NJDEP Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA) 2.0

After ten (10) years, The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) has updated the Site Remediation Reform Act (SRRA).  The latest version of SRRA (commonly referred to as “SRRA 2.0”) was signed into law by Governor Murphy on August 23, 2019, after input from many stakeholders in the environmental community.  Several notable changes were addressed including (but not limited to) the role of the Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) & Due Diligence, and Direct Oversight by the NJDEP.  A brief summary of two (2) updates included in SRRA 2.0 are provided below:

LSRPs & Due Diligence:

Potential property purchasers commonly do not want to involve LSRPs in their Due Diligence (e.g. Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, Preliminary Assessments, etc.) due to legal “reporting” obligations of the LSRP when contamination is observed and/or identified at a site. With SRRA 2.0, potential purchasers do not always have a reporting obligation, including their LSRP. One exception is that LSRPs are still required to notify the NJDEP of an Immediate Environmental Concern (IECs) (e.g. contaminated (potable) water, Vapor Intrusion (VI), etc.), and notify the Person Responsible for Conducting Remediation (PRCR)  in writing. 

An LSRP must be retained when any person initiates a remediation.  For consistency, the term “retained” has replaced the word “hired” throughout SRRA 2.0.  However, does a prospective purchaser of a property need to retain an LSRP for due diligence purposes?  Not necessarily. 

Per SRRA 2.0, an LSRP is not required when collecting media samples (e.g. soil, water, air, etc.) or the investigation is not otherwise required by rule or law (e.g. due diligence, bank refinancing, etc.), conducted to obtain a Response Action Outcome (RAO), or to investigate, clean up or respond to any known, suspected, or threatened discharge of contamination.  However, should laboratory testing results (and/or field observations) confirm the presence of contamination, retention of an LSRP is required to proceed with “remediation” along with notification to the NJDEP by the “owner” or “seller.”

(* “Remediation” or “remediate” is defined  as “… all necessary actions to investigate and clean up or respond to any known, suspected, or threatened discharge of contaminants, including, as necessary, the preliminary assessment, site investigation, remedial investigation, and remedial action, provided, however, that "remediation" or "remediate" shall not include the payment of compensation for damage to, or loss of, natural resources.” [N.J.S.A. 58:10C-2] )

Direct Oversight

The original SRRA (2009), established regulatory and mandatory remediation timeframes for contaminated sites undergoing remediation, and are still applicable today.  Mandatory timeframes are two (2) years after the regulatory timeframes, and if missed, carry large penalties to the PRCR and place the site into NJDEP Direct Oversight.  Once in Direct Oversight, a case manager is assigned by the NJDEP to oversee the remediation going forward.  With SRRA 2.0, there are now exemptions when 1) deadlines are missed due to access/ownership issues and the PRCR made necessary attempts to gain access, and 2) Additional review time(s) by the NJDEP was required for sites under federal oversight resulting in missed timeframes. 

Additionally, modifications to Direct Oversight are possible if 1) there is a public emergency resulting from a natural disaster, 2) if the NJDEP makes a determination that the modification is in the public interest (and protective of public health, and safety of the environment), and 3) if the NJDEP enters into an Administrative Consent Order (ACO) with a prospective purchaser, provided they meet certain requirements.  Failure to comply may prompt the NJDEP to reinstate any or all of the Direct Oversight requirement.

The full act (SRRA 2.0) is provided at: https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2018/Bills/A9999/5293_R2.PDF

For additional information on SRRA 2.0 and how the changes may affect your site remediation and/or property transaction, please contact tfrancis@cardinalLSRP.com or www.cardinalLSRP.com.

At Cardinal Environmental, we have the experience to get you through your remedial situation and provide realistic costs up-front, regardless of the size, or scope.  Additionally, with over two decades in the industry, we have established relationships in the environmental community to get your project on a cost-effective remedial course that meets your long-term goals. Similarly, because the content of this post should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion, Cardinal recommends consulting an environmental attorney for any specific legal question(s) you may have.

Phase I ESA Quirks Volume III: Farm Dumps

To continue with our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) “Quirk” series, let’s expose a Recognized Environmental Concern (REC) that can easily be missed if you’re not careful, and attentive: Farm Dumps…and more specifically, those “solid waste” dump areas.  

