Revitalizing Southeastern Communities , flftr -f North Carolina The North Carolina Brownfieids Program is administered under the Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997. This statute authorizes the North Carolina Division of Waste Management to work with prospective developers who did not cause or contribute to contamination at a site. North Carolina's strategy centers on the establishment of Brownfields Agreements (BFA) between the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and prospective property developers, not potentially responsible parties. These agreements enumerate any actions necessary to make the site safe for a proposed reuse, often employing less costly methods than those required of a site polluter in traditional cleanup programs. They also limit developers' liability to actions performed under the BFA. Developers are entitled to a five-year property tax exclusion for improvements made subject to a BFA, a credit which can be passed on to new owners of the property. The State also sponsors a Voluntary Cleanup Program, housed in the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch of the Superfund Section (IHSB). This program is often utilized by responsible parties who are not eligible for participation in the brownfields program. Website: www.ncbrownfields.org/ Contacts: Bruce Nicholson Brownfields Program Manager North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources 401 Oberlin Road, Suite ISO Raleigh, NC 27605 919-508-8418 bruce.nicholson@ncmail.net Charlotte Jesneck Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch Head North Carolina Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources 401 Oberlin Road Suite 150 Raleigh, NC 27605 919-508-8460 charlotte.jesneck@ncmail.net ------- Brownfields Program Guidelines and Issue Resolutions March 2002 This document is provided as guidance for the brownfields agreement process. Also under the Program Information section of this web site, we outline the basic process with a flow chart and provide guidance documents for the Letter of Intent, Brownfields plat maps, and provide the shell document for the Brownfields Agreement and affidavit. In this document we set out provisional interpretations of those parts of the brownfields statute that the regulated community has indicated are unclear or that have been amended by legislative act since the law was enacted. TABLE OF CONTENTS: ISSUE 1: PURPOSE OF THE ACT ISSUE 2: RELATIONSHIP TO VOLUNTARY CLEANUP PROGRAM ISSUE 3: PUBLIC BENEFIT ISSUE 4: FEDERAL SUPERFUND SITES ISSUE 5: SUBMISSION OF REPORTS AND FEES ISSUE 6: GROUND WATER AND SOIL REMOVALS ISSUE 7: GROUND WATER RECEPTORS ISSUE 8: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK PROGRAM ISSUE 9: INSURANCE AS SAFETY ISSUE 10: PERMITS ISSUE 11: LIABILITY PROTECTION ISSUE 12: OWNER/OPERATOR VS. BUYER AS PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPER ISSUE 1: PURPOSE OF THE ACT (back to ton) The Brownfields Property Reuse Act (the Act) of 1997 is intended to encourage and facilitate the redevelopment of abandoned, idled, or underused properties that have actual or perceived environmental contamination by removing barriers to redevelopment posed by the prospective developer's (PD's) potential liability clean-up costs. The Act is not intended to circumvent practical or necessary remediation of properties under any state or federal cleanup program. The Act is clearly intended for sites at which legitimate redevelopment is both planned and possible. Brownfields agreements are only appropriate when a PD commits to a redevelopment project which the Department believes will have public benefit and will leave public health and the environment protected. Brownfields agreements are not appropriate for situations involving only cleanup, or even situations involving cleanup and conveyance but no redevelopment. The Department intends to use the discretion provided for in G.S. § 130A-310.32 to enter into brownfields agreements only for properties with legitimate redevelopment projects where the Department perceives that cleanup liability is a significant impediment to the property's redevelopment. A brownfields agreement is appropriate for a non-causative buyer or seller of a brownfields property when liability relief is necessary for the redevelopment of the property to proceed. The Department intends to interpret the provisions of the Act as broadly as possible in order to provide liability relief for as many redevelopment projects as possible. For example, a property owner can be construed to be a seller of the property if the property is used as collateral to obtain a loan for site redevelopment or expansion. In this sense, an interest in the property is being "sold" in return for funding. Similarly, the Department realizes that some PDs will need to purchase properties before the technical reviews required by the brownfields process or a brownfields agreement are complete. Therefore, the Department intends to consider a PD that demonstrates such need to be a "buyer" under the Act as long as the PD's Letter of Intent is submitted to the Department before the PD purchases the property. The Department cautions, however, that the submission of a Letter of Intent and the Department's initiation of the review of technical data does not guarantee that the Department will enter into a brownfields agreement. ------- ISSUE 2: RELATIONSHIP TO VOLUNTARY CLEANUP PROGRAM (back to top) The Department recognizes that the Brownfields Program provides a mechanism that is a part of the overall effort to redevelop contaminated sites in North Carolina. Many of the sites addressed by the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) within the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch are cleaned up for the purposes of property transfer and/or redevelopment and transfer. Both the Brownfields Program and the VCP can result in the redevelopment of contaminated brownfields properties. The difference between the two programs lies in whether the party seeking entry into the program did or did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the site. The Brownfields Property Reuse Act (the Act) of 1997 allows only those parties who did not cause or contribute to the contamination, called prospective developers (PDs), to enter the Brownfields Program, and sets forth public policy that allows the Department to treat a PD differently than it treats the polluter of the property. In making this separation clear, the Act allows the Brownfields Program to work with PDs toward the safe redevelopment of sites and provides PDs unprecedented regulatory flexibility and liability protection unavailable to polluters participating in the VCP. The State's VCP provides a means for parties who are responsible for site contamination to voluntarily achieve final remediation of a site. Whereas the State's Brownfields Program is primarily a redevelopment initiative, the VCP is fundamentally a cleanup program. Because VCP site cleanups restore value to formerly contaminated properties, and enable lenders to make conventional (collateral) loans for redevelopment or expansion, the VCP is also an integral part of successful redevelopment. Under the VCP, the remedy may, in certain circumstances, involve alternate cleanup standards and institutional controls. Barring severe site hazards, the Department will place oversight of the voluntary cleanup under the privatized portion of the voluntary cleanup program, known as the Registered Environmental Consultant or "REC" Program. RECs are responsible both for conducting the cleanup and for certifying its regulatory compliance in place of state oversight. Statutorily authorized rules for this program are designed to accomplish a complete cleanup and address all contaminated media. In contrast to VCP projects, brownfields projects require site-specific decisions about restricting assessments for certain media and about determining protective engineering and institutional measures, and require the Department to then weigh these factors against the potential public benefits of the redevelopment. In addition, under the Brownfields Program the Department provides a brownfield agreement that both defines and limits the PD's liability for cleanup at the site. For these reasons the Department necessarily must be directly involved in making these judgements and in ensuring all decisions and protective measures are properly designed and implemented. ISSUE 3: PUBLIC BENEFIT (back to tow) G.S. § 130A-310.32(a)(3) requires that a prospective developer (PD) provide the Department with information necessary to demonstrate that the proposed redevelopment will have "public benefit commensurate with the liability protection provided." While the public benefit may be difficult to quantify, in its Letter of Intent the PD must provide as detailed a description of such benefits as possible. Public benefits have included such factors as job creation, tax base improvements, revitalization of blighted area, improved retail shopping opportunities, as well as potential cleanup activities or project set-asides that have community or environmental benefits. The Department intends to agree to a brownfields redevelopment project at those properties where reuse is clearly to the public's benefit, and where the public feels protected by the terms of the agreement and views the redevelopment as a positive step for the local community. As a general rule, then, the Department would like to see letters of support for the proposed redevelopment from a local governmental unit(s) (city, county, etc.) and community groups. The Department believes the best evidence and demonstration of perceived public benefit is that provided by local community groups representing the people living and working in areas adjacent to the proposed redevelopment, who submit letters of support describing the public benefits in terms that relate to improving the quality of life for the neighboring communities. The inclusion of such support letters with the Letter of Intent is recommended and encouraged. ------- The Department does not intend to refuse to enter into a brownfields agreement based solely on a lack of letters of support at the Letter of Intent stage. Rather, letters of support from the public and from local governments, whether submitted with the Letter of Intent or during the public comment period, will help guide the Department in considering whether to enter into an agreement. However, the Department will give priority in the allocation of its resources to those projects that demonstrate the most benefit to the community and that have the strongest local support. The Department strongly recommends that PDs enlist the support of the local government, community and environmental groups as early in the redevelopment process as possible. ISSUE 4: FEDERAL SUPERFUND SITES (back to top) G.S. § 130A-310.37(c) prohibits the Department from entering into brownfields agreements for federal Superfund sites. This prohibition will leave eligible for a brownfields agreement most properties that are not priorities for the US EPA, notably those sites formerly listed on the US EPA CERCLA Information System (CERCLIS) as having no further remedial action planned (NFRAP) and lightly contaminated properties not listed on CERCLIS. There are some properties, however, that are heavily contaminated, or that pose a great health or environmental risk. These properties are noted on CERCLIS as sites in the nation that pose the highest risks and that have thus been listed on the National Priorities List (NPL). These properties remain under the jurisdiction of the US EPA. Under the present federal law, any responsible party, including any "non-innocent" owner, at one of these properties may be held jointly and severally liable for the entire cost of cleanup of the property. Therefore, the Department will not enter into a brownfields agreement for any part of a property that lies within a NPL site. Additionally, there are sites listed on CERCLIS, called NPL-caliber sites, which, pending further investigation, are likely to be listed on the NPL, and others, called response action properties, that have had response actions funded and conducted by the US EPA. Because federal liability will remain an issue for these sites, a brownfields agreement between the Department and a prospective developer will not entirely define the cleanup liability. For this reason, the Department will consider brownfields agreements on NPL- caliber sites and response action properties only with the knowledge and involvement of the US EPA. Note that the US EPA "Guidance On Agreements with Prospective Purchasers of Contaminated Property" explains the circumstances under which the US EPA may enter into an agreement with a prospective purchaser for an NPL, NPL-caliber, or response action site. ISSUE 5: SUBMISSION OF REPORTS AND FEES (back to tow) G.S. § 130A-310.39(a)(1) requires that "A prospective developer who submits a proposed brownfields agreement for review by the Department" pay an initial fee of two thousand dollars ($2,000). As a matter of practicality and convention, the Department will prepare and submit to the prospective developer (PD) for review a draft brownfields agreement that is acceptable to the Department. The $2,000 fee is due at the time the Department submits its draft agreement, and further negotiation between the Department and the PD regarding the terms of the agreement will be predicated on the Department's receipt of this initial fee. PDs should be aware that, at the present time, the services provided by the Brownfields Program are federally funded, and that there are no state funds appropriated for any of the technical guidance provided by the Department for this Program. Should state funds be expended in the future, a 1999 amendment to the brownfields statute specifies that PDs will pay the Department a fee equal "to the full cost to the Department and the Department of Justice of all activities related" to the development and implementation of a brownfields agreement. At such a juncture (for instance, if federal funds can no longer be obtained, or should the demand for brownfield agreements outstrip the supply of federal funds), the Department may require PDs to pay this "full cost" fee which could be far in excess of $2,000 per site; the current estimate, though site-specific, ranges from $10,000 to $20,000 per site. Should such a situation occur at any time during the brownfields process before the agreement is signed, in order to comply with the statute, the Department reserves the right to request from the PD a fee equal to all costs incurred from such time until the agreement is complete and signed. After the agreement is signed the Department will not ask for full cost fees retroactively. All checks should be made payable to NC DENR. Reports and checks should be sent to: NC Division of Waste Management, ATTN: Shirley Liggins, 401 OberlinRoad, Suite 150, Raleigh, NC 27605. ------- ISSUE 6: GROUND WATER AND SOIL REMOVALS (back to ton) The Department will consider entering into brownfields agreements for properties where groundwater and soil are contaminated somewhat in excess of unrestricted use standards, and will generally allow the prospective developer to refrain from cleaning up either media if the contamination poses no unacceptable risk to people or the environment. Some properties, however, may contain highly contaminated areas where a redevelopment plan may eliminate risks to people, but may not eliminate significant risks to the environment or to the long term safety of the redevelopment. Although a redevelopment design may eliminate these areas as risks to people using the property, such areas may remain a continuing source of groundwater contamination, reduce the margin of safety provided by the redevelopment design, or jeopardize the permanence of the agreement. As an example, some properties may have petroleum products or other contaminants floating on top of the ground water or contain pockets of highly contaminated soils. As another example, the public and the Department may feel comfortable when a four-inch thick asphalt parking lot covers soil contaminated at three times unrestricted use standards, but may feel much less comfortable if there are hot spots in the area significantly more contaminated, even though the redevelopment design indicates both areas would be made safe. Remediation of highly contaminated areas will decrease the likelihood that the agreement will be reopened in the future due to an increased calculated risk, and will reduce the chance of third party lawsuits. In sum, the Department believes that it is in the best interest of the public to clean up these highly contaminated areas whenever practical and intends to specify in the brownfields agreements that those areas are to be cleaned up accordingly. ISSUE 7: GROUND WATER RECEPTORS (back to tow) In order to redevelop properties where groundwater contamination exists, it is important to identify and eliminate any pathway from the contaminated groundwater to any "receptor." Receptors in this sense include not only wells that supply people with groundwater for drinking, cooking, bathing and so forth, but also other avenues whereby contaminated groundwater, or volatiles from contaminated ground water, can reach people. These include basements, utility manways and chases, storm sewers, other underground utilities, drains, and surface water flows and seeps. The brownfields process will generally require the identification, by conducting a thorough receptor survey, and elimination of all identified pathways by which people could be exposed to contaminants in the groundwater. ISSUE 8: UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK PROGRAM (back to top) The Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997 makes those properties which fall under Part 2A of Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes (the Underground Storage Tank Program) ineligible for brownfields agreements. The Department recognizes that USTs are part of the contamination problem of many properties, and that their remediation should be addressed concurrently with any plans for redevelopment under a brownfields agreement. The Department intends to include UST remediations within brownfields agreements by requiring prospective developers (PDs) to identify UST problems within the properties, and by making the liability protection provided by the agreements contingent on PDs addressing any UST problems on the properties in accordance with the UST regulations in place. This approach will allow the Department to enter into a brownfields agreement, and thus encapsulate the PD's liability, even before all UST remediations are complete. Some properties that are candidates for a brownfields agreement may have had USTs removed but may not have had the residual soil contamination remediated to standards. In such cases, the PD may not be responsible for any UST cleanups. Nevertheless, the Department intends to condition brownfields agreements on the commitments, either by PDs or by the parties responsible for the USTs, to comply with UST legal requirements. In neither case will the redevelopment be allowed to impede the final remediation of the USTs. ------- ISSUE 9: INSURANCE AS SAFETY (back to ton) Brownfields agreements are designed to allow redevelopment of contaminated properties provided the properties can be made safe for their intended reuse. The Department recognizes that properties can be made safe in various ways, such as engineered controls, institutional controls, soil or ground water removals or cleanups, and impervious caps. There have also been suggestions for contingency plans, in case the agreed upon methods do not work or fail in the future, and for insurance policies covering expenses for future harm caused by the redevelopment. The Department considers many of the methods by which prospective developers intend to protect those people working and living on or in the vicinity of redeveloped properties as viable ways to make properties safe. However, the Department does not consider methods to compensate people for harm caused by unsafe redevelopment as legitimate ways to make properties safe for the intended reuse as required by the Act. ISSUE 10: PERMITS (back to tow) There is nothing in the Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997 that relieves the prospective developer from having to obtain any and all applicable permits, licenses, and approvals for any Brownfields Property response actions or redevelopment. ISSUE 11: LIABILITY PROTECTION (back to top) One of the major benefits to prospective developers (PDs) who enter the Brownfields Program, but which is generally unavailable to those in cleanup programs, is the liability protection offered in the form of a covenant-not-to-sue contained in the brownfields agreement. Once the "safe-making" actions specified in the brownfield agreement are completed, liability protection is automatically in force which protects the PD from enforcement action by the Department for remaining contamination known to exist at the site prior to its redevelopment (it is important to note that the agreement does not provide liability protection concerning future site contamination for which the PD or other party may be responsible). Because the brownfields agreement defines the PD's cleanup liability at the property, and limits that liability to those actions specified it the agreement, it removes the uncertainty regarding site cleanup costs. In this way, the agreements function to provide comfort to lenders or other entities that would not otherwise be willing to offer project funding. The brownfields agreement, then, is the chief mechanism for breaking this common barrier to obtaining redevelopment financing. In their Letters of Intent, PDs must make the case that the liability protection provided by a brownfield agreement is necessary to break such a barrier or is otherwise required for the redevelopment project to proceed. ISSUE 12: OWNER/OPERATOR VS. BUYER AS PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPER (back to top) Owners of potential brownfields properties who did not cause or contribute to the contamination are potentially eligible to be prospective developers (PDs) under the brownfields statute. In most cases, owners who did not operate the industrial facility on the property, and, likewise, buyers having no history with the property, will have little difficulty establishing that they did not cause or contribute to the site contamination. However, owners who have operated the industrial facility on the property will naturally find it much more difficult to prove to the Department that they did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the property. Also, the effort required to "prove a negative" may well become resource intensive for owners who operated the industrial facility. Furthermore, as stated above in Issue 1, the Program will not be used to circumvent statutorily supported efforts by state or federal cleanup programs to enforce against parties responsible for contamination on the property. Therefore, the Brownfields Program's policy is to provide these cleanup programs the opportunity to enforce against an owner/operator as a potentially responsible party before the Program considers any effort the owner/operator may make to prove, as an applicant PD, that they did not cause or contribute to site contamination. Hence, in order to maintain consistency with the intent of the law, not interfere with any potential enforcement by state and federal cleanup programs, and use resources efficiently to expedite the redevelopment of these sites, the Department strongly encourages the buyer/future owner to apply as the PD rather than have the owner who was the operator of the facility apply as the PD. ------- Annual Report to the North Carolina General Assembly The NC Brownfields Program October 2004 NCDENR NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Division of Waste Management www.wastenotnc.org North Carolina Brownfields Program www, ncbrownfields. org ------- Department of Environment and Natural Resources Michael F. Easley Governor William G. Ross Jr. Secretary NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources Dexter R. Matthews Director Division of Waste Management DENR Division of Waste Management 1646 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1646 (919) 508-8400 2 ------- Brownfields Property Reuse Act Annual Report to the General Assembly October 2004 Executive Summary This report to the General Assembly, required by the Brownfields Property Reuse Act (BPRA) of 1997 (G.S. 130-310.30 et seq.), describes the activities and status of the N.C. Brownfields Program in 2004. DENR is pleased to report continued success and growth in the state's efforts to revitalize and safely reuse brownfields properties through the N.C. Brownfields Program and its partnership with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The program is a model of high return on public investment in that the relatively small sums of public funds spent leverage large sums of private investment in brownfields redevelopment. Furthermore, DENR receives no state-appropriated funds for the program. The public dollars spent are federal funds from a cooperative agreement with the U.S. EPA. Previous years' reports have detailed the program's results on a calendar year basis. Therefore, this report will project out to year's end, based on the status of current projects and on prorated results in the first three quarters of this year. The program projects to complete 22 brownfields agreements in 2004 (there were 15 in 2003), bringing the total of completed agreements to 61. These 61 projects and others in the pipeline represent $1 billion in private investment committed to the redevelopment of environmentally impacted properties under the state's brownfields statute. Moreover, demand for program services continues to increase. DENR projects that a record 45 applications to the program (Letters of Intent) will have been received from prospective developers during 2004 (there were 34 in 2003). Major activities accomplished in 2004 are summarized below: • Implemented the first year work plan of the U.S. EPA 128(a) Brownfields Cooperative Agreement; • Successfully followed its plan to coordinate with the Land-of-Sky Regional Council through a cooperative agreement with Land-of-Sky to station a Brownfields Program staffer at Land- of-Sky offices in Asheville; • Hired three additional staff with the federal funds including a Hydrogeologist (stationed in Asheville), a Toxicologist, and an Applications Programmer; • Held the education/outreach event attended by 170 people, Brownfields Workshop for Developers and Local Governments in Raleigh at the McKimmon Center at N.C. State University, April 1, 2004; • In July the program achieved milestones that mark the 100th site in the program and the 50th completed brownfields agreement; • Increased the total committed private investment in brownfields redevelopment in North Carolina from $550 million to $1 billion; • Obtained a renewal of the U.S. EPA 128(a) Brownfields Cooperative Agreement for 2005 with funding of $968,572. 