Many are familiar with the “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Standard” issued by ASTM, used for satisfying “All Appropriate Inquiry” for environmental contamination. Last week, ASTM issued a revised standard, Phase I ESA Standard E1527-13, with an effective date of November 1, 2013. ASTM believes the 2013 version should be followed, instead of the prior version (issued in 2005), which the organization will discontinue publishing by the end of the year.
“All Appropriate Inquiry” is a critical threshold requirement before property acquisition for asserting any of the federal or state landowner liability defenses, such as the “innocent landowner” defense and the “bona fide prospective purchaser” defense. The existing EPA All Appropriate Inquiry rule (40 C.F.R. Part 312) states that the 2005 version of the ASTM E1527 standard meets the requirements of its rule.
There are several changes in the 2013 standard, and they are not dramatic, but there is a question whether the two versions might lead to different outcomes (e.g., identification of a “Recognized Environmental Condition”). Several aspects of the new standard involve the potential for obtaining additional information. As a result, it seems possible in some cases that more information might result in finding more Recognized Environmental Conditions. Many environmental professionals have said that the additional investigation will result in somewhat higher costs.
Now that the 2013 version of the standard has been published, a critical question for anyone obtaining or conducting a Phase I Site Assessment will be whether the 2013 version should be immediately implemented by the public and environmental professionals, or whether the 2005 version standard should continue to be used until the 2013 version is incorporated into EPA’s rule. EPA initially proposed that both were acceptable, stating its conclusion that there were no “legally significant differences” between its All Appropriate Inquiry rule and the 2005 and 2013 standards. However, EPA received several critical comments by those who pointed out that having two ASTM standards (one no longer being sold) would create significant confusion. EPA has reportedly informed ASTM that its rulemaking process to reference the revised standard as compliant with the “All Appropriate Inquiry” rule should be finalized by the end of the year.
Follow this link to purchase a copy of the new final Phase I ESA Standard E1527-13 from ASTM.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide
to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals issued a significant decision in Maryland Department of the Environment, et al. v. Anacostia Riverkeeper, et al., holding that the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Permit issued by the Maryland Department of the Environment to Montgomery County, Md., violated the Federal Clean Water Act and state of Maryland law.
Settling federal environmental enforcement actions is one of the most important environmental legal challenges faced by regulated entities, be they multi-national corporations, small family businesses...
Those who have tried to keep up with the development of environmental law into the second decade of the 21st century will not be surprised, as others may be, by the attention now focused on reuse of soil.
What are the politics of climate change? A new poll done by Stanford University and Resources for the Future suggests that the public may be more ready to regulate carbon carbon taxthan has previously been thought.
After Sackett, the question on everyone’s mind was "How far does it go?" The first test of that question was the decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals – not known as a bastion of liberalism – in Belle Company v. Corps of Engineers, holding that a Corps jurisdictional determination is not final agency action subject to judicial review.