by Christopher Dacey, Haley & Aldrich

Our communities, businesses, economies, and natural environment face growing water-related challenges and impacts.

These challenges are diverse and often disruptive, and they sometimes have devastating consequences for lives, livelihoods, and economies. Worldwide, over 90 percent of natural disasters are water- and weather-related, including drought, wildfires, pollution, and floods. In 2023, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration confirmed 28 weather and climate disaster events that affected the United States, with losses exceeding $1 billion each. Since 1980, losses related to such events have exceeded $2.6 trillion.

As demand for water grows, infrastructure ages, and climate change makes water-related challenges more frequent and dynamic, such costs are likely to increase.

Also, there are many water challenges outside of natural disasters that can be disruptive and costly, such as contaminated water supplies, operational inefficiencies and upsets, evolving regulations and costs, environmental liabilities, and water security, that businesses must contend with regularly.

No aspect of our communities, economies, or environment is immune to both the need for water and its inherent challenges. This duality often confounds decision making due to conflicting stakeholder objectives and shifting priorities. From industrial, mining, and agriculture operations to technology, utilities, and energy producers, water security and stewardship are critical and growing concerns. The need for sustainable water management and resource protection is further amplified as water resources become stressed under increasing demands.

What is water risk?

The UN Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate defines water risk as the possibility of an entity or asset experiencing a water-related challenge. These challenges take many forms:

• Water supply accessibility and reliability, driven, for example, by inadequate water storage or treatment systems, groundwater depletion, imperiled surface waters, and competing demands from agriculture, industry, urban areas, and environmental protection.
• Water supply quality, which can be degraded by salinity, pollutant discharges, aging infrastructure, and poor waste management.
• Flooding, a growing threat as sea levels rise, flood patterns change, and storms intensify with climate change. Flooding often disproportionately affects vulnerable populations.
• Infrastructure failure, a potential consequence of extreme weather events.
• Droughts, which, due to climate change, may become more intense and increasingly impact geographical areas unaccustomed to drought stress.
• Regulatory discharge limits, which may necessitate water treatment, regulatory tracking, and sampling programs for compliance.
• Supply chain disruption, which could follow floods or storms and impact transportation networks or vulnerable suppliers at any point in an operation’s supply chain. A common example is food supply disruption due to drought, freezes, and flooding.
• Energy-water nexus challenges, because energy is required to withdraw, treat, and distribute water to the point of use, and energy is also consumed as water is used in industrial, manufacturing, agricultural, and cooling processes. Likewise, water resources serve a critical role in the generation of electricity and the production of fuels and can significantly affect the reliability and resilience of energy systems.
• Regulatory uncertainty driven by changing administrations, policies, permitting requirements, regulations, legal challenges, and interpretations.
• Knowledge management due to, e.g., employee turnover, reorganization, poor data management, and technology transitions.

Community opposition to infrastructure modernization or other development projects.

These challenges can evolve slowly — as in the case of a water supply dwindling over years of drought — or occur abruptly, as in the case of flooding caused by a storm. The extent of the risk involved is a function of the likelihood of a specific challenge occurring and the severity of the challenge’s impact, which, in turn, depends on the intensity of the challenge and the vulnerability of the stakeholder or asset. Simultaneous or frequent challenges — such as more frequent and intense storm events — can amplify impacts.

When it comes to water, standard risk management approaches — including avoidance, mitigation, transference, and acceptance — present unique challenges and opportunities. Past risk assumptions may not be appropriate for many locations and industries due to evolving uncertainties and knowledge.  

How can you manage water risk and make operations more resilient?

Given that water risk encompasses such a wide, sometimes competing range of challenges, operations need multidisciplinary expertise and a holistic approach to properly integrate best practices for resource and risk management. They also need to ensure that the risk management strategies they adopt today can adapt to the uncertainties of tomorrow.

The following steps can help manage water risk:

Understand your vulnerabilities. We can think about water risk in four major categories: physical, regulatory, reputational, and technological. All four elements are interrelated, but an understanding of each can guide priorities and create a big-picture view of your current risk profile.

