UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            ENVIRONMENTAL FINANCIAL ADVISORY BOARD
                                     APR  I  9 2001
Honorable Christine Todd Whitman
Administrator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460

Dear Administrator Whitman:

       The Environmental Financial Advisory Board, through its Brownfields Workgroup, has
been monitoring federal legislative proposals intended to help spur investment in brownfields
redevelopment.  Those initiatives that address funding have proposed some variation of one or
more of the following: 1) direct public funding (grants); 2) capitalization of revolving loan funds;
3) loan guarantee programs (such as those of the Small Business Administration); and 4) tax
incentives. We believe that the fourth alternative has significant advantages over grant and loan
approaches because tax incentives would most effectively attract capital from the private sector.

       The 1998 Brownfields Tax Incentive (which the Board commented upon in previous
correspondence) was a beginning, but a bolder approach is necessary to bring significant private
investment to brownfields redevelopment. We believe the following provisions could provide
the core of a new legislative initiative that would help to bring the still-reluctant private sector
into the brownfields remediation financing arena. We encourage EPA to propose and/or support
legislation that is aimed at attracting private investment to this important area.

       Specifically, the Board proposes the following for brownfields tax incentive legislation:

       Create a transferable tax credit equal to the cost of the environmental investigation and
       remediation incurred on a "qualifying site." This would enable cities to assess and clean
       up property and transfer the credits to the next purchaser. We believe that the nature of
       the real estate development process makes the transferability of the tax credits necessary
       to make the tax incentives truly meaningful.  Tax credits drive real estate transactions,
       particularly in low income and redevelopment lending which is attracted to areas with
       already existing infrastructure, like brownfields.  We think that general objections to
       affording benefits to parties other than the taxpayer are both inapplicable and invalid for
       the type of tax credit envisioned.

-------
 •      Define "qualifying site" as contaminated property within an Urban area as defined by the
       Census. This definition includes most brownfields, but importantly, precludes greenfield
       sites, development of which should be discouraged.  We believe that the low usage of the
       current Brownfields Tax Incentive is due, in part, to its restrictive site qualification
       criteria. Budgetary concerns that led to a narrow definition have proven to be unfounded.

 •      The tax credit should be available only after certified commencement of redevelopment
       to avoid claiming the credit and then "warehousing" the property without actually starting
       the cleanup. Since large projects can take years from investigation to redevelopment,
       taxpayers should be able to claim the credit when there is evidence that the project
       legitimately has begun and will proceed on an identifiable timetable to completion.

 •      Property "redevelopment" should be defined to include open spaces, parks, residential
       living spaces, commercial use, schools and any other uses that are of benefit to the
       community. This definition may be specific to the application of this tax incentive.
       While we know that the former administration's Better America Bonds proposal was
       aimed at similar properties, the financial mechanisms of the tax incentive and bonds
       should not be confused. Irrespective of other programs, an open space component should
       be included in any new tax incentive proposal.

 •      "Qualifying remediation costs" should include the capitalized costs of ongoing
       remediation, including pump and treat systems. We urge this definition be established in
       legislation or regulation to avoid the unnecessary progress-inhibiting uncertainty that
       would accompany leaving this to after-the-fact, case-by-case determination by IRS.

 •      Insurance premiums covering post-remediation liabilities should qualify for the tax credit.
       Insurance has become one of the most effective tools to remove the uncertainty that is
       such an impediment to brownfields redevelopment. We see insurance as a valuable
       addition to the definition of qualifying costs that should be set in legislation or regulation.

       The Board thanks you for the opportunity to provide our comments and recommendations
to you. We hope they will  promote legislation that reflects a strong commitment to the recycling
of developed areas and that effectively mobilizes private capital in the redevelopment of cities.

                                        Sincerely,
                                        Robert O. Lenna, Chair
                                        Environmental Financial Advisory Board

cc:     Michael W.S. Ryan, Deputy Chief Financial Officer
       Dona DeLeon, Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy, Economics, and Innovation
       Joseph L. Dillon, Acting Comptroller

-------
                  UN/TED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                                                              OFFICe OF
                                         .,...   _,                      SOLID WASTP ANlJ LMC RGENCV
                                        fiUG  -6 '2001                        MhSWMSC


 Mr. Robert 0. Lcnna, Chair
 Environmental Financial Advisory Board
 Office of the Chief Financial Officer
 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N W (MC 2731R)
 Washington, DC 20460                    •

 Dear Mr. Lcnna:

      . Thank you for your letter regarding brownfields tax incentives. I share your support for
 these tax incentives as valuable tools for encouraging the cleanup and reuse of brown fie Ids.

       As you know, the current Brownficlds Tax Incentive provides an accelerated deduction
 for cleanup expenses. In December 2000, the Brownfields Tax Incentive was improved by
 deleting geographic restrictions and by extending the incentive to December 31, 2003.  The U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working with both the U. S. Department of the
 Treasury arid the states to implement these changes.

       in your letter, the Environmental Financial Advisory Board proposes several new
approaches to brownfields tax policy including a transferable tax credit, extension of the current
incentive to non-economic reuses, and inclusion of insurance costs.  Currently, the
Administration is committed to implementing the December 2000 improvements to the existing
tax incentive and supports making the incentive permanent. We would like to work with you to
encourage use of the current tax incentive, explore further improvements of tax policy, and
develop other tools  that promote private sector investment in brownfields cleanup and reuse.
                        .Primed with v
-------
                                          -2-
       Thank you again for your comments and recommendations. Please feel free to contact
me or Linda Garczynski, Director ofEPA's Brownfields Program, at 202-260-4039 to discuss
these issues further.

                                       Sincerely,
                                        Michael II. Shapiro
                                        Acting Assistant Administrator
cc: Linda Garczynski

-------