3 ------- Background Redeveloping brownfields properties has become increasingly popular as developers and cities realize these properties offer viable opportunities to bring economic growth, public health protection, jobs, and quality of life benefits to cities and rural areas. Brownfields are abandoned, idled or underutilized properties where environmental contamination hinders redevelopment due to concerns about environmental liability. The BPRA gives DENR the authority to enter into brownfields agreements with prospective developers who did not cause or contribute to site contamination. The BPRA modifies the environmental liability barrier for prospective developers and motivates them to bring these properties and their hindrances to DENR's attention. DENR partners with the prospective developer to evaluate the possible risks associated with site contamination, and negotiates a brownfields agreement that stipulates the steps necessary to make the site safe for a specific intended reuse. The result is a redevelopment project that works economically and also protects public health and the environment. Because brownfields agreements afford prospective developers liability protection for as long as they make and maintain the site safe for its intended reuse, the specter of open-ended financial uncertainty is lifted. This economic shield allows prospective developers to obtain financing previously unavailable for these properties. Thus, the BPRA provides guidelines for a new public policy that allows DENR to distinguish between prospective developers of brownfields properties and the properties' polluters. Instead of mandating the site be cleaned to current standards, the BPRA requires developers to make the site safe for reuse. The program must examine the risks to public health or environment posed by the site. Then, DENR determines what the prospective developer must do to ensure safe redevelopment. These actions can range from land-use restrictions to cleanup, or a mixture of both. In addition to holding prospective developers accountable to their agreements, DENR reserves the right to enforce against those parties responsible for the original contamination. The process is summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1. Summary of the Brownfield Process Step 1 - A prospective developer with a brownfield site that needs liability protection submits a letter of intent with basic site facts. DENR determines if the prospective developer and the property proposed for reuse are eligible under the BPRA statute. Step 2 - DENR reviews existing site data to determine the risk posed by contamination at the site. If the data are insufficient to evaluate such risk, DENR advises the prospective developer on further site assessment to gather the necessary data. Step 3 - DENR determines what actions are necessary to make the site safe for reuse and includes these actions in a draft brownfields agreement. The prospective developer pays statutory fee and negotiates/concurs with DENR on provisions in brownfields agreement. Step 4 - The brownfields agreement is published with a 60-day public comment period. Step 5 - The brownfields agreement is finalized after any public comments are considered and incorporated. The prospective developer uses the final brownfields agreement, which provides liability protection, to obtain financing for the project. Liability protection is contingent upon the completion of the actions required by the brownfields agreement. The brownfield agreement makes the site eligible for the brownfields property tax incentive. 4 ------- The ancillary brownfields property tax incentive for prospective developers allows them to recoup funds spent on assessment and cleanup. The program motivates the market to recycle these sites to productive reuse, while preserving or reducing the use of pristine or undeveloped "greenfield" property. While the environmental benefits are obvious, most redevelopments also create a significant number of jobs and put properties back on the tax rolls. This dual economic- environmental gain benefits the state, local government, and the brownfields developer. As these benefits become better known, the program's popularity increases. After four successive years of growth at the end of 2004, the program will have 61 completed brownfields agreements and approximately 60 others in the pipeline. Approximately $1 billion in private investment dollars have been committed to redevelop abandoned properties that blight urban and rural landscapes. The overall result is a win-win scenario for both the environment and economic development. Risk reductions and cleanups are achieved at sites that could have harmed the public or the environment, and prospective developers redevelop abandoned properties that once had little hope for productive reuse. The public benefits of job creation, improved quality of life in the surrounding neighborhoods, local tax base expansion and contribution to the general fund are other positive impacts. The program also supports smart growth, sustainability and the One North Carolina Naturally agenda. Every project that reuses property in urban centers reduces suburban sprawl and preserves green space. In a very real sense, for each brownfield redeveloped, a greenspace is saved. The properties that have received the 61 completed agreements are estimated to represent a minimum of 1,100 acres and the 60 more in the pipeline have an acreage of 1,050. This is, in effect, acreage that is being recycled. Program Status The program has long partnered with the U.S. EPA for funding. This year has been focused on the implementation of the first year of funding from the U.S. EPA 128(a) Brownfields Cooperative Agreement under the federal brownfields act. This increased funding from about $170,000 annually in previous years to $1,000,000 this year. This large infusion of funds required the program to develop goals and commitments to achieve under its work plan with the U.S. EPA, one of which involved creating and filling numerous program staff positions to expand the program enough to handle additional demand for brownfields agreements. By September 30, 2004, the end of the first year of this federal funding, all positions that were proposed to EPA in the work plan had been hired and were in place. These staff members are all fully engaged in processing brownfields agreements as the program continues to employ these federal funds to increase its capabilities, produce more agreements, and facilitate more brownfields redevelopment. The number of projects seeking brownfields agreements has increased each year of the program despite mixed economic conditions in the development sector, and 2004 is no exception with 45 Letters of Intent projected for the year. We anticipate continued increases in demand as the program's expansion serves to better educate both the public and the development community 5 ------- about the benefits of brownfields redevelopment. The federal grants for brownfields assessment and cleanup that were awarded by the U.S. EPA to local governments in 2003 and 2004 (Greensboro, Concord, Farmville, Raleigh, Laurinburg, and the Land-of-Sky Regional Council) will further increase demand as these communities begin local brownfields redevelopment efforts. North Carolina local governments received more EPA grant funding than any other southeastern state in EPA Region 4. In September 2004, the U.S. EPA's Region 4 approved DENR's application for continued brownfield cooperative agreement funding and awarded DENR $968,572 under Section 128 of the federal Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act. The funds are authorized for use starting October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005. A portion of these funds is used to support pre-regulatory landfill identification activities of the Inactive Hazardous Sites Program. Technical positions in the Brownfields Program now include five program managers, a toxicologist, and an IT data programmer for database development. Outreach and Education The program is largely market driven in that prospective developers bring their sites to the program in order to break liability barriers for financing. One of the clear goals of the program is to educate the development community and local governments as to the program's existence and usefulness as a tool for both private and public redevelopment stakeholders. This increase in awareness about the program will in turn result in more redevelopment projects moving forward. This year the program focused its educational efforts on its statewide Brownfields Workshop for Developers and Local Governments held in Raleigh on April 1. The conference was co- sponsored by DENR, the U.S. EPA, the NC Division of Commerce, and the NC League of Municipalities. At the conference local government attendees learned how to compete for federal brownfields grants. Developers and lenders learned about how the Brownfields Program alleviates the uncertainty in liability so they can obtain or loan project financing. Response was overwhelming among the over 170 attendees. Since this workshop, the program has seen a noticeable jump in the number of project applications. Cooperation with Local Government The program has had close cooperation with local governments, especially since its cooperative agreement with the City of Charlotte that placed a DENR employee in Charlotte in May of 2002. This agreement maximized the effectiveness of the program by having a Brownfields Program staff person co-located with local government staff also working on brownfields redevelopment. This also provides direct face to face cooperation with the developers in that locality. This formula has enabled the completion of 23 brownfields agreements in the Charlotte area. Seeking to duplicate this success, the program proposed to EPA a similar approach to coordination with local government in the Asheville area. Thus, one of the new positions funded by this cooperative agreement has been placed in the offices of the Land-of-Sky Regional Council. This project manager works with Land-of Sky in much the same way as our Charlotte staff member works with Charlotte, bringing their combined efforts to bear on encouraging 6 ------- brownfields redevelopment. Several new projects are underway in the western part of the state as a result of this partnership. Site Summaries For brief descriptions of all brownfields projects in the program as of June 30, 2004, please see the Appendix. The table there is divided into three sections: active eligible projects, projects pending eligibility, and projects with finalized brownfields agreements. Active eligible projects have been deemed eligible for a brownfields agreement under BPRA statutory criteria. These developers are working with DENR in some stage of data gathering, analysis or agreement negotiation. As of June 30, 2004 there were 52 active projects. Projects at this stage receive guidance from DENR as the developers gather the additional data needed to ensure protection of public health and environment. Once research is complete, DENR analyzes the data, then drafts and negotiates the terms of the brownfields agreement with the prospective developer. At most of these sites, DENR is waiting for additional data requested by the program. Projects pending eligibility are in the initial stage of the brownfields process as they apply for entry into the program. Sites in this category have yet to meet the requirements under the statute for eligibility for a brownfields agreement. For the sites in this category, the program has requested clarification or additional information from prospective developers regarding a site. Normally developers respond to these requests for clarification, the sites are usually deemed eligible and are quickly moved into the active eligible category. As of June 30, 2004, there were eight sites in this category. Projects with finalized brownfields agreements have completed the public notice phase of the brownfields process and either have a signed brownfields agreement or are waiting for the agreement to be executed. As of June 30, 2004, 47 projects had finalized agreements, and 14 more final agreements are anticipated by the end of the year. Milestone Projects Indicative of the progress made in the last several years, the program has reached significant milestones in 2004. In June 2004 the program admitted its 100th site and nearly simultaneously completed its 50th brownfields agreement in July. These particular projects, summarized to the right and below, and are illustrative of the range of projects that are utilizing the program. The 100th Site to Enter the Program Pillowtex Plant 1 Site Kannapolis, Cabarrus County When this textile operation closed in August 2003, it left 5,000 workers jobless, making this facility closure the single largest loss of jobs in state history. The City of Kannapolis as the prospective developer is seeking a brownfields agreement for an alternative use project for this facility. At present there is a developer interested in multiple industrial and commercial uses including turning a portion of the site into a state of the art commercial sports complex. The Brownfields Program is guiding the City in assessments to determine the contamination on the site, which includes petroleum and chlorinated solvents. It will then formulate plans to ensure the safety of the proposed redevelopment through a brownfields agreement. ------- The Pillowtex plant project is a very large industrial textile facility. The textile industry's recent economic troubles and plant closures are well documented, and fully one fourth of the projects entering the Brownfields Program have been textile related. The program is hopeful that a completed brownfields agreement will help to facilitate the site's safe redevelopment and replacement of lost jobs. The Rusak Property project is a small industrial facility that would be difficult, if not impossible, to consider as a parcel for expansion without the liability protection afforded by a brownfields agreement. Interestingly, both of these projects are being redeveloped by local government entities, though most ongoing projects are private sector redevelopments. Brownfields Project Demographics Brownfields sites in heavily industrialized regions of the country tend to be weighted toward urban areas. However, North Carolina's tradition of rural manufacturing creates a significant number of rural brownfields opportunities. This fact continues to be reflected in the distribution of the program's inventory of projects. While only 4 of the of the 22 agreements projected for completion during 2004 are rural, 19 of the program's total of 61 completed agreements and approximately half of the program's pending and eligible projects are rural sites. The additional staff hired in 2004 allowed the program to continue to raise the level of its education and outreach efforts in order to make rural communities more aware of the state's Brownfields Program. As a result of these efforts, the public benefits enjoyed by urban areas with brownfields projects will extend to rural regions of the state as well. DENR will continue to focus on the importance of rural brownfields to their surrounding communities. To effectively define the brownfields universe in our state and increase effectiveness of outreach efforts, several questions need to be answered. What are the basic demographics of all of the brownfield sites in North Carolina? How many and where are these brownfields? What industries do they come from, and what are their general characteristics? To find out, a key element to the program's EPA funded work plan is a demographic survey of brownfields in the state. The program has opened discussions with the Institute of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill on developing this survey and hopes to implement it in 2005. The survey will be conducted with several local government entities and then statistically extrapolated to determine data on a statewide basis. The goal is to determine the number and geographic distribution of brownfield properties in the state. The 50th Completed Brownfield Agreement The Rusak Property Charlotte, Mecklenburg County This former metal plating operation located in Charlotte is adjacent to the Marie Davis Middle School. This 1.2- acre parcel will be razed and incorporated into school renovation/expansion plans thereby protecting public health and removing an eyesore. The Brownfields Program is guiding the Mecklenburg County Board of Education in the assessment and cleanup efforts to make the site safe for the proposed reuse as a plaza entranceway for the school. The agreement came out of public comment period on July 30, 2004. 8 ------- Improving Effectiveness Throughout its existence, the Brownfields Program has provided a high "bang" for the federal "bucks" it uses for operation funds. The program's 61 brownfields agreements and 60 other projects in the pipeline represent $1 billion in committed private redevelopment investment. The high ratio to which the federal funds have been successfully leveraged into private development dollars for brownfields redevelopment is just one measure of the effectiveness and efficiency of the BPRA. By continuing to add needed staff in 2004 the program has significantly increased its volume capacity as the demand for brownfields agreements continues to increase. New internal technical protocols, more experienced project managers, and an improved project tracking system reduced process time, as did streamlining and standardizing various administrative elements. The program continues to upgrade and update its Web site, which helps disseminate essential and timely information to brownfields stakeholders. These efforts have allowed staff to spend less time conveying information and more time processing applications and advancing projects through the brownfields process. This increase in effectiveness and efficiency is largely responsible for the program's record of 22 projected agreements completed during 2004. The program believes strongly that increased cooperation between DENR and local governments has yielded significant benefits and is a trend it wants to continue to strengthen. DENR has recognized the effectiveness of placing a staff person in the City of Charlotte offices and has duplicated that effort by placing a staffer in the offices of the Land-of-Sky Regional Council. Land-of-Sky has received two EPA brownfields grants this year and is viewed as a strong advocate for brownfields redevelopment in EPA Region 4. The program will continue its educational outreach for local governments and encourage and facilitate their application for federal brownfields funds through these efforts. The program believes that a staff person serving as a local government outreach liaison would be of significant benefit. Although it has no additional funds for such a position, DENR will explore this concept under future work plans with the U.S. EPA. Lastly, the summary table below shows the progress during the program's history since the BPRA became effective in 1997. One turning point evident in the chart is that the program had a 9 ------- Brownfields Program Progress 70T 60 50 40 30 20 10 fi ffl h l-l - *= n 1 ru ¦JTW I 1 u 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 ~ Site Applications (that year) 7 13 7 18 16 21 34 45 ~ Finalized BFAs (that year) 0 2 1 3 8 11 14 22 ¦ Cumulative Total l3FAs (all yrs.) 0 2 3 6 14 25 39 61 *Numbers for 2004 are projected on a prorated basis from 3rd quarter data. noticeable upswing in completed agreements in 2000 when the program received sufficient EPA funds to hire its first full time staff person. Successive hires in years 2002 onward have lead to greater brownfields agreement processing capacity and outreach ability. Hence, the growth in applications into the program and completed agreements. As for legislative efforts that could continue to increase BPRA's effectiveness, DENR recognizes that textile mills and furniture plants have been especially hard hit in the current economy and therefore supports the concepts contained in last session's legislative bill H1743/S1345. This bill provides additional tax incentives for brownfields redevelopment projects of these hard hit industries so as to encourage the reuse of their closed facilities. The demographic survey of North Carolina brownfields DENR is pursuing through the Institute of Government likely would be able to confirm or refute the notion that there are significant and increasing numbers of brownfields from the textile and furniture industries. Fund Status The Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account receives the $2,000 fee charged to prospective developers who enter the program and is to be used by DENR to defray the cost of the program. For fiscal year July 1, 2003 through June 30 2004, the Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account had a beginning balance of $48,674, receipts from fees and interest 10 ------- of $48,047, and expenditures of $2,076. This yields an ending balance in the fund of $96,645. The expenditures were for supplies and for expenses for the Brownfields Workshop for Developers and Local Governments held April 1, 2004. Plans for the use of this fund for the future include additional outreach, software, database development needs, and possibly staff for coordination and assistance for local governments in applying for and using their U.S. EPA brownfields grant funds effectively. Further Information For additional information on the Brownfields Program and how it works, please visit our Web site at www.ncbrownfields.org. 11 ------- APPENDIX Status Summary of Brownfield Projects as of June 30, 2004 12 ------- Appendix Status Summary of Brownfield Projects as of June 30, 2004 Project Inventory is divided into three segments as follows: Active eligible projects have been deemed eligible for a brownfields agreement under BPRA statutory criteria. These developers are working with DENR in some stage of data gathering, analysis or agreement negotiation. Projects pending eligibility are in the initial stage that sites are in as they enter the program. Sites in this category have yet to meet the requirements under the statute for eligibility for a brownfields agreement. Projects with finalized brownfields agreements have completed the public notice phase of the brownfields process and either have a signed brownfields agreement or are waiting for the agreement to be executed. ACTIVE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS (52) PD = Prospective Developer; RP = Responsible Party 8tn STREET LANDFILL West 8th Street Kannapolis, Rowan Co. PD: City of Kannapolis Former landfill operated by Cannon Mills for the disposal of residential, commercial, and industrial waste from the early 1900s through 1972. Landfill contents may include hazardous and regulated compounds. PD intends to redevelop the site for public recreational and dedicated open space uses. ABC ENGRAVERS 724 North 1-85 Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Holden Business Park, LLC Former engraving and plating facility with known chromium and chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site as an office complex. ALPHA MILLS 312 E. 12th St. Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Crosland, Inc. A 5.77-acre parcel that was historically a textile mill. Most recently the site was the former Consolidated Group Incorporated engraving facility. The site has known soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediment impacts from historical site operations. PD intends to redevelop the property for residential apartments with compatible commercial and retail development. AIRPORT EXXON 3305 North Liberty St. Winston-Salem, Forsyth Co. PD: Mrs. Becky Flowers Former automobile engine repair and maintenance facility with known soil and likely groundwater contamination involving petroleum and degreasing solvent constituents. Intended redevelopment is a gas station/convenience store to serve the Smith-Reynolds Airport users and employees. ALAMAC AMERICAN 1885 Alamac Road Lumberton, Robeson Co. PD: Alamac American Knits, LLC The former knit textile manufacturing facility has perchloroethylene contamination associated with former drycleaning operations. The PD is using the facility to also manufacture knit textiles but does not use perchloroethylene on the premises. 13 ------- AMERICAN CYANAMID Donald Ross Road Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: DRR of the Carolinas, LLC Former pesticide formulation facility with petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbons and metals contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to initially redevelop the site as a gravel parking lot for car and trailer storage. Future use may include other light industrial or commercial uses. FORMER AMP FACILITY 1126 Church Street Greensboro, Guilford Co. PD: Church Street Medical, LLC Approximately 10-acre site is the former location of AMP Incorporated, a metal stamping, plating, and manufacturing facility. Closed since the mid-1980s, the site has known chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater, which is being remediated under an approved Corrective Action Plan within the NC DWQ Groundwater Section. PD intends to redevelop the site as a medical office campus. ANDREX INDUSTRIES 220 Deaverview Road Asheville, Buncombe Co. PD: Milkco, Inc. A 9-acre light manufacturing site formerly used as a textile production facility that operated a knitting, weaving and cutting business along with dry cleaning, shrinking and packaging of fabrics. Tetrachloroethylene groundwater contamination from drycleaning operations being remediated by RP with pump-and- treat system. PD is adjacent property owner, a milk processing and distributing plant. Initial plan is to use part of property for truck and trailer parking. Within 3 years they plan to demolish Andrex buildings and expand the Milkco Plant to double capacity within 8 years. BOULIGNY SITE 2320 N. Davidson St. Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: NODA Properties, LLC Approximately 3.5-acre parcel that was the former R.H Boulingy facility. The site has known groundwater impacts from chlorinated solvents. PD intends to redevelop the property for mixed-use development with commercial, retail, industrial and residential. PADGETTE LANE PROPERTY 105 Padgett Lane and Carrboro, Orange Co. PD: Main Street Properties of Chapel Hill LLC This 1-acre site was used as a small motor and automobile repair facility and an auto salvage yard since about 1960. Suspected impacts to soil and/or groundwater include petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents. Site will be redeveloped into high-density residential units serving students at UNC-CH. CAMDEN ROAD 1600 Camden Road Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Harris Murr & Vermillion, LLC Approximately 0.25-acre parcel in Historic SouthEnd of Charlotte. The site has known groundwater impacts from historical site operations as a gas station, tire repair, plumbing repair, and other uses. PD intends to redevelop the property for commercial and retail purposes CAROLINA LOG BUILDINGS Howard Gap Rd at US Hwy. 25 Fletcher, Henderson Co. PD: Town of Fletcher Former wood treating facility with known pentachlorophenol contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the 30-acre site as the new heart of the Town of Fletcher to include various office and retail uses. CEDAR CREEK 3468 Cedar Creek Road Fayetteville, Cumberland Co. PD: DAK Resins, LLC The property was formerly operated by Monsanto to produce herbicide and before that was used to produce nylon and polyester. DAK Resins, LLC plans to use the onsite utilities to produce steam and cooling water, use storage and distribution facility. Resin production may occur on the site in the future. CHARLOTTE TANK TRUCK Border Drive Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: WR Deal Holdings LLC Propane manufacturing company with soil and groundwater contamination from an adjacent property. PD intends to expand his current site operations. 14 ------- CHATHAM PARK NC Hwy. 268 Elkin, Surry Co. PD: Town of Elkin A 30-acre site containing solid waste disposal area used by former textile manufacturing facility. Known VOC and SVOC contamination exists in groundwater at the site. PD intends to redevelop the property for park and recreational uses in keeping with the current use of adjoining property as baseball fields. CHESTER STREET PROPERTY North Chester Street (Hwy 321) Gastonia, Gaston County Site contained former Carson Dry Cleaner located in the center city area of Gastonia. Property has known chlorinated solvents contamination in the soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site in commercial retail uses. CSX RIVERFRONT 515 Nutt Street Wilmington, New Hanover County PD: Riverfront Developers, LLC An 8.26-acre tract on the Cape Fear River in downtown Wilmington. Former CSX railroad property last used for offloading of diesel for rail distribution. Minor naphthalene contamination in the groundwater and some polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons in soil. Intended use is multi-purpose development that could include a hotel, private residences, professional offices, retail stores, restaurants and private marina. Public waterfront amenities, with a 600' extension of Wilmington's historic riverfront. EAST PARK - DOROTHY HALL 1423 & 1427 E. Fourth St Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Torrence Street Partners Approximately 0.8-acre parcel that is a portion of the East Park Development Project, with known chlorinated solvent and gasoline contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site as a pedestrian urban infill multiple use development with commercial, residential, recreational and common open space. The site is part of the City of Charlotte's East Park re- development zone. EAST PARK - Craver 1601,1609,1615 Elizabeth Ave Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Torrence Street Partners Approximately 0.65-acre parcel that is a portion of the East Park Development Project, with known chlorinated solvent and gasoline contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site as a pedestrian urban infill multiple use development with commercial, residential, recreational and common open space. The site is part of the City of Charlotte's East Park re- development zone. EAS7WAY PHASE I 3014 Eastway Drive Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Blaine Lake, LLC Shopping Plaza in the City of Charlotte that has contamination from a dry cleaning operation and adjacent properties. The groundwater is contaminated. PD intends to redevelop the shopping plaza and maintain jobs in the area. EASTWAY PHASE II 3124 Eastway Drive Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Blaine Lake, LLC Shopping Plaza in the City of Charlotte that has contamination from a dry cleaning operation and adjacent properties. The groundwater is contaminated. PD intends to redevelop the shopping plaza and maintain jobs in the area. ECUSTA 1 Ecusta Road Pisgah Forest, Transylvania Co. PD: Ecusta Business Development Center, LLC In its prime, this 540-acre site was the world's largest non-wood pulp and specialty paper manufacturing facility. Closed since late 2002, the site has known metals, caustic and solvent contamination. PD intends to re-start flax pulping operations and to market the pulp to paper manufacturers. PD may also undertake other uses of site buildings and facilities, including office space and possible use of excess wastewater treatment capacity by local municipalities. 15 ------- ELK MOUNTAIN LANDFILL Elk Mountain Road Woodfin, Buncombe Co. PD: Town of Woodfin Approximately 156-acre site contains a former municipal landfill which was operated under lease by the City of Asheville, and which has been closed since the late 1970s. PD has operated a 9-hole golf course on the site since 1990. PD will conduct assessment activities to determine if there is actual contamination at the site. PD intends to redevelop the site into an 18-hole golf course and approximately 250 condominiums in areas outside of the waste cells. FISHBURNE EQUIPMENT Airport Road Arden, Buncombe Co. PD: R. & P. Van Praag Former metal fabrication and tobacco press manufacturing facility with suspected VOC contamination in soil and groundwater, based on detection of these compounds on adjoining, downgradient property, the former Buncombe County landfill. PD intends to redevelop the site for light manufacturing/assembly, warehousing, and public storage uses. GATEWAY AT OLD SALEM Multiple parcels (24, 30 and 408 Salem Avenue, 1007,1016,1019, and 1100 S. Marshall, 1100, 1122 and 1315 S. Main Street, 212 Stafford Street, 1198, 1405, and 1480 Broad Street.) Winston-Salem, Forsyth County PD: Southeast Gateway Ventures, LLC Project size is approximately 51 acres. The property is planned for mixed-use redevelopment including offices, commercial/retail space, residences, a YWCA , a private school and parking. Contamination is from a former Duke Power Plant substation (PCBs, PAHs in soil) and groundwater contamination from a number of sources, mainly petroleum but with a few chlorinated solvents. GENERAL WOOD 1901 Wood Treatment Road Leland, Brunswick County PD: Leland Land, LLC A 120-acre pole treatment facility (creosote, chromated copper arsenate (CCA) and pentachlorophenol (PCP)) under Chapter 11 bankruptcy that is currently under RCRA jurisdiction. PD's intent is to be able to distinguish old from new contamination and then continue with pole treatment (CCA and PCP only). Groundwater contamination mainly associated with creosote and petroleum. Metal and PCP contamination in soil. GLEN RAVEN MILLS 114 Raven Circle Kings Mountain, Cleveland Co. PD: Consortium for Progress Former textile manufacturing facility with solvent contamination in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property as a residential/retirement center for senior citizens. Responsible party will continue assessment and/or cleanup activities under state Voluntary Cleanup Program. GREY HOSIERY MILL Fourth & Laurel Streets Hendersonville, Henderson Co. PD: Old Mill Arts Committee Former hosiery manufacturing facility located in downtown Hendersonville with low concentrations of chlorinated solvents in site groundwater. PD intends to renovate the building and redevelop the property as a performing arts center. GUILFORD MILLS - W. Market Street 4925 W. Market Street Greensboro, Guilford County PD: Kim's Greensboro Real Estate, LLC A 19.8-acre vacant textile facility with ancillary buildings. Minor groundwater contamination associated with former underground storage tanks. Other non-UST contamination has been documented but information has not yet been sent to us. PD plans to use the site for general commercial property. 16 ------- HISTORIC COTTON MILL 191 Riverside Drive Asheville, Buncombe Co. PD: RiverLink, Inc. A 2.63-acre site formerly occupied by a cotton mill that operated from the 1900s but has been abandoned for many years. PD will conduct environmental assessment to determine if the site has any contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site in mixed commercial/retail and residential uses. This project is part of the Asheville French Broad Riverfront Plan. HOME INNOVATIONS SITE Hwy 52 S & Ratliff Gin Road Morven, Anson Co. PD: Dan River Inc. Former textile manufacturing facility with petroleum hydrocarbon and VOC contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site as a modern textile manufacturing operation where present environmental contaminant compounds are not used. Project has significant job creation potential. KIDD LANE BATTERY DISPOSAL 3607 Kidd Lane Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Joshua's Farm Abandon dairy farm with historical lead battery disposal operations. The approximately 1-acre parcel is adjacent to a 22-acre horse & animal farm area for the Joshua's Farm Operations. The site has a limited area with lead contamination in the surficial soils. PD intends to redevelop the area as a parking lot for the horse and animal farm operations. MODEL LINEN PD: QUB Studios 120 West Lewis Street Greensboro, Guilford Co. The site was used to manufacture wood stoves and has low levels of chlorinated solvents in the groundwater. The site will be redeveloped as a photographic studio and other commercial space. NATIONAL TEXTILES Jamestown Road Morgantown, Burke Co. PD: National Textiles Former textile manufacturing facility with chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. The applicant PD intends to sell the site to an identified potential buyer for conversion and reuse as a furniture manufacturing facility. NORTH HILLS MALL 4217 Six Forks Road Raleigh, Wake Co. PD: North Hills Mall Ownership Organization, LLC This 31-acre site was originally developed in 1963, and was expanded into one of Raleigh's earliest enclosed malls. The site has known petroleum and chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater from auto gas and repair facilities and from an off-site drycleaner. DP intends to redevelop the site into a pedestrian friendly mixed-use retail, commercial and residential complex. PADGETTE LANE PROPERTY 105 Padgette Lane Carrboro, Orange County PD: Downtown Urban Ventures, LLC Less than 1-acre site with a 3,500 square foot former automobile repair shop. Contamination appears to be restricted to incidental housekeeping related releases from site activities. PD intends to redevelop the site for 55 residential condos and/or apartments for a total of 63,950 square feet with the intent to market students at UNC-Chapel Hill. PARKER HANNIFIN 12415 Capitol Blvd. Wake Forest, Wake Co. PD: St. Ives 200 Commercial, LLC A 33-acre former air control devices manufacturing facility with known trichloroethene contamination in soil and groundwater resulting from former wastewater treatment operations. PD intends to redevelop the site in mixed commercial, retail, and office space uses. Responsible party is currently undertaking assessment and remediation within RCRA and N.C. Hazardous Waste Section oversight. 17 ------- PILLOWTEX PLANT 1 1 Lake Circle Drive Kannapolis, Rowan & Cabarrus Counties, NC PD: City of Kannapolis A 158-acre site with 5.6 million square feet in 17 buildings. Closed/bankrupt textile manufacturing plant is available for purchase through bankruptcy court. The PD is working with SouthEast Developers to purchase and redevelop the property as a sports and entertainment complex, office space and other businesses. The City is working on submitting a bid to purchase the property through the bankruptcy court. Potential or known contamination at the site includes gas, diesel fuel, varsol, PAHs, acids, caustics, alcohols, maleic acid, formaldehyde, benzidine, naphthylamines, used oil, coal (PAHs, inorganics). RADIATOR SPECIALTY 1900 Wilkinson Blvd. Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Suttle Avenue, LLC Idled automotive chemicals & hardware, and plumbing supplies manufacturing facility with volatile, semi-volatile, and metals contamination is site soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property into a major mixed-use office, retail, commercial, and multi-family residential development. RESCO PRODUCTS 3514 West Wendover Avenue Greensboro, Guilford County PD: CarMaxAuto Superstores, Inc. 1,943-acre tract that is currently on undeveloped portion of Resco Products. CarMax has adjacent property and intends to expand its operations by using this site as paved parking for its vehicles, allowing expansion of its rehabilitation activities on used cars on other portions of it's property (including cleaning, repairing and servicing used vehicles). This larger manufacturing operation will allow CarMax to expand its operations significantly in North Carolina creating 30-50 additional jobs at this site and allowing them to develop three to four new dealerships in the Triangle region of North Carolina, each employing approximately 125 people (total of 400-550 new jobs). RUSAK PROPERTY 3004 Bank Street/ 3331 Griffith Street Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of Education A 1.21-acre parcel that is adjacent to the Marie G. Davis Middle School. The site is contaminated from historical operations as a metal plating facility. The PD intends to incorporate the adjacent parcels into the new middle school construction. The brownfields parcel will be the plaza entrance. SALEM UNIFORM 4015 N. Cherry Street Wnston-Salem, Forsyth County PD: Wnston Weaver Co. Inc. 2.53-acre site that has been vacant for many years. Was leased out from 1967-83 to Salem Uniform and from 1983-86 to Cintus Corporation who purchased the assets for Salem Uniform. During a Limited Site Assessment for petroleum USTs, high levels of PCE were discovered, probably from dry cleaning solvents. PD is currently leasing space, but would like to improve it for use for fertilizer storage and other commercial usage. FORMER SCHLAGE LOCK FACILITY 3551 North Wesleyan Blvd. Rocky Mount, Nash County PD: Community Resource Exchange 49.15 acre/196,000 square foot former manufacturing facility for lock/doorknob plating and assembly that used PCE as a degreasing solvent. Working with the Hazardous Waste Section as it site is a RCRA TSD post-closure facility with active voluntary GW remediation system (Ingersoll-Rand is RP). Chlorinated solvents (PCE, TCE, 1,2-DCE, toluene and acetone are main constituents of concern in both soil and groundwater. PD is non-profit organization who needs loan in order to make improvements to former manufacturing facility in order to provide tenant space for non-profit organizations such as the Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity, United way and the Division of Emergency Management. Also intend to develop outparcels for light industrial businesses and commercial/retail businesses. 18 ------- SHELBY DYEING & FINISHING 1000 West Graver Street Shelby, Cleveland Co. PD: GMAC Commercial Credit, LLC Former textile dyeing and finishing facility with solvent and metals contamination in soil and groundwater. Through its sale of the property to Environmental Fibers, PD intends to facilitate the redevelopment of the site as a cotton recycling facility, bringing the two site buildings back into productive use, and bringing jobs and tax base improvements to the community. SHELBY WILLIAMS 401 Meacham Road Statesville, Iredell Co. PD: Lou Jay Associates, LLC The 28-acre site is contains an idled furniture manufacturing facility with metals contamination in soil and groundwater from former plating operations conducted at the site. Applicant-PD intends to up-fit the facility for the production of high-end cabinetry and add an estimated 650 jobs in the next three years. SOUTH BOULEVARD MGP Site 1424 South Boulevard Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Summit Properties Partnership, L.P. This former manufactured gas plant has limited residual PAH and BETX contamination. The PD intends to redevelop the site into a high-density, multi-family housing development or a mixed-use commercial and residential development. SUTTON SHOPPING CENTER NW Corner of Walkup & Sutherland Ave Monroe, Union Co. PD: Whitley Commercial Properties The site is an old run-down shopping strip center in the Monroe Area. The site has known soil and groundwater contamination from chlorinated solvents and gasoline constituents. PD intends to renovated the shopping center and expand the building area. TAR HEEL LIFT 7055 Albert Pick Road Greensboro, Guilford Co. PD: Idlewild Grading Co., LLC This 8-acre site contains a forklift sales, maintenance, and repair facility. The site has known environmental contamination from historic operations of the forklift facility. The site is currently underused, and PD intends to relocate and expand its grading business from Wnston-Salem, NC to this brownfields property. UNITY PLACE Multiple Parcels (~58) in and around Broad & Fourth Street Wnston-Salem, Forsyth County PD: Unity Partners, LLC A 15-acre property consists of former car dealership, gas station, printing business, dry cleaner, automotive repair shops, etc. Redevelopment plan is for a European-style town center that is mixed use, and will have include Krispy Kreme's headquarters, multi-screen and IMAX theatres, shops, town houses, office space and parking facilities. At this point known contamination consists of Stoddard solvent/mineral spirits in groundwater and soil contaminated with hydraulic fluid. V. F. Site 2831 Wlson Park Road Statesville, Iredell Co. PD: Statesville Partnership LLC This former textile plant has chlorinated solvent contamination as a result of on site drycleaning operations. The PD plans to upgrade the property for light manufacturing or distribution facility. WILSON LANDFILL 6700 Ward Boulevard Wlson, Wilson Co. PD: Dillon Properties, LLC This underused 14-acre site was formerly occupied by a wastewater treatment facility owned and operated by the City of Wlson. The site has known metals contamination in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop in mixed commercial, warehousing, and residential uses. YADKIN BRICK YARD 44052 Yadkin Brick Road New London, Stanly Co. PD: Numantec, LLC Industrial sludges were stockpiled on the site, which led to soil and groundwater contamination, by petroleum products, VOCs and arsenic. The PD plans to reuse the facility to manufacture fertilizer from poultry litter. 