conduct future cleanup activities in a way that appropriately and simultaneously accommodates cleanup of the site with the transfer of the property to the redeveloper so that new jobs and economic opportunities can be provided to the community. Stakeholder Feedback Stakeholders contacted included state, local government, and industry participants. Their detailed comments are included in the APPENDIX. In summary, stakeholders emphasized the value of the pilot in bringing diverse stakeholder interests to the table. This helped to integrate cleanup and redevelopment issues and kept expectations clear for all parties. Some expressed reservations that the activities may have increased expenses, so companies should be given an opportunity for advance consent. There is general consensus that the pilot helped streamline the assessment and cleanup process and that the continued coordination provided by the pilot is favorable. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION LACKAWANNA, NEW YORK PILOT Background The Bethlehem Steel Corporation (BSC) site is a steel manufacturing facility at which past operations resulted in the contamination of certain portions of the site. The site is a RCRA treatment, storage, or disposal facility (TSDF) under Interim Status. The company currently is investigating the contaminated areas under a RCRA 3008(h) consent order with EPA. The pilot is focused on a 102-acre parcel that holds promise for industrial or commercial reuse as the first step in a phased, longer-term plan for the entire site as part of a revitalized "Greenway" to the Buffalo area. Erie County, New York, has $1-2 million available for infrastructure and improvements to the parcel but the county wants more assurances about contamination and liability before undertaking the investment. The Lackawanna Community Development Commission (LCDC), City of Lackawanna, would take ownership of the property. EPA issued a "no further action" letter to BSC for the solid waste management units on the 102-acre parcel, but until the pilot project, the parcel remained part of the EPA/Bethlehem Steel RCRA facility investigation consent order. Under normal circumstances, this portion of the property probably would not be redeveloped until the balance of the site has been investigated and cleaned up as necessary. EPA and the stakeholders hoped to remove obstacles to the city and county's plan for the redevelopment of the 102-acre parcel by first removing it from the RFI consent order. Then BSC, working with the state and Erie County, would reassess this area as part of their due diligence prior to any property transactions or investment in infrastructure. This pilot has explored conducting this reassessment under the state voluntary cleanup program. If the pilot site is successfully returned to use, the administrative process devised for the 102-acre area may be applied to other portions of the Bethlehem Steel facility (including an adjacent 500-acre parcel). Pilot Goals and Innovations The goal of the project is to remove the 102-acre parcel, and subsequently, an additional 500 acres of the facility from the EPA RFI consent order. BSC requested that an additional goal for the project be removal of RCRA Interim Status designation for the 102-acre and/or 500-acre parcels so these portions of the site would be eligible under the state's Voluntary Cleanup Program. New York draft policy for the VCP currently prohibits sites operating under a RCRA order or with RCRA Interim Status from eligibility into the program. Despite Bethlehem Steel's request, EPA Region 2 and the NYDEC concluded that it would be difficult and time consuming to attempt to find a way to remove the "RCRA Interim Status designation" for the 102-acre parcel as long as BSC remained owner of the parcel. This situation appeared to preclude use of New York's Voluntary Cleanup Program. As an alternative approach, NYDEC with the concurrence of EPA, devised a voluntary consent order mechanism for the 102-acre parcel that is substantively equivalent to a VCP approach, but which would not be precluded from use at a RCRA Interim Status facility. Another goal of the pilot is to find ways to integrate the different expectations of RCRA and applicable procedures of the NYDEC, EPA, and Erie County to facilitate the phased redevelopment, as well as to improve community involvement in planning and activities at the site. The future plan is to build a light industrial park. Results to Date and Accomplishments
Lessons Learned
Future of the Pilot A letter to EPA requesting release of the 102-acre parcel from the RFI order, a legal survey of the 102-acre area, and a letter from EPA to BSC regarding release of the 102-acre parcel have been completed. EPA and BSC have signed an amendment to the RFI order to remove the102-acre area. NYSDEC plans to negotiate a voluntary consent order with BSC. BSC also needs to negotiate an investigation work plan to fulfill NYDEC requirements and to help Erie County with the due diligence for the 102-acre parcel. Once these negotiations are complete, BSC will conduct investigation and cleanup activities required for the 102-acre parcel. At that point, the team hopes to begin addressing the next, potentially low-risk parcels planned for investigation, cleanup, and redevelopment. It is hoped that before the end of 2001, Erie County will commit funding to start infrastructure improvements on the 102-acre parcel as the next major step toward redevelopment by the City of Lackawanna. Stakeholder Feedback Stakeholders contacted included the owner/operator and state and local governments. Their comments are presented in the APPENDIX. In summary, stakeholders expressed their views on two aspects of the pilot project. First, there was consensus that the pilot project addressed RCRA issues in a way that accelerated the process toward redevelopment, highlighted the importance of seeking to accommodate redevelopment goals in cleanup, enhanced communications, and served to partially address the company's eligibility to participate in the state voluntary program. However, commenters expressed frustration with what they saw as the inflexibility of RCRA regulators at Interim Status