1. CALED’s 35 th Annual Training Conference April 21, 2015 Yvonne Mallory, City of Gardena John Wharff, PM Environmental, Inc. Robert Doty, Cox Castle & Nicholson

2. Defined : Real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. 42 U.S.C. § 9601(35)(A) Property that is often Vacant, idle, or abandoned Underutilized Blighted Examples - abandoned/dilapidated commercial structures - gas stations - machine shops - dry cleaners - orchards Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

3. 2006 (Metal Plating Facility) Today Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

4.  Revitalization  Enhanced Employment  Improved Property Values  Catalyzing locations/projects Before After Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

5.  CERCLA (aka Superfund) - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act  Post CERCLA Reforms  2002 Federal Brownfield Amendments  2004 Land Reuse and Revitalization Act (CLRRA)  2013 AB 440 (the new Polanco Act) Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

6.  You peel, you cry.  You peel some more, you cry some more.  Fret not, the results are worth it.

7.  Executive Buy-in  Community Inventories – desktop or agency research (Envirostor/Geotracker databases) to develop lists of potential Brownfields sites.  Community Outreach – workshops, meetings, printed resources.  Consultations – concerned and confidential property owner meetings.  Phase I ESA (next slides)

8. Objective: “all appropriate inquiry” into previous ownership and uses. Identify “RECs” - recognized environmental conditions. Focus On:  Current Records Government Databases  Historical Information Aerial Photographs, Topographic Maps, Sanborn Maps, City Directories, etc. Interviews  Site Reconnaissance Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

9. Target Property Leaking Tanks Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

10. 1891-1961 Fire Insurance Maps 1947-2009 Aerial Photographs Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

11. 19501980 Former Gas StationVacant Property ? Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

12. “A past, regularly reported, release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted residential use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls.” Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

13. Involves a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to required controls (i.e. property use restrictions or engineering controls). Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

14. Considerations  Vapors (from volatile contaminants) can migrate into buildings resulting in Vapor Intrusion Risk.  Vapor intrusion is currently a high visibility issue.  Dry cleaners and other solvent-handling businesses are common sources.  ASTM E2600-10 is not necessarily required for a Phase I, but a vapor REC => Phase II ESA. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

15.  No – they surface existing information.  SOP in property transactions.  Access is needed (to avoid “data gaps”).  Authority in AB 440 to obtain them where cooperation is not forthcoming – 25403.1(f) Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

16.  Phase II ESA (Soil borings, monitoring wells, vapor samples.  Target underground storage tank locations, drums, dry well location, etc.).  Geophysical surveys if orphan USTs are suspected.  Costs vary widely. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox Castle & Nicholson

17. geophysical surveys backhoe test pits soil and groundwater sampling soil vapor surveys Types of investigative technics: Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

18.  Not if done correctly, but they do surface new problems – data disclosure may be required!  Common in property transactions, but terms vary.  Authority in AB 440 to obtain them where cooperation is not forthcoming – 25403.1(f). Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

19.  Goal is “site closure.”  Goal is never pristine.  VCAs; CLRRA; AB 440; and the 201 panel.  Insurance & risk transfer come in many shapes and sizes. Contamination Removal In - situ Remediation Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

20. Three Primary Types:  EPA Site Assessment Grants  EPA Cleanup Grants  EPA Revolving Loan Funds Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

21.  Municipalities, quasi governmental organizations, Native American tribes, and coalitions of organizations can apply.  Private organizations are not eligible, even if they work in conjunction with municipalities.  Funding for Phase I ESAs, Phase II ESAs, asbestos inspections, lead inspections, cleanup planning, community involvement, and/or health monitoring. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

22.  A municipality can apply for up to $400,000 at a time ($200,000 for petroleum sites/$200,000 for hazardous substance sites).  Sites must meet EPA site evaluation requirements (e.g., no Superfund sites; no obvious RP).  Can be spent over a three-year period.  Focus is both actually contaminated sites and “perceived” contamination. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

23.  Access/cooperation – assessment can reveal problems.  Highly competitive.  Cannot be used for remediation. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

24.  Site specific grants for remediation at individual properties.  Up to $200,000 cleanup grant funds per site (public entities can apply for cleanup funds for up to three (3) sites per year).  Target of cleanup grant must already have documented contamination in the form of a Phase II ESA or other equivalent report.  Entity applying must own property. Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

25.  Revolving Loans  Workforce Development and Job Training Grant  Job training programs focused on hazardous and solid waste management, assessment, and cleanup- associated activities.  State and Tribal Response Programs  Area Wide Planning Grants  Various Pilot programs Presented by PM Environmental, the City of Gardena and Cox, Castle & Nicholson

26.  SB 445 – LUST Fund Site Cleanup Subaccount Program (SCAP) – just starting this spring. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gran ts_loans/scap/  DTSC Loans and Subgrants Grants http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Brownfields/Loan_ Grants.cfm Targeted Site Assessment (DTSC’s contractor does Phase I, Phase II, other Investigation).  Maryam.Tasnif-Abbasi@dtsc.ca.gov