19 ------- PROJECTS PENDING ELIGIBILITY (8) PD = Prospective Developer; RP = Responsible Party ABBOTT LABORATORIES 16900 North U.S. Hwy 15/402 Bypass (Aberdeen Road) Laurinburg, Scotland Co. PD: Marketta LLC 50.75-acre site with three main structures totally approximate 300,000 square feet of space. Used by Abbott Laboratories from 1970-2002 for manufacture of medical devices (anesthesia kits, specialty intravenous injection sets). Trichloroethene and BTEX groundwater contamination. PD intends to use site for production and manufacture of skin care products, with anticipated creation of 250 new jobs. Currently awaiting additional information to determine eligibility. ALLISON MANUFACTURING 930 Old Charlotte Road Albemarle, Stanly County PD: NCSC Properties, LLC A18.93-acre parcel with a 120,000 square foot former manufacturing facility used in silk-screen production, fabric printing and knitting. PD needs loan in order to improve and repair facility and recruit additional tenants. Naphthalene, 1,1-DCD and PCE in soil; petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents in groundwater. CULTURAL ARTS CENTER 205 McDonald Street, and Old Braswell Library 344 Falls Road Rocky Mount, Nash County, NC PD: Imperial Centre Partners, LP Former Imperial Tobacco Plant is 2.42 acres with140,000 square feet of floor space and Braswell Memorial Library is 4.93 acres with 16,000 square feet floor space. The PD owns the site and is working with City to finance and redevelop the site into the Rocky Mount Cultural Arts Center (RMCAC). The RMCAC will be the new home to the Children's Museum, the Arts Center and the Playhouse Theater, all of which were lost to major flood damage from the overflowing Tar River during Hurricane Floyd in September 1999. Contamination at the site includes gas, diesel, heating oil from USTs and #6 fuel oil from AST, lead, chlordane, asbestos. FORMER DAYCO FACILITY Location: 2150 South Main Street Waynesville, Haywood County PD: Haywood Advancement Foundation The site consists of 35.29 acres with existing buildings totaling 600,000 square feet plus a separate warehouse of 250,000 square feet. The facility was used for rubber hose manufacturing until it closed in 1997. The facility contained numerous ASTs and USTs, both soil and groundwater contamination exists on site. Contamination has been identified primarily as Toluene with some soil PAHs. Currently the ROR Group, a rubber manufacturer, occupies the Banbury building and the Haywood County Sheriffs office occupies a small office section. The majority of the facility is abandoned and in extremely poor condition. The Haywood Advancement Foundation is working with a potential developer to redevelop the property into a commercial property with retail stores. GRIFFITH STREET PROPERTY 565 Griffith St. & 536 Jetton St. Davidson, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Five Six Five, LLC Prior industrial operations resulted in soil and groundwater contamination by petroleum and VOCs. The PD plans to redevelop the facility as a charter school and as retail and commercial space. MOSER-HALL Indian Trail, Union Co. PD: Moser-Hall, LLC Property with petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in groundwater which has migrated onto the property. The source of the contamination was a release from a leaking underground storage tank system located on an adjoining parcel. PD intends to redevelop the site in commercial/retail use. 20 ------- OLD WNC FAIRGROUNDS Location: Intersection of James Street and Mill Street East Flat Rock, Henderson County PD: Henderson County Public Schools Project is former Western North Carolina Fairgrounds, it is currently vacant land, approximately 27 acres. The site was also used as training grounds for the Blue Ridge Fire Department. The training exercises led to soil contamination consisting of petroleum hydrocarbons in the training area. The PD intends to redevelop the property into an industrial park with the assistance of Henderson County Partnership for Economic Development. PILLOWTEX WWTP West C Street & Glenn Ave. Kannapolis, Rowan PD: City of Kannapolis A 118-acre abandoned Wastewater treatment facility for the Pillowtex Plant 1 property. It is owned by the bankrupt Pillowtex Corporation and is available for purchase. The Phase I ESA states that a pond on this property was used for alum sludge by the City of Kannapolis Water Treatment Plant. Thus, due to potential liability on part of PD, until a potential buyer is identified, there are no immediate plans for redevelopment of this property. PD is seeking viable buyers at this time. FINALIZED BROWNFIELDS AGREEMENTS (47) EITHER IN FORCE OR PENDING SIGNATURE PD = Prospective Developer; RP = Responsible Party ALAMAC KNIT FABRIC Hamilton, Martin Co. Former textile manufacturing facility with known soil and groundwater contamination involving chlorinated solvents. Site is undergoing active remediation under NC DWQ. Intended reuse is as a non-polluting school locker manufacturing facility that will employ some 350 workers. ANCHOR MILL Huntersville, Mecklenburg Co. Abandoned textile manufacturing facility with known metals contamination in soil, and lead, chlorinated solvent, and petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the 32-acre site as a mixed-use transit village that reuses the old mill building and adds new office, retail, and residential components. ARCHDALE MARKETPLACE Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Approximately 13-acre parcel known as Archdale Marketplace Shopping Center. Groundwater is contaminated at the Property due to historical site operations by an A&P grocery store, Sno- White Cleaners, and K-mart auto service center. PD intends to redevelop the property for commercial and retail. BALDOR ELECTRIC Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Former electric motor and motor component assembly and manufacturing facility with solvent impacted soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property for use as industrial condominiums. BROWN'S SOLVENT CO. Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Former paint and solvent formulation facility with known solvent- impacted soil and groundwater. PD intends to initially renovate & reuse the existing structure for office/warehouse use, and ultimately raze the building and redevelop the site as a mixed office/retail complex in keeping with other redevelopment taking place in Charlotte's South End. 21 ------- BURKHART CAROLINA Henderson, Vance Co. Former pickle processing and packing facility with chloride impacted soil and groundwater and minor solvent contamination in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property for commercial retail use. Simultaneously, the responsible party will implement groundwater remediation at the site under separate action. The PD's development will provide an impervious cap on the site, further assisting remedial efforts. BURLINGTON - JAMESTOWN Jamestown, Guilford Co. A 22-acre site containing a abandoned chemical formulation facility operated in support of Burlington Industries textile manufacturing operations. Known chlorinated and petroleum hydrocarbon contamination exists in site soil and groundwater and is being addressed under a consent order with DENR. PD intends to redevelop the property as polyurethane and polyacrylate emulsions manufacturing facility. BURLINGTON MILLS Mooresville, Iredell Co. Abandoned textile manufacturing facility with known petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in soil and groundwater, and chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site as an auto racing industry complex with office, flex, shop, and R&D space. CAMDEN SQUARE Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Abandoned Knitting and Printing Operations rebuilt into the "Design Center of the Carolinas". Development supported by the Wilmore Community as a vital redevelopment in an economically depressed area. Land Use restrictions for chlorinated solvents in groundwater. CAMDEN SQUARE ADDITION Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. This project will add, by amendment, 4.5 acres to the first brownfields agreement completed in North Carolina, Camden Square, in Charlotte's South End redevelopment corridor. Contamination includes VOC- and SVOC-impacted soil and groundwater. Intended reuse is for mixed office and retail. CAROLINA PRODUCTION FINISHING Asheville, Buncombe Co. Former textile finishing facility with metals contamination in both soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site for warehousing and as a sewing operation. PD is in the process of reviewing DENR's draft brownfields agreement for this site. CENTRAL PARK LANDFILL Winston-Salem, Forsyth Co. Former municipal landfill for the City of Winston-Salem. Site is 7.23 acres in size, and has been used as a city park since the 1950s. Low levels of chlorinated solvents, with no surficial soil contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site for soccer and a softball field for the adjoining Salem Academy and College so their current fields can be used for additional building space. A passive methane collection system will be installed prior to installation of the recreational fields. CHEROKEE OIL Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Approximately 2-acre site was formerly a non-permitted hazardous waste storage facility and the site of an EPA removal action. Known arsenic, oil & grease, and solvent contamination exists in site soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property as a nightclub and parking facility. 22 ------- CITY WEST COMMONS Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Dilapidated shopping center seized in a drug raid by the U.S. Dept. of Justice that has been approved for transfer to the city of Charlotte. Site had VOC and chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. The City intends transfer the property to a not-for-profit development corporation to redevelop the site as commercial retail shopping facility. C.K. LAND DEVELOPMENT Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. A large mixed use development on a former industrial services firm adjacent to a manufactured gas plant. Ground floor retail and studio with Office and residential units above. Project is in vicinity of Camden Square and provides redevelopment to economically depressed area. Capping and land use restrictions regarding PAHs in soil and chlorinated solvents in soil and groundwater. CUMBERLAND SHOPPING CENTER Greensboro, Guilford Co. Site of former shopping center and dry cleaners with chlorinated solvent impacted soil and groundwater. PD is a not-for-profit community development corporation. The PD has performed soil remediation activities and intends to redevelop the site with affordable residential housing. DYNATECH INDUSTRIES Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Former plating facility with metals-impacted soil and groundwater. EPA conducted soil removal activities at the site and has classified it as NFRAP. PD intends to redevelop the property for use as mixed office/retail complex. EAST GANNON PROPERTY Zebulon, Wake Co. This property consists of four parcels of land totaling 1.75 acres with four exiting structures (former restaurant, current auto sales, auto service garage and hair salon). Site planned to be redeveloped into a stand-alone Eckerd Drug Store, with other surrounding complimentary retail tenants. Soil and groundwater are contaminated with petroleum constituents from above ground storage tanks used by previous gas station. EAST PARK - BOYER 1607 & 1611 E. Fourth St. Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. PD: Torrence Street Partners Approximately 0.39-acre parcel that is a portion of the East Park Development Project, with known chlorinated solvent and gasoline contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site as a pedestrian urban infill multiple use development with commercial, residential, recreational and common open space. The site is part of the City of Charlotte's East Park re-development zone. EAST PARK - JOAL REALTY Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Part of the 24-acre site encompassing a six-block area with known chlorinated solvent contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site as a model for urban infill mixed use development with an emphasis on the needs of pedestrians in an urban setting. The site is part of the City of Charlotte's East Park re-development zone located between the CBD and the historic residential neighborhoods of Elizabeth and Myers Park. EAST PARK - KOSSOVE Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Part of the 24-acre site encompassing a six-block area with known chlorinated solvent contamination. PD intends to redevelop the site as a model for urban infill mixed use development with an emphasis on the needs of pedestrians in an urban setting. The site is part of the City of Charlotte's East Park re-development zone located between the CBD and the historic residential neighborhoods of Elizabeth and Myers Park. 23 ------- ERWIN SQUARE Durham, Durham Co. This approximately 6-acre property is a portion of a decommissioned former Burlington Industries site, other portions of which have already been redeveloped. There is known chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater, and these impacts are being addressed under an approved Division of Water Quality corrective action plan. PD intends to redevelop the site in high-density residential use. FLEMINGTON LANDFILL Wilmington, New Hanover Co. Site of a closed (1979), privately operated domestic and industrial solid waste landfill with VOC-impacted soil and groundwater. Intended reuse is for a soccer complex. This is the first former landfill property proposed for redevelopment under the NC brownfields statute, and the project's feasibility and technical challenges are being carefully evaluated. FOOD LION Winston-Salem, Forsyth Co. A new large supermarket placed on the site of an abandoned grocery store in urban Winston-Salem. Project had strong community support as a quality of life issue as the community had no supermarket. Land use restrictions for chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater. Brownfield Assessment determined the source to be nearby drycleaner. GUILFORD MILLS Greensboro, Guilford Co. A 55-acre site containing former textile manufacturing facility with known VOC contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property in mixed retail uses. Public benefits include the creation of an estimated 500 jobs and substantial tax roles increases. HAMILTON PROPERTY Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. As small, dilapidated property bought for the expansion of Cost Effective Maintenance Inc., a small business in the South End area of Charlotte. Expansion into this property allowed CEM to stay in Charlotte instead of move to suburbs. Land use restrictions for chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater. HILLSBOROUGH VENTURES Raleigh, Wake Co. Project involves redeveloping an area of parking lots and dilapidated, underused retail structures. Land use restrictions are in place for the petroleum hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property as mixed residential (private student dormitory for N.C. State University) and retail complex. HILLSBOROUGH VENTURES ADDITION Raleigh, Wake Co. Prospective developer added acreage to the footprint of original Hillsborough Ventures project, which involves redeveloping an area of parking lots and dilapidated, underused retail structures adjacent to N.C. State University for mixed residential (private student dormitory) and retail uses. HOME DEPOT - South Blvd. Charlotte, Mecklenburg County A 12-acre site currently occupied by a produce grocer and office rental store (1 acre), parking (7 acres), abandoned plant nursery (1 acre); the rest is undeveloped. Operations at adjacent Academy Steel Drum (ASD) from 1947-69 included the disposal of wastes and sludge from drums into pits/lagoons. The location of the lagoons and overflow drainage is suspected to have been partially on subject property. After ASD burned in 1969 the property was thoroughly re-graded with contaminated soil moved around. Elevated concentrations of lead, chromium, and PCBs in soil along with lead, 2-chlorophenol, and trichloroethene. PD plans to lease property to Home Depot for construction of a new Home Depot home improvement retail store. 24 ------- LEWITH TEXTILE Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Project involves the redevelopment of 50+ acres of abandoned and underused commercial and industrial property, including the former Lewith Textile facility. Contaminants include Petroleum hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvents in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site as an industrial park for light manufacturing and warehousing/distribution. LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES Greensboro, Guilford Co. Former cotton mill and manufacturing facility with chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site in mixed commercial retail/office and residential. MALLARD CREEK Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. A 21-acre site adjacent to former auto service station and chainsaw service center operations. Petroleum hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater, sourced from underground and aboveground storage tanks releases on the adjacent site, has migrated onto the subject property. PD intends to redevelop the property as an apartment complex. OXFORD PRINTING Oxford, Granville Co. Former textile printing and finishing facility with VOC contamination in groundwater. PD has conducted remediation of floor drain contents. PD intends to redevelop the site for industrial/distribution use. PILOT MILLS Raleigh, Wake Co. Abandoned, condemned turn-of-the-century textile mill in Downtown Raleigh redeveloped into office space and preserved on the National Register of Historic Places. Land use restrictions for chlorinated solvent in groundwater and capping of mercury in soils. QUALITY METAL PRODUCTS Gastonia, Gaston Co. This 11- acre site contains an abandoned facility of 48,000 square feet formerly used as for metal fabrication. Parts cleaning activities resulted in solvent impacts to site soil and groundwater. PD intends to refurbish the facility for metal fabrication utilizing high-tech, non-contaminating methods. REDMAN HOMES Mebane, Orange Co. Former mobile home manufacturing facility with metals and solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. PD has performed drum removal and soil remediation activities. PD intends to redevelop the site as a manufacturing facility to produce windows and doors. SANFORD WWTP Sanford, Lee Co. Former municipal wastewater treatment plant site with petroleum impacted sewer sludge and metals impacts in site soils and low concentrations of volatile and semi-volatile compounds in groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the property in commercial use, including restaurant, retail space and a multi- screen movie theater. SINGER COMPANY Chocowinity, Beaufort Co. Abandoned rural manufacturing facility with lead and phthalate contamination in soil and groundwater. The brownfields agreement provides for partial site remediation. PD intends to redevelop the site with mixed retail and light industrial uses. SMITH METAL & IRON Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Former site of a scrap metal yard and of a waste cell created for the temporary disposal of impacted soil removed during the construction of the adjoining Carolina Panther's practice field. The waste in the cell has been removed, and minor chlorinated solvent impacts remain in site groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site in high density residential with additional office, entertainment, and retail potential. 25 ------- SMITH PROPERTY Shelby, Cleveland Co. Project involves the redevelopment of an area occupied by seven underused and dilapidated residential homes with petroleum hydrocarbon and chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater. PD has the support of local residents to reuse the site as a parking lot serving the Cleveland County Offices. SOUTH TRYON STREET Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. A 2.88-acre parcel near historic SouthEnd. PD intends to redevelop the property for commercial purposes such as office and showroom condominiums. Groundwater is contaminated at the Property due to historical site operations as industrial/warehouse storage. SOUTHERN MANUFACTURING Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. This 9-acre site located in inner Charlotte was a former asbestos tile manufacturing facility. Operations involving asbestos were discontinued in 1986, and the facility was closed in 1999. The site has known asbestos contamination in soils. Intended reuse of the site includes an outdoor amphitheater, a technical business park, or a mixed-use development with industrial, commercial, and residential components. STATE FARM ROAD Boone, Watauga Co. Project involves the redevelopment of property occupied by a rural residence with chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater and in a spring from an off-site source. PD intends to redevelop the site as a medical office complex. TARTAN MARINE Hamlet, Richmond Co. Former boat manufacturing facility with lead contamination in soil. Additional site sampling conducted by the PD has shown previous soil removal actions have left no health-based lead problems. PD intends to redevelop the site as a chair and table base manufacturing facility. TERRELL MACHINE Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Site of former textile manufacturing and gear box machining operations, property in Charlotte's South End district is being redeveloped with ground floor retail and office/residential above. Remedial actions to eliminate hot spot contamination included soil removal and groundwater pump and treat. Land use restrictions are in place to address chlorinated solvent contamination remaining in groundwater. VANIER GRAPHICS Eden, Rockingham Co. Former printing facility with petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbon contamination in the soil and solvent contamination in the groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site as a furniture assembly and upholstering facility. WEST MOREHEAD Charlotte, Mecklenburg Co. Former automobile repair and maintenance facility with chlorinated solvent contamination in soil and groundwater. PD intends to redevelop the site, to include both facility renovation and new construction for use as commercial office/retail. 26 ------- Brownfields Agreement Process NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM Prospective Developer (PD) NC Brownfields Program (NCBP) Submit Letter of Intent Project Manager reviews Letter of Intent Submit Revisions to LOI Insufficient Eligible? Not Eligible - End of Process Send out LOI Response ACRONYMS BFA Brownfields Agreement LOE Letter of Eligibility LOI Letter of Intent PD Prospective Developer PM Project Manager Perform additional assessment and receptor survey; submit with, proposed site plans More Assessment eeded? Send out Letter of Eligibility and request all available assessment data Project Manager reviews available data and determines if additional assessment needed Send out letter with further assessment requirements Begin preparation of brownfields plat map according to guidance. Revise as needed BFA Agreement eached? Draft BFA document e-mailed to PD and invoice for $2000 brownfields fee sent to PD Complete? PM drafts Brownfields Agreement and has Brownfields attorney review, edit and approve. Process ends \ without BFA J k Negotiations Attorney notifies PM to create ancillary documents. Attorney reviews, edits and approves and e- mails PD Plat Map approvable? Agreement Reached? Negotiations Proceed to Public Comment Process ends without BFA BFA Process Flowchart 5-27-04.vsd ------- NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE MATTER OF: [Name of Prospective Developer] UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE ) BROWNFIELDS AGREEMENT re: BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY REUSE ACT ) [site name] OF 1997, N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.30, et seq. ) [site address] [BF Project Number] I. INTRODUCTION This Brownfields Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ("DENR") and [name of Prospective Developer] (collectively the "Parties") pursuant to the Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997, N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.30, et seq. (the "Act"). [Introductory information, consistent with Statement of Facts, about Prospective Developer, its address, its business form and where it's chartered, and its proposed use of property, with location and brief description of property.] A map showing the location of the property, which is the subject of this Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The Parties agree to undertake all actions required by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to settle and resolve, subject to reservations and limitations contained in Section VIII (Certification), Section IX (DENR's Covenant Not to Sue and Reservation of Rights) and Section X (Prospective Developer's Covenant Not to Sue), the potential liability of [name of Prospective Developer] for contaminants at the property which is the subject of this Agreement. The Parties agree that [name of Prospective Developer]'s entry into this Agreement, and the actions undertaken by [name of Prospective Developer] in accordance with the Agreement, do not constitute an admission of any liability by [name of Prospective Developer], The resolution of this potential liability, in exchange for the benefit [name of Prospective Developer] shall provide to DENR, is in the public interest. II. DEFINITIONS Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, terms used in this Agreement which are defined in the Act or elsewhere in N.C.G.S. 130A, Article 9 shall have the meaning assigned to them in those statutory provisions, including any amendments thereto. 