• Physical risk. As the most visible aspect of water risk, physical risk often manifests as the effects of flooding, drought, landslides, inadequate infrastructure, erosion, water stress, ecosystem vulnerability, and water quality. Familiar examples of risk mitigation measures include engineering structures for flood protection or securing more reliable water supplies.
• Regulatory risk. This aspect encompasses concerns such as evolving regulations, rising water costs, regulatory permitting uncertainty, water laws, and water allocation limits. The administration of water rights, laws, and regulations can vary significantly across jurisdictional boundaries, which can contribute to compliance and operational challenges.
• Reputational risk. Given water’s centrality to healthy, prosperous communities and the increased public scrutiny of corporate environmental, social, and governance concerns, including environmental justice, projects that impact water supplies can draw intense scrutiny from local communities and other partners. Reputational risk factors include potential community opposition, shareholder concern and litigation, creditworthiness, insurability, and investment community expectations.
• Technological risk. This risk area encompasses data governance, decision barriers, knowledge gaps, data quality, technology debt, technology transition, and change management. In other words, does a company have the right technology and practices in place for informed operational, compliance, and safety-related decisions as water challenges arise? Effective decision support solutions require careful assessment and implementation to prove useful and provide value.

Assess your vulnerabilities to find your opportunities. A systematic look at each risk area mentioned above can help operations find where they are most vulnerable, which, in turn, can help prioritize mitigation efforts.

A risk assessment can also help you identify the vulnerability of assets to water stranding, that is, assets that have or could stop producing a return due to a water-related event, such as flooding, inadequate water supply, poor water quality, or regulatory noncompliance. Without proactive actions, stranded assets can evolve into long-term liabilities.

A thorough understanding of your risk can also reveal water-related opportunities: the possibility that you can drive value and positive outcomes through better water management.

What is a water opportunity?

With proper planning, tactics for managing risk can accomplish multiple goals — increasing the efficiency of your current water use, making progress toward internal sustainability commitments, and helping you better mitigate water risk.

Water opportunities can include:

• Efficiency gains. These gains include cutting water use by modernizing systems and practices to eliminate leaks and waste, performing regular water audits, and co-optimizing water and energy efficiency.
• Recycling, reclamation, and restoration. These opportunities also increase efficiency and can make your site more self-sufficient or protected in the event of a water-related emergency. For example, a restored coastal marsh can mitigate the impacts of storms and flooding.
• Opportunities to benefit your community. For example, that same restored coastal marsh could provide your community with recreation and wildlife habitat.
• Risk mitigation cost sharing. Federal and nonfederal funding programs, such as EPA brownfields, stormwater, and infrastructure grants, offer cost-sharing opportunities, some of which can pair risk mitigation with conservation efforts. Stakeholder collaboration can also achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.
• Nature-based solutions. Green roofs, permeable pavement, bioswales, and other green-design choices can protect water quality and offer side benefits, such as better air quality, wildlife habitat, and aesthetic appeal.
• Technology sharing and leveraging. Properly aligned technology can provide cost savings while mitigating water risk — such as a water monitoring program that informs compliance and operational decisions or sharing information with stakeholders for transparency or to inspire innovative solutions.
• A chance to employ the best available science and practices. A growing wealth of resources is available to guide risk mitigation and adaptation investment decisions.
• Lower insurance costs. Demonstrating proactive water risk reduction measures can lower insurance costs and validate insurability.
• Safer operations. Effective water risk mitigation protects people, assets, businesses, and the environment.
• Future cost avoidance. By planning today, you can incorporate water risk reductions and sustainability into ongoing improvement plans to reduce future costs or build a water-resilient supply chain to protect future revenues.
• Better monitoring of industry and international standards. The Alliance for Water Stewardship, the Global Reporting Initiative, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board, CEO Water Mandate, and many other bodies offer regulatory and industry guidance related to water risk. Operations increasingly need to account for and disclose their sustainability, water stewardship, and water risk and opportunity initiatives. Tracking those standards and understanding your current state can build a more robust, accurate reporting structure.

The Author:

Christopher Dacey is a Technical Expert, Senior Hydrogeologist with Haley & Aldrich.

By Keith Ziobron, PE and Samantha Miller, PE, CHA Consulting, Inc.