facilities. PECO-ENERGY CHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA PILOTBackground The PECO-Energy (now the Exelon Corporation) site comprises about 88 acres along the Delaware River in Chester, Pennsylvania. Seventeen of these acres are currently under a RCRA 3008(h) Administrative Consent Order to investigate and characterize past waste activities. The Delaware River waterfront has been an industrial area for about the last 150 years. Contamination at the site consists primarily of petroleum products and poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) from decomposing resins. Interim measures are in place to recover free product and prevent sheens from forming on the surface of the Delaware River. PECO-Energy no longer needs much of the land at the Chester site and is committed to cleaning up the site for redevelopment. Current proposed uses include office buildings and other commercial ventures. The city is an Environmental Justice area and the Regional Environmental Justice Office has played an important part in this project. Pilot Goals and Innovations The overall goal of this pilot is to expedite efficient remediation that protects human health and the environment and does not hinder redevelopment by integrating the administrative processes of the RCRA Corrective Action and Pennsylvania's Act 2 programs. Once integrated, remediation at the PECO-Energy site will be done under the Act 2 administrative process to avoid duplication of time and resources for EPA, the state, and PECO-Energy. Because of this integrated process, EPA has eliminated the need to negotiate a second Consent Order for investigation of the site beyond the original 17 acres and a third Consent Order for implementation of the remedy. When PECO-Energy finishes all the remediation requirements, the entire 88-acre site will be suitable for redevelopment. Accomplishments and Lessons Learned
Future of the Pilot On October 11, 2000, PECO-Energy Preferred Real Estate Investments (PREI) unveiled its proposed redevelopment project plans for the Chester waterfront. The project is expected to represent an investment of some $150-$200 million, create approximately 3,000 permanent jobs, and create 500 temporary construction jobs. PREI signed a purchaser agreement in July 2000 and closed on the property in May 2001. PREI has received a commitment from Synygy, Inc., a software and systems provider company, to move its corporate headquarters to the site. PREI plans to begin development during 2001 by renovating the old generating station into office space. EPA expects to issue the Statement of Basis in late 2001, which begins the public comment period for the proposed final remedy. EPA plans to mail a fact sheet to members of the community and to hold a public meeting to collect comments. After a final remedy is determined, PECO-Energy/Exelon will implement the remediation goals through the Act 2 process. Stakeholder Feedback Stakeholders contacted included state and industry interests. Their comments are included in the APPENDIX. Stakeholders were uniformly supportive of the pilot as a demonstration of how to integrate the federal RCRA corrective action program with the state cleanup law to minimize duplication and accelerate the cleanup and redevelopment process. THE BLUE VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI PILOTBackground The Blue Valley area in Kansas City, Missouri, is a blighted, multi-facility industrial area that includes several RCRA-regulated facilities, including wood treaters and scrap recyclers. The area is the Blue River flood plain in east Kansas City. This RCRA Pilot builds on the work of the existing interagency Blue Valley Redevelopment Team formed to examine opportunities posed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) flood control/rechannelization project on the Blue River and the EPA Brownfields program. The team partners include EPA Region 7, USACE, City of Kansas City (various offices), Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Hanson/Beazer East, CEC, Inc. (a RCRA facility in the Blue Valley), and the Blue Valley Industrial Association. Goals of the Pilot The goals of the pilot are to perform an area-wide assessment of the Blue River Industrial Corridor and facilitate site-specific cleanup and redevelopment of properties within this area, starting with the Beazer East site. As a first step, the area-wide environmental assessment includes the use of geographic information system (GIS) maps to compile and integrate data from the USACE, RCRA permits, Superfund assessments, and other pertinent environmental and economic redevelopment information. These maps have been included in the city's "Redevelopment Opportunity Portfolio." At the Beazer East site, a high-priority RCRA facility with a post-closure permit, the team coordinated logistics, secured approvals to use dredged material from the re-channelization project to make site improvements necessary for cleanup and redevelopment, and provided certainty regarding future cleanup obligations by removing cleaned portions from the cleanup requirements in the permit. The future plans are to place new industrial facilities on old industrial properties and to revitalize the area. Results and Accomplishments to Date
Lessons Learned
Future of the Pilot In September 2001, the Team partners anticipate that an area-wide characterization of the environmental conditions of the Blue Valley Industrial Corridor will be conducted, including typical contamination levels by past-land-use category, background PAH and metals levels, and qualitative ecological risk assessment data for use in site-specific risk assessments necessary for voluntary cleanups. EPA also anticipates carving out Beazer East Tracts A and B from the RCRA permit and the successful redevelopment of part or all of the Beazer East site. Stakeholder Feedback Stakeholders contacted included city, community, and business interests. Their comments are included in the APPENDIX. The pilot was credited with accelerating the state RCRA process and integrating state and federal approaches to accommodate site redevelopment goals. Stakeholders felt that EPA should further explore the connection between brownfields