1. "Property" shall mean the Brownfields Property which is the subject of this Agreement, and which is described and depicted in Exhibit 1 of this Agreement. 2."Prospective Developer" shall mean [name of Prospective Developer], III. STATEMENT OF FACTS 3. [Facts relating to the Property that are relevant; and that do not relate to actions or parties that are outside of this Agreement.] The Property comprises acres. Prospective Developer has committed itself to redevelopment for no uses other than . 4. The Property is bordered to the north by [ ["and owned by ], to the south by the west by . ] [land used for , to the east by _ _] , and to ------- a. Prospective Developer obtained or commissioned the following reports, referred to hereinafter as the "Environmental Reports," regarding the Property: Title Prepared by Date of Report 5. For purposes of this Agreement, DENR relies on the following representations by Prospective Developer as to prior use of the Property: a. [List of representations here] 6. The most recent environmental sampling at the Property reported in the Environmental Reports occurred on , 200_. The following table(s) set forth, for contaminants present at the Property above unrestricted use standards, the maximum concentration found at each sample location and the applicable standard: a. Groundwater contaminants (in micrograms per liter, the equivalent of parts per billion), the standards for which are in Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2L, Rule .0202: Groundwater Contaminant Sample Location Date of Max. Concentration Sampling Maximum Concentration above Std. (mg/L) Standard (mg/L) b. Soil contaminants (in milligrams per kilogram, the equivalent of parts per million), the standards for which are derived using the Guidelines of the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch of DENR's Superfund Section: Soil Contaminant Sample Location Depth Date of Max. Concentration Sampling Maximum Concentration above Std. (mg/kg) Standard (mg/kg) 7. For purposes of this Agreement DENR relies on Prospective Developer's representations that Prospective Developer's involvement with the Property has been limited to obtaining or commissioning the Environmental Reports, preparing and submitting to DENR a Brownfields Letter of Intent dated , 200_, and the following: ------- 8. On , 200_, Prospective Developer [purchased] [contracted to purchase] the Property (if either applies) 9. Prospective Developer has provided DENR with information, or sworn certifications regarding that information on which DENR relies for purposes of this Agreement, sufficient to demonstrate that: a. Prospective Developer and any parent, subsidiary, or other affiliate has substantially complied with federal and state laws, regulations and rules for protection of the environment, and with the other agreements and requirements cited at N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.32(a)(1); b. As a result of the implementation of this Agreement, the Property will be suitable for the uses specified in the Agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment; c. Prospective Developer's reuse of the Property will produce a public benefit commensurate with the liability protection provided Prospective Developer hereunder; d. Prospective Developer has or can obtain the financial, managerial and technical means to fully implement this Agreement and assure the safe use of the Property; and e. Prospective Developer has complied with all applicable procedural requirements. 10. Prospective Developer has paid the $2,000 fee to seek a brownfields agreement required by N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.39(a)(1). Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.39(a)(2), the procedure upon which Prospective Developer and DENR have agreed for payment of the full cost to DENR and the North Carolina Department of Justice ("DOJ") of all activities related to this Agreement is that Prospective Developer shall pay any amount by which DOJ's hours, multiplied by $36.24, exceed the $2,000 fee referenced above in this paragraph. (DENR has incurred no costs.) IV. BENEFIT TO COMMUNITY 11. The redevelopment of the Property proposed herein would provide the following public benefits: a. A return to productive use of the Property;[use only where property's idle] b. An increase in the Property's productivity;[use where property's currently in use] _. A spur to additional community redevelopment, through improved neighborhood appearance and otherwise;[use where surrounding area's depressed] . [Use where # known: "approximately "] jobs; _. Tax revenue for affected jurisdictions; . ["Additional" (if applicable)] ["retail"] ["office"] [other?] space for the area; and _. "Smart growth" through use of land in an already developed area, which avoids development of land beyond the urban fringe ("greenfields"). _. Additional benefits supplied by PD V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED 12. [Include here provisions relating to agency approvals, reporting, any required financial assurances, any petroleum underground storage tanks, etc, and: a. Any remediation to be conducted on the property, including: ------- i. A description of specific areas where remediation is to be conducted. ii. The remediation method or methods to be employed. iii. The resources that Prospective Developer will make available. iv. A schedule of remediation activities. v. Applicable remediation standards. vi. A schedule and the method or methods for evaluating the remediation.] . By way of the Notice of Brownfields Property referenced below in paragraph , Prospective Developer shall impose the following land use restrictions under the Act, running with the land, to make the Property safe for the uses specified in this Agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment. No use other than the following may be made of the Property: [list use(s) we've approved] Surface water and underground water at the Property may not be used for any purpose without the approval of DENR or its successor in function. _. No activities that encounter, expose, remove or use groundwater (for example, installation of water supply wells, fountains, ponds, lakes or swimming pools, or construction or excavation activities that encounter or expose groundwater) may occur on the Property without prior sampling and analysis of groundwater to the satisfaction of DENR or its successor in function in any areas proposed for such activities, and submittal of the analytical results to DENR or its successor in function. If such results disclose to DENR or its successor in function contamination in excess of North Carolina's groundwater quality standards, the proposed activities may not occur without the approval of DENR or its successor in function on such conditions as DENR or its successor in function imposes, including at a minimum compliance with plans and procedures, approved pursuant to applicable law, to protect public health and the environment during the proposed activities. _. Soil underlying paved surfaces and buildings at the Property may not be exposed without prior sampling and analysis of such soil to the satisfaction of DENR or its successor in function, and submittal of the analytical results to DENR or its successor in function. If such results disclose contamination in excess of the applicable standards as determined by DENR or its successor in function, the soil may not be exposed without the approval of DENR or its successor in function on such conditions as DENR or its successor in function imposes, including at a minimum compliance with plans and procedures, approved pursuant to applicable law, to protect public health and the environment during the activities that would expose such soil. _. Soil not previously sampled for contaminants may not be exposed without a minimum of five (5) business days advance written notice to DENR or its successor in function. At the time such soil is exposed, DENR or its successor in function may inspect and sample, or require sampling of, the exposed soil for contaminants. If soil contamination is discovered that DENR or its successor in function determines would likely contaminate groundwater even if capped, or that may pose an imminent threat to public health or the environment if exposed, as much soil as DENR or its successor in function requires shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable law, and any other actions that DENR or its successor in function requires to make the Property suitable for the uses specified in this Agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment shall be taken. If soil contamination is discovered that DENR or its successor in function determines would not contaminate groundwater if capped, or pose an imminent threat to public health or the environment if exposed, as much soil as DENR or its successor in function requires shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable law or capped to the satisfaction of DENR or its successor in function. ------- Soil, landscaping and contours at the Property may not be disturbed without the approval of DENR or its successor in function, except for mowing and pruning of above-ground vegetation. No mining may be conducted on or under the Property, including, without limitation, extraction of coal, oil, gas or any other minerals or non-mineral substances. _. No basements may be constructed on the Property unless they are, as determined by DENR or its successor in function, vented in conformance with applicable building codes. _. None of the contaminants known to be present in the environmental media at the Property, including those listed in paragraph of this Agreement, may be used or stored at the Property without the prior approval of DENR or its successor in function, except in de minimis amounts for cleaning and other routine housekeeping activities. _. The Property may not be used as a park or for sports of any kind, including, but not limited to, golf, football, soccer and baseball, without the approval of DENR or its successor in function. _. The Property may not be used for agriculture, grazing, timbering or timber production. _. The Property may not be used as a playground, or for child care centers or schools. _. The Property may not be used for kennels, private animal pens or horse-riding. _. During January of each year after this Agreement becomes effective, the then current owner of any part of the Property shall submit a notarized Land Use Restrictions Update to DENR or its successor in function certifying that the Notice of Brownfields Property containing these land use restrictions remains recorded at the County, North Carolina Register of Deeds' office, and that the land use restrictions are being complied with [Add here any additional items PD needs to certify annually]. . [Use if applicable.] Within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this Agreement, Prospective Developer shall notify DENR that it is ready to effect the abandonment of all groundwater monitoring wells, injection wells, recovery wells, piezometers and other man-made points of groundwater access at the Property in accordance with Subchapter 2C of Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code. Unless DENR notifies Prospective Developer within ten (10) days of receiving such notification to refrain from such abandonment, Prospective Developer shall effect said abandonment and shall, within thirty (30) days after concluding such abandonment, provide DENR a report setting forth the procedures and results. . The desired result of the above-referenced ["remediation and" if there's active remediation] land use restrictions is to make the Property suitable for the uses specified in the Agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment. . The guidelines, including parameters, principles and policies within which the desired results are to be accomplished are the Guidelines of the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch of DENR's Superfund Section, as embodied in their most current version. . The consequences of achieving or not achieving the desired results will be that the Property is or is not suitable for the uses specified in the Agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment. VI. ACCESS/NOTICE TO SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST . Commencing upon the [date that it acquires title to the Property] ["effective date of this Agreement" if Prospective Developer already owns Property], Prospective Developer agrees to provide to DENR, its authorized officers, employees, representatives, and all other persons performing response actions under DENR oversight, an irrevocable right of access at all reasonable times to the Property and to any other property to which access is required for the implementation of response actions at the Property, to the extent access to such other property is controlled by the Prospective Developer, for the purposes of performing or overseeing response actions at the Property under applicable law. DENR agrees to provide ------- reasonable notice to the Prospective Developer of the timing of response actions to be undertaken at the Property. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, DENR retains all of its authorities and rights, including enforcement authorities related thereto, under the Act and any other applicable statute or regulation, including any amendments thereto. . DENR has approved, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.35, a Notice of Brownfields Property for the Property containing, inter alia, the land use restrictions set forth in Section V (Work to Be Performed) of this Agreement and a survey plat of the Property. Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.35(b), within 15 days of the effective date of this Agreement Prospective Developer shall file the Notice of Brownfields Property in the County, North Carolina Register of Deeds' office. Within three days thereafter, Prospective Developer shall furnish DENR a copy of the documentary component of the Notice containing a certification by the register of deeds as to the Book and Page numbers where both the documentary and plat components of the Notice are recorded, and a copy of the plat with notations indicating its recordation. . This Agreement shall be attached as Exhibit A to the Notice of Brownfields Property. Subsequent to recordation of said Notice, any deed or other instrument conveying an interest in the Property shall contain the following notice: "The property which is the subject of this instrument is subject to the Brownfields Agreement attached as Exhibit A to the Notice of Brownfields Property recorded in the County land records, Book , Page ." A copy of any such instrument shall be sent to the persons listed in Section XV (Notices and Submissions), though financial figures related to the conveyance may be redacted. . The Prospective Developer shall ensure that assignees, successors in interest, lessees and sublessees of the Property shall provide the same access and cooperation. The Prospective Developer shall ensure that a copy of this Agreement is provided to any current lessee or sublessee on the Property as of the effective date of this Agreement and shall ensure that any subsequent leases, subleases, assignments or transfers of the Property or an interest in the Property are consistent with this Section, Section V (Work to be Performed) and Section XI (Parties Bound/Transfer of Covenant) of this Agreement. VII. DUE CARE/COOPERATION . The Prospective Developer shall exercise due care at the Property with respect to regulated substances and shall comply with all applicable local, State, and federal laws and regulations. The Prospective Developer agrees to cooperate fully with any remediation of the Property by DENR and further agrees not to interfere with any such remediation. DENR agrees, consistent with its responsibilities under applicable law, to use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference with the Prospective Developer's operations by any such remediation. In the event the Prospective Developer becomes aware of any action or occurrence which causes or threatens a release of contaminants at or from the Property, the Prospective Developer shall immediately take all appropriate action to prevent, abate, or minimize such release or threat of release, and shall, in addition to complying with any applicable notification requirements under N.C.G.S. 130A- 310.1 and 143-215.84, and Section 103 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9603, or any other law, immediately notify DENR of such release or threatened release. VIII. CERTIFICATION . By entering into this agreement, the Prospective Developer certifies that, without DENR approval, it will make no use of the Property other than that committed to in the Brownfields Letter of Intent dated by which it applied for this Agreement. That use is . Prospective Developer also certifies that to the best of its knowledge and belief it has fully and accurately disclosed to DENR all information known to Prospective Developer and all information in the possession or control of its officers, directors, employees, contractors and agents which relates in any way to any regulated substances at the Property and to its qualification for this Agreement, including the requirement that it not have caused or contributed to the contamination at the Property. ------- IX. DENR'S COVENANT NOT TO SUE AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS . Unless one of the following applies, Prospective Developer shall not be liable to DENR, and DENR covenants not to sue Prospective Developer, for remediation of the Property except as specified in this Agreement: a. The Prospective Developer fails to comply with this Agreement. b. The activities conducted on the Property by or under the control or direction of the Prospective Developer increase the risk of harm to public health or the environment, in which case Prospective Developer shall be liable for remediation of the areas of the Property, remediation of which is required by this Agreement, to the extent necessary to eliminate such risk of harm to public health or the environment. c. A land use restriction set out in the Notice of Brownfields Property required under N.C.G.S. 130A-310.35 is violated while the Prospective Developer owns the Property, in which case the Prospective Developer shall be responsible for remediation of the Property to current standards. d. The Prospective Developer knowingly or recklessly provided false information that formed a basis for this Agreement or knowingly or recklessly offers false information to demonstrate compliance with this Agreement or fails to disclose relevant information about contamination at the Property. e. New information indicates the existence of previously unreported contaminants or an area of previously unreported contamination on or associated with the Property that has not been remediated to current standards, unless this Agreement is amended to include any previously unreported contaminants and any additional areas of contamination. If this Agreement sets maximum concentrations for contaminants, and new information indicates the existence of previously unreported areas of these contaminants, further remediation shall be required only if the areas of previously unreported contaminants raise the risk of the contamination to public health or the environment to a level less protective of public health and the environment than that required by this Agreement. f. The level of risk to public health or the environment from contaminants is unacceptable at or in the vicinity of the Property due to changes in exposure conditions, including (i) a change in land use that increases the probability of exposure to contaminants at or in the vicinity of the Property or (ii) the failure of remediation to mitigate risks to the extent required to make the Property fully protective of public health and the environment as planned in this Agreement. g. The Department obtains new information about a contaminant associated with the Property or exposures at or around the Property that raises the risk to public health or the environment associated with the Property beyond an acceptable range and in a manner or to a degree not anticipated in this Agreement. h. The Prospective Developer fails to file a timely and proper Notice of Brownfields Property under N.C.G.S. 130A-310.35. . Except as may be provided herein, DENR reserves its rights against Prospective Developer as to liabilities beyond the scope of the Act, including those regarding petroleum underground storage tanks pursuant to Part 2A, Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes. . This Agreement does not waive any applicable requirement to obtain a permit, license or certification, or to comply with any and all other applicable law, including the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act, N.C.G.S. § 113A-1, et seq. ------- X. PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPER'S COVENANT NOT TO SUE . In consideration of DENR's Covenant Not To Sue in Section IX of this Agreement and in recognition of the absolute State immunity provided in N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.37(b), the Prospective Developer hereby covenants not to sue and not to assert any claims or causes of action against DENR, its authorized officers, employees, or representatives with respect to any action implementing the Act, including negotiating, entering, monitoring or enforcing this Agreement or the above-referenced Notice of Brownfields Property. XI. PARTIES BOUND & TRANSFER/ASSIGNMENT NOTICE . This Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon DENR, and on the Prospective Developer, its officers, directors, employees, and agents. Each Party's signatory to this Agreement represents that she or he is fully authorized to enter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to legally bind the Party for whom she or he signs. . No later than fourteen (14) days prior to any transfer or assignment by Prospective Developer of any interest in the Property, Prospective Developer shall provide in writing to DENR the transferee or assignee's name, mailing address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and e-mail address. XII. DISCLAIMER . This Agreement in no way constitutes a finding by DENR as to the risks to public health and the environment which may be posed by regulated substances at the Property, a representation by DENR that the Property is fit for any particular purpose, nor a waiver of Prospective Developer's duty to seek applicable permits or of the provisions of N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.37. XIII. DOCUMENT