According to the EPA, there are an estimated 450,000 brownfields in the United States. They can be found in both urban and rural communities, and they range in size from small corner filling stations to former locomotive manufacturing facilities covering hundreds or even thousands of acres. These properties have often been vacant and underutilized for decades. Regardless of size, history and location, their common trait is that they could be complicated to reuse or redevelop due to known or perceived environmental conditions.

Urban brownfield sites are often former industrial sites. They frequently sit in the center of our cities but remain dormant due to the presence of contaminated soil or groundwater, asbestos-containing materials, and/or mold infestation. Perhaps there are dilapidated buildings still standing, long-forgotten underground infrastructure, or years of waste and junk that must be removed before a site is ready for redevelopment.

Rural brownfields are present in nearly every downtown main street where the populations have dwindled or are located along defunct railroad tracks or our rivers. These sites are often hidden by decades of untended brush and vegetation that doesn’t entirely cover the remnants of the past. 

Urban, rural, or somewhere in between, there’s funding available to communities to help them transform these sites into community assets. While some see insurmountable obstacles to reviving these sites, community leaders with vision see limitless opportunities. Two recent case studies, one from Downtown Syracuse, New York, and one across the country in the City of Chiloquin, Oregon, demonstrate the successes that a community can achieve when visions are harnessed and available resources leveraged.

Syracuse, New York

The City of Syracuse is experiencing a rejuvenation with investment in the local economy and revitalization of its downtown. A big part of this revitalization began with the JMA Wireless Tech Campus, which has been a cornerstone of the efforts to foster economic growth, innovation, community development, and stimulate further economic activity and job growth for the city.

The JMA Wireless Tech Campus was developed at 140 Cortland Avenue, a former brownfield site that has been redeveloped into a state-of-the-art 5G manufacturing facility with modern offices and showrooms. This is just the beginning of what the city hopes will be a national hub for 5G technology.

This brownfield site, a former industrial laundry, required a comprehensive remedial investigation, alternative remedial analysis, and a comprehensive remedial design work plan through the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Brownfield Cleanup Program. Historical industrial use of the property resulted in soil, groundwater and soil vapor contamination, primarily chlorinated solvents. Site investigation activities included an extensive soil and groundwater investigation and included the removal of six underground storage tanks, source area treatment via deep soil mixing with zero-valent iron for one plume area, and ex-situ chemical oxidation with groundwater extraction and injection system for a second plume area. As the redevelopment construction progressed, a sub-slab vapor mitigation system and soil cover system were installed on the site for long-term controls.

Following site cleanup, the project focused on the design, permitting and construction of a modern 80,000 SF headquarters and manufacturing facility, including the associated infrastructure for water, sewer, gas, electric, telecommunications, and fire. Infrastructure improvements included new traffic signal design, sanitary sewer lining, and reconstruction of existing 8” and 24” water mains for the city.

The JMA project has served as a catalyst for further investment in the city. Syracuse was recently awarded $40 million in federal funding under the CHIPS and Science Act and $8 million from the State of New York to continue to bolster the semiconductor industry in the region. This added investment is a continuation of the revitalization initiated by the JMA Wireless Tech Campus and the vision of community leaders to bring prosperity and jobs to their city.

Chiloquin, Oregon

As a rural community with a population of just under 800, Chiloquin, Oregon, has leveraged a series of state and federal funding sources to access nearly $1.2 million to date to catalyze redevelopment in their blighted downtown area. More specifically, Chiloquin’s brownfield program is cleaning up two key properties centrally located in the city and has assessed 10 additional properties. To date, the City of Chiloquin has been able to leverage an array of state and federal funding, including:

1.    A $60,000 Business Oregon Assessment grant for the pre-acquisition due diligence of the former Markwardt Brothers Garage site.

2.    A $300,000 EPA Community-wide Assessment grant.

3.    A $402,500 EPA Cleanup grant for the former Markwardt Brothers Garage.

4.    A $200,000 Business Oregon Cleanup grant for removal of asbestos-containing debris associated with the collapsed Chiloquin Mercantile Building.

5.    A $200,000 Business Oregon Cleanup grant to supplement the EPA Cleanup grant for the Markwardt Brothers Garage.

With cleanup complete, the City of Chiloquin has applied for a $15 million EPA Community Change Grant to fund the design and construction of a state-of-the-art community resilience center. Chiloquin is an admirable example of a rural community taking charge of its brownfields and creating something valuable for the future. In fact, the City of Chiloquin was just awarded the 2024 Outstanding Oregon Brownfield Project of the Year at this year’s Oregon Brownfield Conference.

