Response to Participant Question Regarding Brownfield
Two weeks ago a student posted a question on our Brownfields discussion. The question concerned how the efficacy of a Brownfield cap would be tested after its installment. This seemed like a fair question, so I have spent the last couple of weeks making inquiries to the projects Civil Engineers, who are responsible for designing the cap, as well as the EPA and other professionals. What I have found is that local and federal authorities do not require follow up testing for projects such as the new Academic Center. The reason no additional testing is required is based on threat categorization, project size, and practicality.
As we discussed in the Brownfields Post the site in Charles Town was formerly utilized as a scrap heap. To prevent further leaching of metal contaminates present in the soil the site has been capped with concrete and asphalt. The cap consists of the building footings (4′ of concrete, compacted stone and a vapor barrier) and an asphalt parking lot. Once those items are in place, soil testing beneath them is not possible. It is also highly unlikely that a significant volume of water, if any, could penetrate these layers and cause contaminates to leach further into the water table.
The level of risk associated with contaminated sites varies greatly depending on the site characteristics and the nature of the contamination. It is important to note that while the site in Charles Town is a Brownfield, the contaminate area is not a highly toxic waste site. Note, I am not trying to downplay the necessity of adequately sequestering contaminates on any Brownfield. However, for our discussion here, it is important to note that the site in question is not so large and so dangerously contaminated as to warrant a high threat designation, such as a Superfund site. Superfund sites are areas where threats are so great and the area so large that funds are appropriated from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), to address the issue and protect local residents and resources. On January 11, 2002, President Bush signed the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Pub .L.No. 107-118, 115 stat. 2356, “the Brownfields Law”). The Brownfields Law amended CERCLA by providing funds to assess and clean up Brownfields. These types of policy approaches help make projects like the Academic Center possible. Click Here to Link to the EPA’s Superfund Site
For typical Brownfield sites, such as ours, the threat level and necessary follow up for remediation efforts is designated by local codes and authorities. For the project in Charles Town, the regulatory agency responsible for assessing threat levels and assigning follow up activities is the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP). According to the WVDEP, the remaining exposed soil on the site of the Academic Center, consisting of small decorative plant beds, is not of sufficient size to require additional testing. This finding by local authorities would suggest that their inspection revealed insufficient risk to merit further testing of the soil after it has been covered with several feet of impervious paving material and a three story building.
Thanks for the question Henry! Please keep reading and feel free to submit any more questions you may have.