Similar to our previous posts (Phase I ESA Quirks Volume I: Historic Deeds, and Volume II: Stained Concrete), where we identified how significant the smallest pieces of information can oftentimes be, that remote dump area in the back 40 of a farm is usually lurking…and hopefully you find it.  Now, farms will typically have many RECs when conducting due diligence, but solid waste dump areas on a farm may not be as obvious for the investigator or Environmental Professional (EP). Even experienced practitioners can miss them (especially if that dump is actually a landfilled area). Unfortunately, not identifying a dump area could have significant ramifications down the road, so keep your eyes open and pose the question to the property owner, farmer, tenant, or whoever may have knowledge of dumping.  In lieu of obtaining useful information, during a site walk keep your eyes open for these areas (just to name a few): 

• Low-lying areas.
• Areas with relatively new to medium tree or brush growth.
• Areas with no growth (or stressed vegetation).
• Embankments.
• Sloped areas near streams or creeks.
• Areas adjacent to access roads (or dead ends).
• Old dry wells, foundations / basements, vaults, or septic tanks.
• Behind buildings/structures.
• Miscellaneous objects “protruding” from the ground surface (not always a “no brainer” as solid waste could be scattered over large areas).

The ultimate goal is to identify the where, why, and what in these situations and ascertain the likelihood that the contents of that solid waste resulted in a release to the subsurface soils (or groundwater). Also, taking a deeper look usually isn’t that difficult, but the investigator should be prepared to do some bush-whacking, and digging, if the situation presents itself.  

*For all of the practitioners, real estate professionals, and lenders, let us know what your war stories are for the infamous farm-dump areas found during your due diligence projects…and more interestingly, what happened when they were found “after the fact?”  

We hope that you find these posts informative, and relatively useful, and your feedback is always welcome. Stay tuned for future Phase I ESA tips and tidbits in the upcoming weeks…as there are plenty of lessons and unique observations to be shared, which could ultimately make our jobs easier!  

For further information, or for assistance on your next project, please don't hesitate to contact us at tfrancis@cardinallsrp.com, or www.cardinalLSRP.com.

Get That Compass out!

I’m not a Boy Scout, Girl Scout, Eagle Scout…or any sort of scout for that matter, but somewhere along the journey I learned how to use a compass.   A skill that has served me well…professionally for nearly 20 years now when working in the field.  It has been particularly useful when conducting due diligence, or completing a soil & groundwater investigation when controls are limited…but in the crowded northeast, those projects where you feel like you’re in the middle of nowhere seem to be limited these days.  Similarly, with so many GPS gadgets available to guide us, you’d think that unless you were a “scout” why would you need an actual compass in your toolbox.  That’s old school…but timeless. 

There has been more than one occasion where the only tool I had at my disposal was a beat up site plan (with barely legible “proposed” soil boring markings), and limited site controls, so for all environmental practitioners, I challenge each of you to spend a few minutes with your staff (senior & junior) and cover the basics including Determining Bearing & Heading, Triangulation, etc.  Put down the GPS unit, get out that site plan, and work through it.   It’s a valuable skill, and one that can be quite beneficial when honing your field judgment skills, and hopefully help to minimize your reliance on the electronics!  

Stay tuned for future posts on various “field” topics in the upcoming weeks…as there are plenty of lessons and unique observations to be shared, which could ultimately make our jobs easier and each of us a little wiser.

We hope that you find these posts informative, and relatively useful, and your feedback is always welcome. For further information, or for assistance on your next project, please don't hesitate to contact us at tfrancis@cardinallsrp.com, or www.cardinalLSRP.com.

Phase I ESA Quirks Volume II: Stained Concrete

To continue with our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) “Quirk” series, let’s take a quick look at a common issue that is often overlooked or under-valued: Stained Concrete. Similar to our previous post (Phase I ESA Quirks Volume I: Historic Deeds), many times when conducting Phase I ESAs or Preliminary Assessments (New Jersey) you encounter interesting bits of information, or scenarios, but how you interpret and utilize it can significantly impact your project, including that small concrete stain that appears insignificant.

Generally when conducting due diligence you encounter stained concrete.  It’s fairly common, and could be in an auto repair shop, manufacturing facility, or any number of other facilities with varying uses. Usually the occasional small spill that is cleaned up rather quickly, could fall under a de minimis category, or an Environmental Professional (EP) may deem it a Recognized Environmental Concern (REC) depending on the severity.  In either situation, this should prompt the investigator to the next round of questions (or considerations) including:

 How did it get there?