RETENTION . The Prospective Developer agrees to retain and make available to DENR all business and operating records, contracts, site studies and investigations, and documents relating to operations at the Property, for ten years following the effective date of this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Parties. At the end of ten years, the Prospective Developer shall notify DENR of the location of such documents and shall provide DENR with an opportunity to copy any documents at the expense of DENR. XIV. PAYMENT OF ENFORCEMENT COSTS . If the Prospective Developer fails to comply with the terms of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the provisions of Section V (Work to be Performed), it shall be liable for all litigation and other enforcement costs incurred by DENR to enforce this Agreement or otherwise obtain compliance. XV. NOTICES AND SUBMISSIONS . Unless otherwise required by DENR or a Party notifies the other Party in writing of a change in contact information, all notices and submissions pursuant to this Agreement shall be sent by prepaid first class U.S. mail, as follows: a. For DENR: N.C. Division of Waste Management Brownfields Program 401 OberlinRoad, Suite 150 Raleigh, NC 27605 ------- b. For Prospective Developer: Name Company Address City, State, ZIP Notices and submissions sent by prepaid first class U.S. mail shall be effective on the third day following postmarking. Notices and submissions sent by hand or by other means affording written evidence of date of receipt shall be effective on such date. XVI. EFFECTIVE DATE . This Agreement shall become effective on the date the Prospective Developer signs it, after receiving it, signed, from DENR. Prospective Developer shall sign the Agreement within seven (7) days following such receipt. XVII. TERMINATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS . If any Party believes that any or all of the obligations under Section VI (Access/Notice to Successors in Interest) are no longer necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Agreement, that Party may request in writing that the other Party agree to terminate the provision(s) establishing such obligations; provided, however, that the provision(s) in question shall continue in force unless and until the Party requesting such termination receives written agreement from the other Party to terminate such provisions). XVIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION . With regard to claims for contribution against Prospective Developer in relation to the subject matter of this Agreement, Prospective Developer is entitled to protection from such claims to the extent provided by N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.37(a)(5)-(6). The subject matter of this Agreement is all remediation taken or to be taken and response costs incurred or to be incurred by DENR or any other person in relation to the Property. . The Prospective Developer agrees that, with respect to any suit or claim for contribution brought by it in relation to the subject matter of this Agreement, it will notify DENR in writing no later than 60 days prior to the initiation of such suit or claim. . The Prospective Developer also agrees that, with respect to any suit or claim for contribution brought against it in relation to the subject matter of this Agreement, it will notify DENR in writing within 10 days of service of the complaint on it. XVIV. PUBLIC COMMENT . This Agreement shall be subject to a public comment period of at least sixty days starting the day after publication of the approved summary of the Notice of Intent to Redevelop a Brownfields Property required by N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.34 in the North Carolina Register, or the day after publication of the same in a newspaper of general circulation serving the area in which the Property is located, whichever occurs later. After expiration of that period, or following a public meeting if DENR holds one pursuant to N.C.G. S. § 130A-310.34(c), DENR may modify or withdraw its consent to this Agreement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that this Agreement is inappropriate, improper or inadequate. ------- IT IS SO AGREED: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES By: Linda M. Culpepper Date Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management IT IS SO AGREED: [Name of Prospective Developer] By: Name typed or printed: Date Title typed or printed: ------- Brownfields Property Reuse Act § 130A-310.30. Short title. This Part may be cited as The Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997. (1997-357, s. 2.) § 130A-310.31. Definitions. (a) Unless a different meaning is required by the context or unless a different meaning is set out in subsection (b) of this section, the definitions in G.S. 130A-2 and G.S. 130A-310 apply throughout this Part. (b) Unless a different meaning is required by the context: (1) "Affiliate" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12b-2 (1 April 1996 Edition) (2) "Brownfields agreement" means an agreement between the Department and a prospective developer that meets the requirements of G.S. 130A-310.32. (3) "Brownfields property" or "brownfields site" means abandoned, idled, or underused property at which expansion or redevelopment is hindered by actual environmental contamination or the possibility of environmental contamination and that is or may be subject to remediation under any State remedial program other than Part 2A of Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes or that is or may be subject to remediation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.). (4) "Contaminant" means a regulated substance released into the environment. (5) "Unrestricted use standards" when used in connection with "cleanup", "remediated", or "remediation" means that cleanup or remediation of contamination complies with generally applicable standards, guidance, or established methods governing the contaminants that are established by statute or adopted, published, or implemented by the Environmental Management Commission, the Commission, or the Department instead of the risk-based standards established by the Commission pursuant to this Part. (6) "Environmental contamination" means contaminants at the property requiring remediation and that are to be remediated under the brownfields agreement including, at a minimum, hazardous waste, as defined in G.S. 130A-290; a hazardous substance, as defined in G.S. 130A-310; a hazardous substance, as defined in G.S. 143-215.77; or oil, as defined in G.S. 143-215.77. (7) "Local government" means a town, city, or county. (8) "Parent" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12b-2 (1 April 1996 Edition). (9) "Potentially responsible party" means a person who is or may be liable for remediation under a remedial program. (10) "Prospective developer" means any person who desires to either buy or sell a brownfields property for the purpose of developing or redeveloping that brownfields property and who did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the brownfields property. ------- (11) "Regulated substance" means a hazardous waste, as defined in G.S 130A-290; a hazardous substance, as defined in G.S. 143-215.77A; oil, as defined in G.S. 143-215.77; or other substance regulated under any remedial program implemented by the Department other than Part 2A of Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes. (12) "Remedial program" means a program implemented by the Department for the remediation of any contaminant, including the Inactive Hazardous Sites Response Act of 1987 under Part 3 of this Article, the Superfund Program under Part 4 of this Article, and the Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substances Control Act of 1978 under Part 2 of Article 21A of Chapter 143 of the General Statutes. (13) "Remediation" means action to cleanup, mitigate, correct, abate, minimize, eliminate, control, or prevent the spreading, migration, leaking, leaching, volatilization, spilling, transport, or further release of a contaminant into the environment in order to protect public health or the environment. (14) "Subsidiary" has the same meaning as in 17 Code of Federal Regulations § 240.12b- 2 (1 April 1996 Edition). (1997-357, s. 2; 1997-392, ss. 4.2-4.4; 2001-384, s. 11.) § 130A-310.32. Brownfields agreement. (a) The Department may, in its discretion, enter into a brownfields agreement with a prospective developer who satisfies the requirements of this section. A prospective developer shall provide the Department with any information necessary to demonstrate that: (1) The prospective developer, and any parent, subsidiary, or other affiliate of the prospective developer has substantially complied with: a. The terms of any brownfields agreement or similar agreement to which the prospective developer or any parent, subsidiary, or other affiliate of the prospective developer has been a party. b. The requirements applicable to any remediation in which the applicant has previously engaged. c. Federal and state laws, regulations, and rules for the protection of the environment. (2) As a result of the implementation of the brownfields agreement, the brownfields property will be suitable for the uses specified in the agreement while fully protecting public health and the environment instead of being remediated to unrestricted use standards. (3) There is a public benefit commensurate with the liability protection provided under this Part. (4) The prospective developer has or can obtain the financial, managerial, and technical means to fully implement the brownfields agreement and assure the safe use of the brownfields property. (5) The prospective developer has complied with or will comply with all applicable procedural requirements. (b) In negotiating a brownfields agreement, parties may rely on land-use restrictions that will be included in a Notice of Brownfields Property required under G.S. 130A-310.35. A brownfields agreement may provide for remediation standards that are based on those land-use restrictions. ------- (c) A brownfields agreement shall contain a description of the brownfields property that would be sufficient as a description of the property in an instrument of conveyance and, as applicable, a statement of: (1) Any remediation to be conducted on the property, including: a. A description of specific areas where remediation is to be conducted. b. The remediation method or methods to be employed. c. The resources that the prospective developer will make available. d. A schedule of remediation activities. e. Applicable remediation standards. f. A schedule and the method or methods for evaluating the remediation. (2) Any land-use restrictions that will apply to the brownfields property. (3) The desired results of any remediation or land-use restrictions with respect to the brownfields property. (4) The guidelines, including parameters, principles, and policies within which the desired results are to be accomplished. (5) The consequences of achieving or not achieving the desired results. (d) Any failure of the prospective developer or the prospective developer's agents and employees to comply with the brownfields agreement constitutes a violation of this Part by the prospective developer. (1997-357, s. 2; 2001-384, s. 11.) § 130A-310.33. Liability protection. (a) A prospective developer who enters into a brownfields agreement with the Department and who is complying with the brownfields agreement shall not be held liable for remediation of areas of contaminants identified in the brownfields agreement except as specified in the brownfields agreement, so long as the activities conducted on the brownfields property by or under the control or direction of the prospective developer do not increase the risk of harm to public health or the environment and the prospective developer is not required to undertake additional remediation to unrestricted use standards pursuant to subsection (c) of this section. The liability protection provided under this Part applies to all of the following persons to the same extent as to a prospective developer, so long as these persons are not otherwise potentially responsible parties or parents, subsidiaries, or affiliates of potentially responsible parties and the person is not required to undertake additional remediation to unrestricted use standards pursuant to subsection (c) of this section: (1) Any person under the direction or control of the prospective developer who directs or contracts for remediation or redevelopment of the brownfields property. (2) Any future owner of the brownfields property. (3) A person who develops or occupies the brownfields property. ------- (4) A successor or assign of any person to whom the liability protection provided under this Part applies. (5) Any lender or fiduciary that provides financing for remediation or redevelopment of the brownfields property. (b) A person who conducts an environmental assessment or transaction screen on a brownfields property and who is not otherwise a potentially responsible party is not a potentially responsible party as a result of conducting the environmental assessment or transaction screen unless that person increases the risk of harm to public health or the environment by failing to exercise due diligence and reasonable care in performing the environmental assessment or transaction screen. (c) If a land-use restriction set out in the Notice of Brownfields Property required under G.S. 130A-310.35 is violated, the owner of the brownfields property at the time the land-use restriction is violated, the owner's successors and assigns, and the owner's agents who direct or contract for alteration of the brownfields property in violation of a land-use restriction shall be liable for remediation to unrestricted use standards. A prospective developer who completes the remediation or redevelopment required under a brownfields agreement or other person who receives liability protection under this Part shall not be required to undertake additional remediation at the brownfields property unless any of the following apply: (1) The prospective developer knowingly or recklessly provides false information that forms a basis for the brownfields agreement or that is offered to demonstrate compliance with the brownfields agreement or fails to disclose relevant information about contamination at the brownfields property. (2) New information indicates the existence of previously unreported contaminants or an area of previously unreported contamination on or associated with the brownfields property that has not been remediated to unrestricted use standards, unless the brownfields agreement is amended to include any previously unreported contaminants and any additional areas of contamination. If the brownfields agreement sets maximum concentrations for contaminants, and new information indicates the existence of previously unreported areas of these contaminants, further remediation shall be required only if the areas of previously unreported contaminants raise the risk of the contamination to public health or the environment to a level less protective of public health and the environment than that required by the brownfields agreement. (3)The level of risk to public health or the environment from contaminants is unacceptable at or in the vicinity of the brownfields property due to changes in exposure conditions, including (i) a change in land use that increases the probability of exposure to contaminants or in the vicinity of the brownfields property or (ii) the failure of remediation to mitigate risks to the extent required to make the brownfields property fully protective of public health and the environment as planned in the brownfields agreement. (4) The Department obtains new information about a contaminant associated with the brownfields property or exposures at or around the brownfields property that raises the risk to public health or the environment associated with the brownfields property beyond an acceptable range and in a manner or to a degree not anticipated in the brownfields agreement. Any person whose use, including any change in use, of the brownfields property causes an unacceptable risk to public health or the environment may be required by the Department to undertake additional remediation measures under the provisions of this Part. (5) A prospective developer fails to file a timely and proper Notice of Brownfields Development under this Part. (1997-357, s. 2; 2001-384, s. 11.) ------- § 130A-310.34. Public notice and community involvement. (a) A prospective developer who desires to enter into a brownfields agreement shall notify the public and the community in which the brownfields property is located of planned remediation and redevelopment activities. The prospective developer shall submit a Notice of Intent to Redevelop a Brownfields Property and a summary of the Notice of Intent to the Department. The Notice of Intent shall provide, to the extent known, a legal description of the location of the brownfields property, a map showing the location of the brownfields property, a description of the contaminants involved and their concentrations in the media of the brownfields property, a description of the intended future use of the brownfields property, any proposed investigation and remediation, and a proposed Notice of Brownfields Property prepared in accordance with G.S. 130A-310.35. Both the Notice of Intent and the summary of the Notice of Intent shall state the time period and means for submitting written comment and for requesting a public meeting on the proposed brownfields agreement. The summary of the Notice of Intent shall include a statement as to the public availability of the full Notice of Intent. After approval of the Notice of Intent and summary of the Notice of Intent by the Department, the prospective developer shall provide a copy of the Notice of Intent to all local governments having jurisdiction over the brownfields property. The prospective developer shall publish the summary of the Notice of Intent in a newspaper of general circulation serving the area in which the brownfields property is located and shall file a copy of the summary of the Notice of Intent with the Codifier of Rules, who shall publish the summary of the Notice of Intent in the North Carolina Register. The prospective developer shall also conspicuously post a copy of the summary of the Notice of Intent at the brownfields site. (b) Publication of the approved summary of the Notice of Intent in the North Carolina Register and publication in a newspaper of general circulation shall begin a public comment period of at least 60 days from the later date of publication. During the public comment period, members of the public, residents of the community in which the brownfields property is located, and local governments having jurisdiction over the brownfields property may submit comment on the proposed brownfields agreement, including methods and degree of remediation, future land uses, and impact on local employment. (c) Any person who desires a public meeting on a proposed brownfields agreement shall submit a written request for a public meeting to the Department within 30 days after the public comment period begins. The Department shall consider all requests for a public meeting and shall hold a public meeting if the Department determines that there is significant public interest in the proposed brownfields agreement. If the Department decides to hold a public meeting, the Department shall, at least 30 days prior to the public meeting, mail written notice of the public meeting to all persons who requested the public meeting and to any other person who had previously requested notice. The Department shall also direct the prospective developer to publish, at least 30 days prior to the date of the public meeting, a notice of the public meeting at least one time in a newspaper having general circulation in such county where the brownfields property is located. In any county in which there is more than one newspaper having general circulation, the Department shall direct the prospective developer to publish a copy of the notice in as many newspapers having general circulation in the county as the Department in its discretion determines to be necessary to assure that the notice is generally available throughout the county. The Department shall prescribe the form and content of the notice to be published. The Department shall prescribe the procedures to be followed in the public meeting. The Department shall take detailed minutes of the meeting. The minutes shall include any written comments, exhibits, or documents presented at the meeting. (d) Prior to entering into a brownfields agreement, the Department shall take into account the comment received during the comment period and at the public meeting if the Department holds a public meeting. The Department shall incorporate into the brownfields agreement provisions that reflect comment received during the comment period and at the public meeting to the extent practical. The Department shall give particular consideration to written comment that is supported ------- by valid scientific and technical information and analysis and to written comment from the units of local government that have taxing jurisdiction over the brownfields property. (1997-357, s. 2; 2000-158, s. 2.) § 130A-310.35. Notice of Brownfields Property; land-use restrictions in deed. (a) In order to reduce or eliminate the danger to public health or the environment posed by a brownfields property being addressed under this Part, a prospective developer who desires to enter into a brownfields agreement with the Department shall submit to the Department a proposed Notice of Brownfields Property. A Notice of Brownfields Property shall be entitled "Notice of Brownfields Property", shall include a survey plat of areas designated by the Department that has been prepared and certified by a professional land surveyor and that meets the requirements of G.S. 47-30, shall include a legal description of the brownfields property that would be sufficient as a description of the property in an instrument of conveyance, and shall identify all of the following: (1) The location and dimensions of the areas of potential environmental concern with respect to permanently surveyed benchmarks. (2) The type, location, and quantity of regulated substances and contaminants known to exist on the brownfields property. (3) Any restrictions on the current or future use of the brownfields property or, with the owner's permission, other property that are necessary or useful to maintain the level of protection appropriate for the designated current or future use of the brownfields property and that are designated in the brownfields agreement. These land-use restrictions may apply to activities on, over, or under the land, including, but not limited to, use of groundwater, building, filling, grading, excavating, and mining. Where a brownfields property encompasses more than one parcel or tract of land, a composite map or plat showing all parcels or tracts may be recorded. (b) After the Department approves and certifies the Notice of Brownfields Property under subsection (a) of this section, a prospective developer who enters into a brownfields agreement with the Department shall file a certified copy of the Notice of Brownfields Property in the register of deeds' office in the county or counties in which the land is located. The prospective developer shall file the Notice of Brownfields Property within 15 days of the prospective developer's receipt of the Department's approval of the notice or the prospective developer's entry into the brownfields agreement, whichever is later. (c) The register of deeds shall record the certified copy of the notice and index it in the grantor index under the names of the owners of the land, and, if different, also under the name of the prospective developer conducting the redevelopment of the brownfields property. (d) When a brownfields property is sold, leased, conveyed, or transferred, the deed or other instrument of transfer shall contain in the description section, in no smaller type than that used in the body of the deed or instrument, a statement that the brownfields property