More E While use of this practice is intended to constitute all appropriate inquiries for purposes of the LLPs, it is not intended that its use be limited to that purpose. This practice is intended primarily as an approach to conducting an inquiry designed to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property. No implication is intended that a person must use this practice in order to be deemed to have conducted inquiry in a commercially prudent or reasonable manner in any particular transaction. Nevertheless, this practice is intended to reflect a commercially prudent and reasonable inquiry. See Section 1.
|Published (Last):||3 December 2011|
|PDF File Size:||3.28 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.69 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
It has been 8 years since E was last updated. The changes, which are effective immediately, include some changes that will impact the Phase I ESA process.
Many of the changes in E consist of simplifications, clarifications, or increased detail or guidance on provisions that were already in E, which will allow Environmental Professionals EPs to better discuss and categorize concerns found during the completion of Phase I ESAs.
Vapor Intrusion Under the Standard, vapor impacts must now be considered, similar to the way we have always treated soil and groundwater impact. Prior to this, any potential vapor concerns were usually dealt with as an indoor air quality issue. Even though this change is new to the Standard, our industry has seen this coming for quite a while now. In the end, the Standard says that pertinent regulatory files should be reviewed, but it does not necessarily require it be done.
The Standard does require, however, that if the EP chooses not to review files, they must give justification as to why they were not. What this means is the EP should review pertinent regulatory files to more thoroughly evaluate whether information exists to conclude no recognized environmental conditions RECs or additional investigation is necessary.
How do these changes affect you? Therefore, additional investigation could be necessary. For some companies, including PM, file reviews are standard procedure. Others, however, can leave this step out to provide a lower cost bid. This is why some companies who do not do it as part of their standard scope of services appear to have lower prices.
This is due to reviewing the files at regulatory agencies, which takes additional time. The standard industry turnaround time is weeks. Consultants who do not include regulatory file reviews as part of their standard scope of service may offer a shorter lead time. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions. For simplification, the REC definition removed the description of a de minimis condition. Before calling the past release a historical recognized environmental condition, the environmental professional must determine whether the past release is a recognized environmental condition at the time the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is conducted for example, if there has been a change in the regulatory criteria.
If the EP considers the past release to be a recognized environmental condition at the time the Phase I ESA is conducted, the condition shall be included in the conclusions section of the report as a recognized environmental condition.
Added Key Definitions The definition of de minimis condition was added to the Standard to read: De Minimis Condition: A condition that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions or controlled recognized environmental conditions.
The environmental professional shall list any controlled recognized environmental conditions in the findings and conclusions sections of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report.
This term was added to better categorize sites where previous environmental work has been done and proper regulatory closure or No Further Action NFA status has been obtained or otherwise met, but residual contamination is present.
Other Changes Other important but less obvious changes include clarifications in Section 6. Another much debated topic was whether the Standard would continue to meet AAI after the version was published, and the conflict of picking one or the other in satisfying AAI requirements.
As with most things, change can present uncertainty and anxiety. However, for most environmental consultants of good quality, the revised ASTM Standard will not create significant changes in how their Phase I ESAs are conducted, and presents an opportunity to clarify certain issues needed from the version.
Price has been involved in thousands of transactions, including typical Environmental Due Diligence for purchase and refinance transactions, and participations and foreclosures. Related Services:.
Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment – ASTM E1527-13
A footnote and edits to the Non-Scope Considerations appendix to acknowledge growing regulator attention to emerging contaminants, especially PFAS. In their research, the task group found that the standard is currently being utilized by many lending institutions, but usually with the assistance of an environmental consultant. The task group is considering revisions to the standard and accompanying questionnaire to improve usability by both professionals and non-professionals. The task group is waiting to publish the updated standard as EPA revises its Common Elements guidance and anticipates a new E standard to be available in late This standard will help professionals benchmark commercial properties against others in their area and identify improvements that could be made to increase energy efficiency.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Expiration
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided. This essentially consists of environmental due diligence conducted prior to a property transaction to determine whether a property may have been contaminated by past or current activities, for a property stakeholder for example, the prospective purchaser to be exempt from liability for contamination that existed on a property prior to the property transaction. First released in , the standard has been revised in , , , , and most recently in The evolution of the E standard over the last 25 years has been significant, and reflects both the ready availability of a greater data set, and a trend towards a more narrow, clear scope of assessment. Ultimately, every new version ensures more consistency, quality and the elimination of potential loopholes that could incur CERCLA liability. The current standard for the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment , ASTM E, is up for renewal, with a final deadline for the new E standard in January , when the current standard sunsets. Over the course of and , the committee has met on numerous occasions to propose and discuss revisions.