With an eye on the future and the willingness to tap into available resources and brownfield cleanup expertise, other communities, urban like Syracuse or rural like Chiloquin, can realize a better future ahead for their residents.

About the Authors:

Keith Ziobron, PE, is a senior project manager and leads the brownfield program at CHA Consulting, Inc. He has over 38 years of experience in environmental engineering, including brownfield funding, assessment and redevelopment, remediation services, environmental compliance and permitting, and planning/economic development-related services. Keith has been helping secure and manage USEPA Brownfield grant funding since 2001. In all, he has assisted more than 25 communities to establish Brownfield programs and is currently managing four EPA Community-wide Assessment grants, two EPA Brownfield Cleanup grants, and three EPA Revolving Loan Fund grants. You can reach Keith at kziobron@chasolutions.com or 678-787-9576.

Samantha Miller, PE, is a senior engineer at CHA Consulting, Inc. She has 12 years of experience providing engineering services for environmental projects, including performing environmental monitoring, construction observation services, remediation system designs, bulk storage tank inspections, developing site management plans, and regulatory negotiation and coordination. Samantha has worked on various regulated sites, including petroleum and chemical remediation sites, tank cleanup sites, solid waste facility closures, and vapor intrusion mitigation projects. You can reach Samantha at smiller@chasolutions.com or 315-257-7154.

The Authors:

Keith Ziobron, PE, is a senior project manager and leads the brownfield program at CHA Consulting, Inc. He has over 38 years of experience in environmental engineering, including brownfield funding, assessment and redevelopment, remediation services, environmental compliance and permitting, and planning/economic development-related services. Keith has been helping secure and manage USEPA Brownfield grant funding since 2001. In all, he has assisted more than 25 communities to establish Brownfield programs and is currently managing four EPA Community-wide Assessment grants, two EPA Brownfield Cleanup grants, and three EPA Revolving Loan Fund grants. You can reach Keith at kziobron@chasolutions.com or 678-787-9576.

Samantha Miller, PE, is a senior engineer at CHA Consulting, Inc. She has 12 years of experience providing engineering services for environmental projects, including performing environmental monitoring, construction observation services, remediation system designs, bulk storage tank inspections, developing site management plans, and regulatory negotiation and coordination. Samantha has worked on various regulated sites, including petroleum and chemical remediation sites, tank cleanup sites, solid waste facility closures, and vapor intrusion mitigation projects. You can reach Samantha at smiller@chasolutions.com or 315-257-7154.

By Christina Sartorio Ku - Connell Foley

Reforms contained in a rule proposal to modernize land resource protection rules will significantly impact land use developments throughout New Jersey, making the Garden State’s permit acquisition process even more challenging and difficult to navigate than it is now.

The proposed reforms, known as the Resilient Environments and Landscapes (REAL) rules, are intended to better protect New Jersey communities from coastal flooding, sea-level rise, and other public health and safety risks arising from climate change. Announced by Governor Phil Murphy and Commissioner of Environmental Protection Shawn M. LaTourette in May, and published in the New Jersey Register on August 5, 2024, the REAL rules are a result of the New Jersey Protecting Against Climate Threats (NJ PACT) initiative. If enacted, they would amend New Jersey’s existing flood hazard, stormwater, coastal zone, and freshwater wetland regulations statewide to address climate change impacts, improve water quality, increase flood protections, and address issues specifically impacting overburdened communities.

The REAL rules would amend existing law to increase flood protections in several ways, including by:

• creating an “Inundation Risk Zone” (IRZ) regulated area within tidal flood hazard areas that would encompass land currently above sea level likely to be inundated during high tides during the life of the proposed development. New or improved developments within the IRZ will need to meet specific standards intended to address the increased flood risk that people and property are exposed to due to expected sea level rise and more intense storm events.
• redefining the extent of tidal flood hazard areas and replacing the existing “flood hazard area design flood elevation” with a proposed “climate adjusted flood elevation” that is calculated by adding five feet to FEMA’s 100-year flood elevation in tidal flood hazard areas.
• expanding riparian zone buffers and imposing stricter limitations on wetlands and stormwater management, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas. For example, the rule imposes a 3% impervious cover limit in new “Critical Environmental Sites” and enhances the requirements for stormwater management in redevelopment projects.
• aligning New Jersey’s floodplain management efforts with the National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP’s) minimum standards, as established in the rule or floodplain ordinance for the community where the site is located.