has been classified and, if appropriate, cleaned up as a brownfields property under this Part. (e) A Notice of Brownfields Property filed pursuant to this section may, at the request of the owner of the land, be cancelled by the Secretary after the hazards have been eliminated. If requested in writing by the owner of the land and if the Secretary concurs with the request, the Secretary shall send to the register of deeds of each county where the notice is recorded a statement that the hazards have been eliminated and request that the notice be cancelled of record. The Secretary's statement shall contain the names of the owners of the land as shown in the notice and reference the plat book and page where the notice is recorded. The register of deeds shall record the Secretary's statement in the deed books and index it on the grantor index in the names ------- of the owners of the land as shown in the Notice of Brownfields Property and on the grantee index in the name "Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources". The register of deeds shall make a marginal entry on the Notice of Brownfields Property showing the date of cancellation and the book and page where the Secretary's statement is recorded, and the register of deeds shall sign the entry. If a marginal entry is impracticable because of the method used to record maps and plats, the register of deeds shall not be required to make a marginal entry. (f) Any land-use restriction filed pursuant to this section shall be enforced by any owner of the land. Any land-use restriction may also be enforced by the Department through the remedies provided in Part 2 of Article 1 of this Chapter or by means of a civil action. The Department may enforce any land-use restriction without first having exhausted any available administrative remedies. A land-use restriction may also be enforced by any unit of local government having jurisdiction over any part of the brownfields property by means of a civil action without the unit of local government having first exhausted any available administrative remedy. A land-use restriction may also be enforced by any person eligible for liability protection under this Part who will lose liability protection if the land-use restriction is violated. A land-use restriction shall not be declared unenforceable due to lack of privity of estate or contract, due to lack of benefit to particular land, or due to lack of any property interest in particular land. Any person who owns or leases a property subject to a land-use restriction under this section shall abide by the land-use restriction. (g) This section shall apply in lieu of the provisions of G.S. 130A-310.8 for brownfields properties remediated under this Part. (1997-357, s. 2; 1997-443, s. 11 A. 119(b).) § 130A-310.36. Appeals. A decision by the Department as to whether or not to enter into a brownfields agreement including the terms of any brownfields agreement is reviewable under Article 3 of Chapter 150B of the General Statutes. (1997-357, s. 2.) § 130A-310.37. Construction of Part. (a) This Part is not intended and shall not be construed to: (1) Affect the ability of local governments to regulate land use under Article 19 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes and Article 18 of Chapter 153A of the General Statutes. The use of the identified brownfields property and any land-use restrictions in the brownfields agreement shall be consistent with local land-use controls adopted under those statutes. (2) Amend, modify, repeal, or otherwise alter any provision of any remedial program or other provision of this Chapter, Chapter 143 of the General Statutes, or any other provision of law relating to civil and criminal penalties or enforcement actions and remedies available to the Department, except as may be provided in a brownfields agreement. (3) Prevent or impede the immediate response of the Department or responsible party to an emergency that involves an imminent or actual release of a regulated substance that threatens public health or the environment. (4) Relieve a person receiving liability protection under this Part from any liability for contamination later caused by that person on a brownfields property. (5) Affect the right of any person to seek any relief available against any party to the brownfields agreement who may have liability with respect to the brownfields property, except that this Part does limit the relief available against any party to a brownfields ------- agreement with respect to remediation of the brownfields property to the remediation required under the brownfields agreement. (6) Affect the right of any person who may have liability with respect to the brownfields property to seek contribution from any other person who may have liability with respect to the brownfields property and who neither received nor has liability protection under this Part. (7) Prevent the State from enforcing specific numerical remediation standards, monitoring, or compliance requirements specifically required to be enforced by the federal government as a condition to receive program authorization, delegation, primacy, or federal funds. (8) Create a defense against the imposition of criminal and civil fines or penalties or administrative penalties otherwise authorized by law and imposed as the result of the illegal disposal of waste or for the pollution of the land, air, or waters of this State on a brownfields property. (9) Relieve a person of any liability for failure to exercise due diligence and reasonable care in performing an environmental assessment or transaction screen. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Tort Claims Act, G.S. 143-291 through G.S. 143-300.1 or any other provision of law waiving the sovereign immunity of the State of North Carolina, the State, its agencies, officers, employees, and agents shall be absolutely immune from any liability in any proceeding for any injury or claim arising from negotiating, entering, monitoring, or enforcing a brownfields agreement or a Notice of Brownfields Property under this Part or any other action implementing this Part. (c) The Department shall not enter into a brownfields agreement for a brownfields site that is identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a federal Superfund site pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 300 (1 July 1996 Edition). (1997-357, s. 2; 1997- 392, s. 4.5.) § 130A-310.38. Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account. The Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account is created as a nonreverting interest-bearing account in the Office of the State Treasurer. The Account shall consist of fees and interest collected under G.S. 130A-310.39, moneys appropriated to it by the General Assembly, moneys received from the federal government, moneys contributed by private organizations, and moneys received from any other source. Funds in the Account shall be used by the Department to defray the costs of implementing this Part. The Department may contract with a private entity for any services necessary to implement this Part. (1997-357, s. 2; 1999-360, s. 17.2.) § 130A-310.39. Fees. (a)The Department shall collect the following fees: (1) A prospective developer who submits a proposed brownfields agreement for review by the Department shall pay an initial fee of two thousand dollars ($2,000). (2) A prospective developer who enters into a brownfields agreement with the Department shall pay a fee in an amount equal to the full cost to the Department and the Department of Justice of all activities related to the brownfields agreement, including but not limited to negotiation of the brownfields agreement, public notice and community involvement, and monitoring the implementation of the brownfields agreement. The procedure by which the amount of this fee is determined shall be established by ------- agreement between the prospective developer and the Department and shall be set out as a part of the brownfields agreement. The fee imposed by this subdivision shall be paid in two installments. The first installment shall be due at the time the prospective developer and the Department enter into the brownfields agreement and shall equal all costs that have been incurred by the Department and the Department of Justice at that time less the amount of the initial fee paid pursuant to subdivision (1) of this subsection. The Department shall not enter into the brownfields agreement unless the first installment is paid in full when due. The second installment shall be due at the time the prospective developer submits a final report certifying completion of remediation under the brownfields agreement and shall include any additional costs that have been incurred by the Department and the Department of Justice, including all costs of monitoring the implementation of the brownfields agreement. (b) Fees and interest imposed under this section shall be credited to the Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account. (c) If a prospective developer fails to pay the full amount of any fee due under this section, interest on the unpaid portion of the fee shall accrue from the time the fee is due until paid at the rate established by the Secretary of Revenue pursuant to G.S. 105-241.1(i). A lien for the amount of the unpaid fee plus interest shall attach to the real and personal property of the prospective developer and to the brownfields property until the fee and interest is paid. The Department may collect unpaid fees and interest in any manner that a unit of local government may collect delinquent taxes. (1997-357, s. 2; 1999-360, s. 17.3.) § 130A-310.40. Legislative reports. The Department shall prepare and submit to the Environmental Review Commission, concurrently with the report on the Inactive Hazardous Sites Response Act of 1987 required under G.S. 130A-310.10, an evaluation of the effectiveness of this Part in facilitating the remediation and reuse of existing industrial and commercial properties. This evaluation shall include any recommendations for additional incentives or changes, if needed, to improve the effectiveness of this Part in addressing such properties. This evaluation shall also include a report on receipts by and expenditures from the Brownfields Property Reuse Act Implementation Account. (1997-357, s. 2.) ------- Guidance for Completing a North Carolina Brownfields Letter of Intent The information contained in the Brownfields Letter of Intent, submitted to the Department by the Prospective Developer (PD), will enable the Department to decide as quickly as possible if the project will qualify for a brownfields agreement as defined under the law. This eligibility determination is an administrative tool that allows the program to spend resources strictly on those sites that it believes, based on the data provided, meet the statutory criteria . It does not mean that a site will remain eligible. However unlikely, any new information entering the process that runs counter to statutory eligibility criteria may require the Program's reevaluation. The Letter of Intent must include all of the following twelve elements: 1. The name, address, e-mail, telephone and fax number of the PD. 2. The name, e-mail, telephone and fax number of the PD contact person. 3. The name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of all parent companies, subsidiaries or other affiliates of the PD. If the PD is a LLC, list all members of the LLC, stating if it is a member- or a manager-managed LLC, and listing, if applicable, the manager(s). 4. A brief description of the property, tax PIN(s) if available, the property's current use and use history and its actual or suspected contamination. Include the street address(es) and total acreage of the property. Your submittal should demonstrate that: a. the property is abandoned, idled, or underused; b. the actual or suspected contamination creates unacceptable liability risks; and c. if funding is lacking for acquisition and/or redevelopment, without a brownfields agreement securing such funding would be difficult or impossible. 5. The intended use(s) of the redeveloped property. Be as specific as possible. Please provide an estimate of the proposed redevelopment's value upon completion. 6. A description of public benefits that will result from the redevelopment. Again, be as specific as possible. [Potential public benefits for brownfields projects include specific information on job creation, tax base improvements, revitalization of blighted area, improved retail shopping opportunities, as well as potential cleanup activities or project set asides that have community or environmental benefits. In gauging public benefit, the Department places great value upon letters of support from community groups that describe the benefits as they relate to improvements in quality of life for neighboring communities that the project will bring. The inclusion of such support letters with the Letter of Intent is recommended and encouraged.] 7. Information sufficient to demonstrate that the PD has or can obtain the financial, managerial, and technical means to fully implement a Brownfields Agreement and assure the safe use of the property. 8. A commitment that the PD will (and has, if PD has had a prior project in the program), comply with all applicable procedural requirements of the NC brownfields program, including payment of all statutorily required fees 9. Certification in the form of a signed and notarized original of a model affidavit provided by DENR that: a. The PD, its parent companies, subsidiaries, partners and affiliates did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the property; and b. The PD, and any parent company, subsidiary, partner and affiliate have substantially complied with the terms of any Brownfields Agreement, the requirements applicable to any remediation in which the PD has previously engaged, and Federal and state laws, regulations, and rules for the protection of the environment. 10. The location of the property plotted on a 1:24,000 U.S.G.S. topographic quadrangle map. 11. A survey plat of the property with the property boundaries clearly identified, and a metes and bounds legal description that matches the plat. 12. At least one pre-development photograph of the property that shows existing facilities and structures. Page 1 of 2 Rev. 2/1/05 ------- Any materials submitted that the PD maintains are confidential shall be segregated pending Department review, which shall occur no later than any citizen request to review the materials. The Department will review the Letter of Intent in order to answer the following questions: Did the PD, any parent company, subsidiary, partner, or affiliate cause or contribute to the contamination on the property? No: Continue evaluation for Brownfields Agreement Yes: PD is not eligible for a Brownfields Agreement is the property partly or wholly an EPA National Priority List (NPL) site or an NPL -caliber site ? No: Continue evaluation for Brownfields Agreement Yes: Property not eligibly for a ; Brownfields Agreement Did the PD prove or certify that it has complied or will comply with the requirements ofother Brown field projects, the requirements of other remediation projects, and all Federal and state laws, regulations, and rules for \ protecting the environment? Yes: Continue evaluation for Brownfields Agreement No: PD is not eligible for a Brownfields : Agreement. Page 2 of 2 Rev. 2/1/05 ------- PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS FOR NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM Prospective Developer (PD) NC Brownfields Program (NCBP) Public PD negotiates with NCBP on amended BFA language if necessary and modifies plat map as necessary. Ancillary Documents * generated, plat map reviewed for completeness and accuracy. Ancillary docs/plat map provable'? Written approval to proceed with public notice sent to PD by NCBP, when final language and plat map approved. PD provides Copy of "full" Nl' to local government. PD provides Copy of full Nl* to local library/other public locale for public review PD arranges for publication of SNI* in local newspaper of general circulation. File electronic copy of SNI * with N.C. Register by filing deadline (~ 3 weeks prior to publication), see http://www.oah.state.nc.us Conspicuously post SNI * using at least 20 point font and encase sign in plastic at the site. NCBP receives confirmation from PD that actions have been taken 1,2,3 * DESCRIPTIONS OF ANCILLARY DOCUMENTS BFA - Brownfields Agreement -Contract and covenant not-to-sue between state and PD that provides details of the site, the work to be performed, and land use restrictions. NBP - Notice of Brownfields Property-A three to four page document that recites important provisions from the BFA. Its recordation allows land use restrictions to run with the land. Exhibits to NBP are the BFA, the survey plat and a legal description. Nl - Notice of Intent - Generic, one-page document that functions as a cover to introduce other Brownfields documents. Full Nl - Nl plus NBP with attached exhibits SNI - Summary of the Notice of Intent - A one to two page document that summarizes the "full" Nl. SNI is published in a local newspaper, the N.C. Register and is posted at the Property. FOR PD CONFIRMATION OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS 1 For placement of full Nl at local government offices and other locations for public review, provide a letter/ certified mail receipt from each office/location. At a minimum, provide copies of PD's letter of transmittal to each such office/location. 2 For publication of the SNI, provide an affidavit of publication from the publishing entity. At a minimum, provide a photocopy of the actual SNI as published along with the name of publishing entity and date of publication. 3 For posting of the SNI at the Property, provide two photographs, one close-up and one long shot, of the actual SNI as posted. 60-day public comment period starts on later date of publication of SNI* in N.C. Register or newspaper. Public can submit a written request for public meeting within 30 days. Public may submit written comments to the NCBP within 60 days. Publish information at least 30 days prior to public meeting in local newspaper(s) of general circulation. Public Meeting equested? Public Mtg Warranted? Written Comments Received NCBP prints final copy NBP, or if comments received may modify BFA. Determines if further public notification of changes is warranted. Public meeting held. PD signs documents within seven days of receipt and records one complete set of documents within fifteen days of signing in that county's Register of Deeds. BFA, NBP and plat map signed by Division of Waste Management Deputy Director. Two complete signed, notarized sets of documents and one reproducible mylar plat map sent to PD. / Certified copy or original of signed \ and recorded NBP sent to NCBP. / BF Public Notice Flowchart.vsd 06/09/04 ------- NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE MATTER OF: «Prospective Developer» UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ) NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ) STATUTES § 130A-310.30, et. seq. ) AFFIDAVIT RE: RESPONSIBILITY AND COMPLIANCE «NAME OF INDIVIDUAL SIGNING», being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says: 1. I am «Title» of «Prospective Developer». 2. [If signatory is not President, add this paragraph: I am fully authorized to make the declarations contained herein and to legally bind «Prospective Developer».] 3. «Prospective Developer» is applying for a Brownfields Agreement with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, pursuant to N.C.G.S. §130A, Article 9, Part 5 (Brownfields Act), in relation to the following «Parcel Number(s)» parcel(s) in «City», «County Name» County, North Carolina: «Street Address No. 1, Street Address No. 2, etc.» 4. I hereby certify, under the pains and penalties of peijury and of the Brownfields Act, that «Prospective Developer», and any parent, subsidiary or other affiliate meets the eligibility requirements of N.C.G.S. § 130A-310.3 l(b)(10), in that it did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the parcel(s) cited in the preceding paragraph. 5. I hereby certify, under the pains and penalties of peijury and of the Brownfields Act, that «Prospective Developer» meets the eligibility requirement of N.C.G.S.§ 130A-310.32(a)(1) in that it and any parent, subsidiary or other affiliate have substantially complied with: a. the terms of any brownfields or similar agreement to which it or any parent, subsidiary or other affiliate has been a party; b. the requirements applicable to any remediation in which it or any parent, subsidiary or other affiliate has previously engaged; c. federal and state laws, regulations and rules for the protection of the environment. Affiant further saith not. Signature/Printed Name Date Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of 20 Notary Public My commission expires: (SEAL) rev. 6/11/04 ------- Institutional Controls as a Component of NC's Brownfields Program prepared for Brownfields Workshop For Developers and Local Governments McKimmon Center, April 1, 2004 Robert Gelblum Special Deputy Attorney General ------- The dirty little secret: "Institutional Controls" essentially means Land Use Restrictions (LURs) (a.k.a., in one form or another, Restrictive Covenants, Equitable Servitudes, Easements) ------- You should be grateful for LURs After all, without them, government would lack sufficient confidence in the integrity of cleanups to less than unrestricted use standards ------- Government needs confidence not only in the "imposability" of LURs (that's the easy part), but in their enforceability. Historically, that's been far from a done deal. ------- * Until the advent of statutes such * • as our Brownfields Act, J "strangers" to a LUR "deal" (i.e., * those lacking a parcel benefited » by the restriction) could very 11 rarely enforce the deal. # It's what lawyers called the • "easement in gross" problem. # ------- Now, with the help of statutes that "trump" the common law, 3rd parties such as the state may, with confidence re: enforceability, accept LURs in lieu of some or all cleanup at a contaminated site. ------- LURs, in essence, "fill the gap" between the level of protectiveness to be provided by any actual remediation at a site and the level that would be reached by a cleanup to unrestricted use standards. ------- Just as with restrictive covenants, LURs may come in any flavor or form, i.e., they may prohibit (or require) any actions necessary to make the site safe for the use intended. ------- The most common LURs, in the context of the Browntields Program (and all other environmental cleanup programs), are, of course, those relating to the likes of permissible uses of the property in general, groundwater use and dealing with contaminated soil. ------- « ~ It is assumed that LURs will be "on * the books" unless and until the '9 • Prospective Developer (or a future * owner of the Brownfields property) • convinces DENR the contamination * has been actively or passively • remediated to unrestricted use * standards. # ------- • Following execution of a • Brownfields Agreement, the | # Prospective Developer records the 2 document containing the LURs (the • Notice of Brownfields Property) at I« the local Register of Deeds' office. ------- Bottom line: The Brownfields Program cannot do its duty to protect public health and the environment without requiring LURs at sites to be partially cleaned up; therefore, all stakeholders should become familiar with them. ------- Success Stories1 Brownfields agreements completed to date have resulted in more than $500 million in committed private investment in the safe redevelopment of brownfields properties. Click on the links below to get summaries of some of the projects and public benefits that have occurred on land that would otherwise have remained abandoned. Alamac Knit Fabrics - February 2002 Hamilton, Martin County The original textile manufacturing facility on this 106-acre site was constructed in 1961 as part of the textile industry's growth in eastern North Carolina. During its operational history, the facility produced cotton and cotton-blend fabrics. As has happened so often in the state as the textile industry