The E1527 task group is pleased to submit this ballot to the E50.02 subcommittee for review and input. The task group consists of approximately 150 members. Approximately 1/3 of the task group represents users and general interest, with the remaining 2/3 representing producers. The task group was formed in early 2010 in anticipation of the mandatory 8-year review. After initial discussions and review of recent court interpretations involving Phase I ESAs, the overall objective that was established to guide the task group through this revision process was to clarify the process and strengthen the deliverable. The task group is coordinating these revision efforts with EPA, and anticipates completing the full ASTM balloting process no later than late 2012 to allow EPA time to complete its process necessary to reference the updated standard by the end of 2013. Several focus groups were formed around specific issues, some that were ultimately tabled, and some that resulted in the proposed language that is now brought to the subcommittee. Many of the proposed changes are clarifications. Some are intended to establish consistency in the process. Some of the key elements of the proposed modifications include the following: *Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs): The task group recognized that EPs are addressing HRECs with residual contamination differently. Several approaches had merit, so the goal was to establish consistency in how these conditions are described and presented in the final report. *User Responsibilities: There is broad industry confusion about the user responsibilities. The legal basis and purpose of the User Responsibilities set forth in Section 6 have never been explained in the E1527. The task group is not proposing a change to the definition of the user, but the revised standard does explain that a user seeking an LLP or an EPA brownfield assessment grant has certain obligations, in accordance with the CERCLA statute and as specified in the EPA All Appropriate Inquiries rule. *Regulatory Agency File Reviews: The task group generally agreed that a review of agency file records should be conducted if the property is identified on one of the standard record source databases outlined in section 8.2.1. Although several task group members believe this is already required under current Section 8.2.2, informal polling within industry indicated that, as a matter of practice, many EPs do not include agency file reviews as part of the Phase I process. A new section 8.2.2 has been added to emphasize the need to conduct agency file reviews, recognizing that this effort is subject to reasonable time and cost constraints. This has always been important, but is particularly important with the connection to Continuing Obligation requirements that must be met after property acquisition to maintaining an LLP. *The proposed language in 12.6 supports the task group goal of establishing consistency in how HRECs are presented in the report. *Section 12.6.1 was initially developed in the -05 version of the E1527 standard in response to Section 312.31 of the EPA All Appropriate Inquiries rule. The proposed language for this ballot seeks to add further clarification *Section 12.9 is a new section that further supports the task group goal of establishing consistency with how HRECs are presented in the report. *Section 12.15 is a new section that specifically states that recommendations are not required by this standard. *The proposed modification to Section 18.104.22.168 regarding Indoor Air is tied to Section XI.1.1.2 of the revised legal appendix and Section X5.7 of the new Business Environmental Risk. *Appendices are non-binding and are typically provided for information. The Legal Appendix and suggested Table of Contents appendix have been revamped. *The task group supported an effort to develop Business Environmental Risk appendix to provide some background and guidance on some of the more common issues listed in Section 13.
Citing ASTM Standards
[Back to Top]