and RCRA sites as there often is a disconnect between remedial project managers and city land-use planners regarding end use of the site. Some stakeholders felt that regulator attitudes often are a disincentive for companies to "step up for help." They believe that for that reason, brownfield sites remain unaddressed even though they are often ideally situated compared with greenfield sites. Stakeholder Feedback on RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative Pilot Projects [Note: EPA sought feedback from external stakeholders involved with each of the four pilot projects to help the Agency further improve communications, define needed refinements to the overall RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative, and identify their concerns and perspectives. EPA's view is that all of the pilots worked well to identify issues and to formulate solutions, and that the feedback was beneficial to focus attention on specific concerns and necessary next steps in communications and outreach. Stakeholder comments are verbatim or edited only for context. To assist the reader, each set of comments is followed by a note explaining the Agency's response and steps taken to date, as appropriate.] CBS/VIACOM BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT PILOT Stakeholder Comments
EPA Response: The Agency appreciates the feedback about early communication with companies that may become involved in pilot projects. Based on the pilot to date, EPA is confident that the RCRA will not impede successful completion of the project. EPA and the state are working with the redeveloper, provided assurances that the assessment and cleanup can proceed as part of the redevelopment planning, and will continue to coordinate efforts at the site. For the next round of RCRA Brownfields projects, EPA included company acceptance as a key consideration for selection, stakeholders were apprised well in advance, and in several cases, helped to define the scope of the pilot effort. The Agency also believes this project (as well as the other first round pilots) further reinforces the value of broad-based and early stakeholder involvement in RCRA cleanups where the potential exists for property reuse and revitalization. EPA has worked to help streamline the assessment and cleanup with the involvement of city, state, and private redevelopment interests. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION LACKAWANNA, NEW YORK PILOTStakeholder Comments
EPA Response: EPA understands the difficulties that can arise regarding the regulatory status of RCRA sites and agrees that it would be helpful to clarify how and when regulators may release a facility from "Interim Status" at RCRA facilities. At this pilot site, EPA encouraged and strongly supported pilot team efforts to work through the Interim Status issues in a way that recognized the interests of both the company and community and provided for an outcome that is consistent with the state voluntary cleanup program and meets the overall RCRA goal of protection of human health and the environment. The state's voluntary order is expected to serve these purposes. Subsequent to the release of the 102-acre parcel from the RFI, EPA also notified the state that upon the completion of the ongoing facility investigation, the entire site would be turned over to New York for completion of assessments or remediation as may be necessary. EPA will issue for comment guidance on ways to reflect that cleanup obligations at RCRA sites or portions of sites (whether permitted or Interim Status) are complete. Where appropriate, EPA will continue to encourage the use of state voluntary cleanup authorities or other alternative approaches to help expedite cleanup and redevelopment and prevent future brownfields at RCRA sites. PECO-ENERGY CHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA PILOTStakeholder Comments
EPA Response: Like the CBS/Viacom pilot, this project demonstrated that state cleanup programs, whether in authorized states or not, can be effectively integrated with federal RCRA programs to enhance efficiency, avoid duplication, and streamline the cleanup and redevelopment process. The Agency will continue to emphasize the importance of diverse stakeholder involvement at sites and the value of the involvement, in particular when environmental justice issues arise. EPA Region 3 is working with PA DEP to address the issue of a formal mechanism for site referral to the Act 2 program, where appropriate. THE BLUE VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI PILOTStakeholder Comments
EPA Response: The Agency appreciates the feedback on the Blue Valley Redevelopment pilot and will continue to stress the importance of early and on-going involvement of stakeholders in any site cleanups, as well as the importance of speeding cleanup to allow redevelopment of RCRA sites wherever possible. Training and outreach to stakeholders, including federal and state regulators, will continue as part of the RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative throughout 2001. 1. Brownfields are abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. 2. The memorandum also announced the formation of an EPA workgroup that would "identify and understand any potential impediments to cleanup and reuse of brownfields posed by RCRA." The workgroup also was charged to "begin strategizing ways to facilitate successful reuse of [RCRA corrective action] facilities." (See "Facilitating Reuse of Brownfields Subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: RCRA Brownfields Prevention Initiative," Memorandum from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator, OECA and Timothy Fields, Acting Assistant Administrator, OSWER to RCRA Senior Policy Managers and CERCLA Senior Policy Managers, Regions 1 - 10, June 11, 1998.) 3. (See "Call for Regional/State RCRA Brownfields Pilot Projects," Memorandum from Timothy Fields, Assistant Administrator, OSWER and Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator, OECA to RCRA and CERCLA Senior Policy Managers, Regions 1 - 10, December 3, 1999.) 4. Midway through this pilot, which originated as the CBS Bridgeport Pilot, Viacom purchased CBS.
| ||||||