has struggled and faltered, Alamac Knit Fabrics Inc. (Alamac) ceased operations at the site in 1999, and as a result of the plant's closure, hundreds of jobs were lost in this rural community. Penco Products Inc. (Penco), the nation's largest manufacturer of school lockers, identified the Alamac facility as an excellent candidate for the consolidation of its Oaks, Pa. and Vicksburg, Miss, manufacturing plants, and the realization of this business plan was made possible by obtaining the liability protection provided by the brownfields agreement on the property. Chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater at the site is being actively remediated by Alamac under a corrective action plan with the Division of Water Quality's Groundwater Section. In conjunction with Alamac's remedial effort, land use restrictions and groundwater monitoring requirements in the agreement will ensure the full protection of public health and the environment. Penco's operations at the facility will employ state- of-the-art, non-polluting technologies, and its redevelopment of the property will involve an estimated $11 million in private capital investment, and the creation of approximately 350 jobs over the next 3 to 5 years, the great majority of which will be filled from the local community. Cumberland Shopping Center - January 2002 Greensboro, Guilford County Originally developed in about 1970, the 2.5-acre Cumberland Shopping Center on East Market Street, near downtown Greensboro, had been home to various retail businesses, including a dry-cleaning operation that had contaminated the property. By mid-1998 the shopping center had been abandoned, and the two site buildings were razed in late '98. A local, publicly-supported, not-for-profit organization recognized the many quality of life improvements associated with the site's reuse, and provided letters from various public and private sector groups indicating broad support for its plans to redevelop the property. But a factor common to many brownfields projects stood in the way: available project funding was predicated on the developer obtaining the liability protection of a brownfields agreement. Under the guidance of the brownfields program, the developer 1 Available at http://www.ncbrownfields.Org/nws/success_stories.htm#l ------- conducted required environmental assessment and soil remediation activities. These activities and the land use restrictions in the brown fields agreement will ensure the safe reuse of the property. Planning is underway for the site's redevelopment as a multi-use complex offering retail and office space, promising this economically depressed neighborhood a boost with additional employment opportunities and the removal of an abandoned eyesore. Brown fields in action, for the community and for the environment. Lewith Textiles - January 2002 Charlotte, Mecklenburg County Lewith Textile Machinery, which manufactured and refurbished machinery in support of an active textile industry, was developed in the mid-1960s on a 20-acre site south of Wilkinson Boulevard, about three miles west of downtown Charlotte. In response to the general demise of the textile industry, the Lewith facility closed and was abandoned in 1993. The residential, commercial and industrial properties that developed along Wilkinson Boulevard eventually became partially abandoned and underused, in large part due to concerns regarding the site's unknown environmental conditions. In keeping with the city of Charlotte's Westside Strategic Plan and the Charlotte Mecklenburg Planning Commission's City Within A City plan for the Wilkinson Boulevard Corridor, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Development Corporation, a public/private partnership, acquired the 3 3-acre site for redevelopment under the NC brown fields program. The liability protection and institutional controls provided by the brown fields agreement implemented for this site are crucial to the property's reuse viability. CMDC has completed environmental assessment and soil cleanup activities in accordance with requirements of the agreement, thus paving the way for the new Wilkinson Park Business Center, a major redevelopment initiative designed to help transform this vital transportation corridor into a thriving business center. Smith Property - January 2002 Shelby, Cleveland County The inability of Cleveland County to provide parking for the growing number of visitors to its offices in downtown Shelby had forced the county to lease parking spaces from nearby downtown merchants. In an effort to eliminate those costs, reduce encroachment on downtown merchants and provide its own customers with adequate and accessible parking, the county identified an available I -acre parcel, the Smith Property, across the street from the county offices on which it could build a parking lot. The parcel contained several rundown, mostly abandoned housing units. However, environmental sampling revealed groundwater contamination which had likely migrated to the site from an adjacent property, and the county could not proceed with its purchase and redevelopment of the parcel without the liability protection provided by a brown fields agreement. The county provided DHNR with statements of support from surrounding property owners regarding its planned reuse of the site. Including land use restrictions that prohibit the use of site groundwater, and requiring the county to maintain the parking lot to function as a ------- protective cap, the brown fields agreement for the site has "paved the way" for the safe, productive reuse of the Smith Property to the public's benefit. Terrell Machine Company - January 2002 Charlotte, Mecklenburg County With the success of the Camden square brown fields project leading the way for urban redevelopment in Charlotte's South End district, other brown fields opportunities were sure to follow. The former Terrell Machine Company site had seen textile and textile- related machinery manufacturing operations dating back to the 1940s. The site was abandoned in 1990, and the site building was demolished in 1992, leaving a cleared 4.6- acre parcel, over which was parked a familiar dark cloud of environmental unknowns and concerns. The prospective developer entered the brown fields program after substantial groundwater assessment and cleanup had been conducted by the party responsible for site contamination. Following acquisition of the property and its entry into the brown fields program, the developer conducted the additional sampling and significant soil cleanup activities required by the program to make the property safe for the intended mixed office, retail and residential reuse. The Terrell project is one of several in the South End district slated for brown fields redevelopment, and yet another example of why brownfields properties are considered viable redevelopment targets. West Morehead - January 2002 Charlotte, Mecklenburg County Addison Investments LLC discovered environmental contamination on the abandoned and rundown 1+ acre site it wanted to acquire and redevelop as office and retail space, and its lenders would not fund Addison's project without some relief regarding possible cleanup liability - an all too common scenario, especially where commercial or industrial property in urban locations are concerned. The property, located just west of downtown Charlotte, had housed trailer manufacturing, motor repair, metal fabrication and auto repair operations since the early 1940s, and had been abandoned since 1996. Letters were provided demonstrating enthusiastic community support for the project. Under the direction of the brown fields program, Addison conducted atarget/sensitive receptor survey and additional soil and groundwater sampling, which indicated the property did not have high concentration levels. This enabled DENE, to conclude that the property could be safely redeveloped with certain protective land and groundwater use restrictions. The brownfields agreement between Addison and DENE, imposed those restrictions and has provided the necessary liability protection for this project to proceed. Oxford Printing - October 2001 Oxford, Granville County ------- Like so many other properties in uses related to the textile industry, this 5-acre site just west of Oxford had seen robust times as a manufacturer of sleeping bags and other outdoor items from the early 1960s through the mid-70s, and as fabric screen printing, dyeing and finishing plant from the late 70s until 1995 when Oxford Printing closed its doors. Redevelopment of this site was hindered by liability concerns regarding possible contamination resulting from previous on-site operations, and possible impacts from an adjoining National Priorities List (NPL) site where cleanup activities were ongoing. Under the brown fields program, the developer conducted assessment activities and a cleanup and closure of the former flood drain/sump collection system at the facility. The brown fields agreement for the property contains land use restrictions to protect against possible exposure to impacted groundwater that may encroach onto the property from the NPL site. The agreement has also provided liability protection that enabled the developer to perform necessary repairs at the facility and restore the site to productive reuse for warehousing purposes. State Farm Road Project - September 2001 Boone, Watauga County Sometimes it is the growth of light industry in an area that drives residents away creating abandoned residential property. Light industry had grown up near this property and the groundwater beneath the site was contaminated with chlorinated solvents from an upgradient tool manufacturing facility. While the tool manufacturer was under an enforcement order for cleanup, the property languished abandoned. The prospective developer proposed a medical office complex on the site (as it is near the local hospital) with the strong support of the town, but needed a brownfield agreement to make it happen. The brownfield agreement restricts the use of groundwater and eliminates a flowing spring on the site that was formerly a point of contaminated water discharge to surface water. The cleanup action of the tool manufacturer will continue to address the groundwater in the area and the developer will sample any surface water discharges in the future should the spring reappear. The abandoned property will now see new life and lower public health risk. Camden Square - April 19998 Camden Square Amendment - August 2001 Charlotte, Mecklenburg County The original textile manufacturing facility on this 106-acre site was constructed in 1961 as part of the textile industry's growth in the eastern portion of North Carolina. During its operational history, the facility produced cotton and cotton-blend fabrics. As has happened so often in the state as the textile industry has struggled and faltered, Alamac Knit Fabrics Inc. (Alamac) ceased operations at the site in 1999, and as a result, hundreds of jobs were lost in this rural community. Penco Products Inc. (Penco), the nation's largest manufacturer of school lockers, identified the Alamac facility as an excellent candidate for the consolidation of its Oaks, Pa. and Vicksburg, Miss, manufacturing ------- plants, and the realization of this business plan was made possible by obtaining the liability protection provided by the brownfields agreement on the property. Chlorinated solvent contamination in groundwater at the site is being actively remediated by Alamac under a corrective action plan with the Division of Water. ------- North Carolina G/emralOnformaSon Contact: Bruce Nicholson Brownfields Program Manager Charlotte Jesneck Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch Head North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Special Remediation Branch/Superfund Section Address: North Carolina Division of Waste Management 401 Oberlin Road, Suite 150 Raleigh, NC 27605 Phone: 919 733 4996 Fax: 919 715 3605 Email: bruce.nicholson@ncmail.net charlotte.jesneck@ncmail.net Web site: Brownfields: http://www.ncbrownfields.org/ VCP: www.wastenotnc.org/sfhome/ ihsbrnch.htm Program Description (VCP, brownfields, or related) North Carolina has both a Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) and a Brownfields Program and makes a distinction between them by the type of party that is conducting the work. The state's public policy calls for allowing the extra benefits associated with participation in the Brownfields Program only to non-causative parties. In this way these sites are truly abandoned sites being addressed by developers that need liability protection to obtain financing for brick and mortar redevelopment projects. Responsible parties cannot receive these benefits, but can conduct cleanups under a different statute within the state's VCP. The Brownfields Program (1997) operates under the Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997. The Program provides prospective developers (PDs), who are non- causative parties, liability protection under a brownfields agreement in the form of a Covenant Not To Sue (CNTS), contingent on completion of cleanup and/or safemaking actions in the brownfields agreement. Cleanups are risk- based and designed to ensure safe reuse of the property and include institutional controls such as land use restrictions. A PD must certify that it did not cause or contribute to site contamination. The property must be abandoned, idled, or underused and must have real or perceived contamination that hinders redevelopment. It cannot be a National Priorities List (NPL) site. The project must be a bona fide redevelopment with public benefits (e.g., jobs, quality of life, tax base) commensurate with liability protection provided by the brownfields agreement. The VCP operates under the Inactive Hazardous Sites Response Act of 1987. Responsible parties (or any other parties for that matter) are eligible for cleanup actions under this program. The VCP offers No Further Action letters at the completion of work. Cleanups to levels other than unrestricted use concentrations can apply for soils not posing a threat to ground water if they are accompanied with land use restrictions. Ground water must be restored to state ground water standards if it is technically practicable to do so. In such cases, land use restrictions would be required along with possibly other controls to prevent exposure. Lower priority voluntary actions are addressed by the Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch's (IHSB) Registered Environmental Consultant (REC) Program. In the REC Program, the remediating party is required to hire an approved REC and enter into an agreement with the IHSB. The REC then performs and certifies that the remedial action has been performed in accordance with state law (privatized oversight). Remediating parties at sites having a high potential for exposure, contaminated sensitive environments, or significant public concern or interest may still perform a voluntary remedial action. However this work is directly overseen and approved by the IHSB. Brownfields definition: An abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination has hindered its redevelopment. This definition is applicable for the requirements of the Brownfields Program above only. Program titles: • Brownfields Program • Inactive Hazardous Sites Voluntary Cleanup Program Liability relief provisions: A brownfields agreement provided by the Brownfields Program is designed to break barriers to obtaining financing at lending institutions through the CNTS contained within. Financial incentives (grants, loans, tax provisions, etc.): North Carolina has a brownfields tax incentive that applies to those who obtain brownfields agreements from the DENR (i.e., non-causative parties only). The holder of a brownfields agreement statutorily receives local property tax relief upon completion of improvements to the brownfields property. The value of such improvements is excluded from future property taxes for five years at a rate of 90% exclusion in the first year, gradually decreasing to a 10% exclusion in year five. Legislative or program site eligibility requirements: While any party may enter the state's VCP, the Brownfields Program and its specific benefits are statutorily restricted to non-causative prospective developers desiring to redevelop the brownfields property. The redevelopment project must be shown to have public benefit (e.g., jobs, tax base, community quality of life, greenspace) commensurate with the liability relief provided. An eligible prospective developer must be in substantial compliance with rules and regulations regarding environmental protection. 64 State Brownfields and Voluntary Response Programs: ------- Financial Elements Assessment and cleanup funding (source, amount, relationship to VCP/brownfields programs, application process, eligibility requirements, dedication to special types of sites such as petroleum, dry cleaners, abandoned drug labs, etc.): No information available Tax incentives (abatements, credits, etc.): 2000 legislation authorized sliding scale of property tax abatements for increased value of sites being redeveloped under a brownfields agreement (90% for year one, down to 10% in year five), effective July 1, 2001. Other forms of support (environmental insurance, brownfields redevelopment authorities, etc.): No information available Program Elements Technical Elements Methods/standards/controls: Under the Brownfields Program, because the program only works with non- causative prospective developers, site cleanup is required only to the extent necessary to make the site safe for intended reuse or the permanence of the agreement is threatened by uncontrolled migration of contaminants. Site- specific risk-based cleanup standards and land use restrictions are used. Under the VCP, site-specific risk-based standards can be used at VCP sites for soils where the remedy includes land use restrictions and the soils are not a source of ground water contamination that could practicably be treated or removed. Ground water cleanup under the VCP must meet state ground water standards unless a demonstration is made and approved that cleanup is technically impracticable. Contaminants covered/excluded: Sites with exclusively petroleum hydrocarbon contamination from Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) are ineligible for the Brownfields Program. Otherwise, all soil and ground water contaminants are OK, including those with comingled UST contamination. The VCP addresses only hazardous substance releases unless they are comingled with other pollutant releases. Use of long-term stewardship and institutional controls (tracking, oversight, monitoring, reopeners): The North Carolina brownfields process assumes that land use restrictions (LURs) will be an integral part of all brownfields agreements where site specific LURs are developed to coordinate with design footprints and run with the land. Annual LUR compliance updates are required by all brownfields agreements. Violation of a LUR is a reopener that subjects the violating party to complete cleanup of the site to state environmental standards. Under the VCP, LURs can be used in relation to restricted use soil remedies, ground water contamination that is deemed impracticable to correct, and where they may otherwise be a necessary part of a remedy. Perpetual reporting on the restrictive covenants is a requirement that runs with the land. The VCP does have reopeners if the Branch finds that false or incomplete information was provided on the site or if there is a violation of the restrictive covenants. Management & Implementation Elements Voluntary Cleanup Program MOA with EPA: No Costs to enter program or fees for service: Under the Brownfields Program, PDs pay a $2,000 fee for a brownfields agreement. Funds remain in a non- reverting account for the program to use to defray its costs. Under the VCP, remediating parties must pay a $500 fee if they want a written No Further Action letter. If the voluntary action is addressed through the REC Program, the remediating party pays an annual adjustable fee to provide for a state auditor/educator/ enforcer of this privatized part of the program. Funding source for administrative costs and staff: The Brownfields Program is funded through a CERCLA 128(a) State and Tribal Response Program Grant (Response Program Grant) cooperative agreement and also through its $2,000 fee. The VCP is funded mostly through state legislature appropriation. A small number of staff are funded for specific tasks through the Response Program Grant cooperative agreement. Cleanup Activities Sites currently in VCP: Under the Brownfields Program, as of fourth quarter 2004, there are 112 sites. Redevelopment projects include manufacturing, commercial, residential, mixed commercial/residential, and greenspace uses. Approximately one third of these sites are in rural settings. All of these sites were initiated by prospective developers applying for entry into the Brownfields Program. Under the VCP, currently 85 sites have approved voluntary assessments and/or cleanups underway. Sites Completed under VCP: Under the Brownfields Program, 52 brownfields agreements have been completed and 60 are in the pipeline. These projects, facilitated by brownfields agreements, represent approximately $1,000,000,000 in committed private investment in brownfields redevelopment. Under the VCP, a current total of 421 sites have completed all work and been assigned No Further Action status under the Inactive Hazardous Sites Program. Benefits (incentives to participate in theVCP, covenants not to sue, etc.): The public policy of restricting the Brownfields Program to non-causative parties allows greater public benefits to be provided to these redeveloping entities thereby encouraging an additional set of cleanups above and beyond what is possible under the VCP. Benefits to PDs include site- specific risk-based cleanups designed for safe reuse An Update from the States ------- North Carolina of the site rather than meeting current state environmental standards that responsible parties are required to meet. This typically results in ground water use restrictions for the PD. For the PD this holds considerable savings over more active remedial action, and also reserves the state's right to enforce against viable responsible parties for further action. PDs also receive the property tax incentive. Perhaps most importantly they receive strong liability protection under the brownfields agreement's CNTS. Such agreements now have a track record of facilitating project redevelopment loans. Public Participation Public participation requirements (notice, comment periods, etc.): The Brownfields Program requires that the PD establish that there is public benefit with the project that is commensurate with the liability relief provided. One manner in which to establish this is through letters from the public or neighborhood groups. Statutory public notice requires that a summary of the brownfields agreement must be posted on the brownfields property, advertised in a local newspaper, and published in the state register. Brownfields agreement documents must be made available at a local repository and at the Brownfields Program public files. There is a statutory minimum 60-day public comment period on every brownfields agreement. Under the VCP, there are 30-day public notice periods for both the agreement and the remedial action plan. Public participation activities (hearing, meetings, etc.): Under the Brownfields Program, the public may request a public meeting within the first 30 days of the public comment period. The program reports that no public meetings have been requested. Public comments are rare, and, when received, have been universally supportive. Under the VCP, public participation activities beyond notice include public meetings, establishing local file information repositories, meetings with local community groups, fact sheet distribution and such. Statutory Authorities • Brownfields Program: The Brownfields Property Reuse Act of 1997, NCGS §§130A-310.30 through 310.40. • Voluntary Cleanup Program: The North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Response Act of 1987 (NCGS §§130A-310.1 through 310.13). 66 State Brownfields and Voluntary Response Programs: ------- |