What caused the stain?

How large of an area is stained?

Duration?

Condition of the concrete?

The ultimate goal is to ascertain the likelihood of the contents of that stain or spill getting to the subsurface soils (or groundwater), but take into consideration the goals of your client, especially the future end use(s) and whether that stained concrete will be removed as part of a site’s redevelopment.  This doesn’t necessarily mean you need to recommend an elaborate Phase II investigation; however, you also shouldn’t assume that the stain is insignificant.  Many inexperienced professionals (or experienced individuals for that matter) tend to overlook that fact that concrete is porous, which could be costly in some circumstances.   It may be in great condition, but even small spills that occur over a long period of time should be given close consideration.  Similarly, the complications of testing, handling, and disposing of PCB-impacted concrete (for example) could have drastic effects on a project’s cost and schedule.

Along with the above, and possibly more concerning are the brand new concrete floors or floors with that nice and shiny epoxy coat: Why were they repaired or replaced? What happened at those locations previously?

All of the above questions are those that need to be answered regardless of the due diligence platform if one is to provide true value to their client. Know where to look, who to ask, and don’t fall into the “Concrete is in good condition, no additional investigation necessary” trap.  Taking a deeper look usually isn’t that difficult, and you’ll thank yourself later if you were able to discover an issue early in the process.

Stay tuned for future Phase I ESA tips and tidbits in the upcoming weeks…as there are plenty of lessons and unique observations to be shared, which could ultimately make our jobs easier!  

We hope that you find these posts informative, and relatively useful, and your feedback is always welcome. For further information, or for assistance on your next project, please don't hesitate to contact us at tfrancis@cardinallsrp.com, or www.cardinalLSRP.com.

Phase I ESA Quirks Volume I: Historic Deeds

Oftentimes when conducting Phase I Environmental Site Assessments or Preliminary Assessments (in New Jersey) you run into some interesting bits of information…you just need to know where to look, and who to ask. Sanborn Maps and Property Record Cards usually have some Easter Eggs hidden in them. Other times you hit roadblocks, or have to deal with cantankerous individuals, but either way it’s always an adventure (even for the supposedly easy projects).  

For this new series, we’ll unearth some obscure finds and possibly a tip or two…just to keep the brain stimulated! 

In this first volume, what was expected to be a relatively easy review of a property’s ownership history, turned into a hunting expedition into several deed books at the County offices.  A couple of hours later, some answers were identified, along with some excellent passages from a 1913 survey (old “metes & bounds”) that was included in the deed:

The first sentence of the main paragraph was great: Beginning at a large hickory tree standing about a chain + a half from the road that leads from …   Looking further down you get this: …from thence runs by Cornell’s line north two degrees west thirty-one chains + four then links to stone in David Kline’s line…

Now, I’m not a surveyor, so I did some quick research and compared some old files & figures…prior to conducting my site visit. The key factor here?  A chain’s length = 66feet.  Why would I ever know that? 

When I brought this info to the field along with a current tax map, I was then able to (with a little bit of head scratching) locate a spectacular 100 year old hickory tree and eventually one of my site’s corners.   Not the most exact for my purposes, but a great start. (Note: finding the “stone” or any stone for that matter was less successful, but not unexpected). As we all know, understanding “off and on-site” is pretty important, so a couple of measurements were taken just to confirm the findings which were surprisingly (still) accurate, and then off I went to locate the other property corners and eventually complete my perimeter inspection.  A little time consuming (more so from the hilly terrain), but the old information from that deed was quite useful. There are a number of useful tips from this particular effort, but, here are a couple that stood out from this phase of the work: 

1.     Utilize all sources to confirm property lines (especially in a wooded area with a general lack of controls).

2.     Attempt to confirm “old” information / measurement as inaccuracies are common. 

3.     Know how to use a compass. Most smartphones have them…but do you know how to “use” it for field purposes?

4.     Dust off your field guide on tree identification!

(disclaimer: if the identification of property lines are critical to your project, consider asking your surveyor for a little help.)

Stay tuned for future Phase I ESA tips and tidbits in the upcoming weeks…as there are plenty of lessons and unique observations to be shared, which could ultimately make our jobs easier! We hope that you find these posts informative, and relatively useful, and your feedback is always welcome. For further information please don't hesitate to contact us at tfrancis@cardinallsrp.com, or www.cardinalLSRP.com.