Other proposed changes include replacing the term “permit-by-rule” under the Coastal Zone Management Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:7) with the new term “permit-by-registration,” which requires applicants to submit compliance information to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for tracking of regulated activities throughout the State. Under the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act Rules (N.J.A.C. 7:7A), the proposed rules would require applicants to demonstrate why a project necessitates impacting wetlands, regardless of whether all other criteria under the rules are met; the reforms also require that all proposed activities in transition areas be situated at least 25 feet from any freshwater wetlands.

Finally, pursuant to the Flood Hazard Area Control Act rules (N.J.A.C. 7:13), the REAL rules would regulate isolated waters draining less than 50 acres, removing the exception for work located within 25 feet of a bulkhead, retaining wall, or revetment along a tidal or impounded fluvial water.

The NJDEP is accepting public comments to the proposed rules until November 3, 2024. If the NJDEP does not make any substantive changes to the proposed rules upon review of the public comments, these rules may be adopted and effective as early as the spring or summer of 2025. Pursuant to the regulations, any application submitted to the NJDEP after the effective date of the adopted rules, or any application that has not been deemed administratively complete by that date, will be subject to the new rules.

The Author:

by Cassie Bethoney - Weston & Sampson

Like many mill towns in the region, the neighborhood of Willimansett in Chicopee, Massachusetts followed a pattern of urban development and had been one of the area’s most thriving industrial centers for over a century. During that time, the neighborhood was almost entirely built out with few land parcels left undeveloped. However, during the mid-20thcentury, businesses began closing, leaving these industrial facilities and structures empty and unused. This situation has continued to impact the neighborhood’s traffic patterns and demographics, which was exacerbated by its bounds - major highways and infrastructure to the north, east, and south and the Connecticut River to the west. Many original settlers in the area moved away, and the neighborhood evolved into a home for a new wave of immigrants from Caribbean and Latin American nations. 

This story is not new. Industry evolves. The demographics of a neighborhood change over time, yet so much potential is tied up in these foundational ‘bones’ of developed land. What some might see as blight – brownfields – are actually opportunities in disguise. The Willimansett Brownfields Area-Wide Plan (AWP) positions five brownfield sites as catalysts for reinvestment in a way that both honors the neighborhood’s industrial past and those who live there today. 

While Willimansett may be challenged in some respects, it has much to offer, from fantastic open spaces, walkability, and a connected commercial corridor, to a shifting demographic just waiting for their culture to be expressed in their surroundings. A younger population means more families, more working age adults, and more community activity, which can provide the energy and entrepreneurism to fuel future growth and prosperity in Willimansett and throughout Chicopee. Housing, jobs, community goods, and services – these things can thrive in the underutilized buildings and vacant brownfields of the neighborhood and are the critical elements of any vibrant neighborhood. This ambitious project is seen as a vital step toward creating a vibrant, connected, and thriving community in Chicopee.

The Willimansett Brownfields AWP, funded by a $300,000 U.S. EPA Community Wide Assessment Grant, presents a strategic roadmap to assess, clean up, and/or repurpose the catalyst brownfield sites for new housing, commercial development, approachable streetscapes, and green spaces. The five key takeaways from the plan are summarized below:

1.  Community-Led Approach: One of the most notable aspects of the plan is its foundation in neighborhood voices. Business owners and local residents, especially those typically hard to reach, shaped the redevelopment strategy to ensure that any transformation set for the neighborhood aligns with the needs of those who live and work there. “We see this as an opportunity to not only clean up these sites but also to foster a new sense of community,” said Mayor John Vieau. 

Engagement was challenging during the planning process. Early on, the project team realized that the standard methods of engagement wouldn’t work in a high renter neighborhood where English is often not the main language spoken at home. A pivot toward strategically aligning with existing community events and asking quick and simple questions (alongside beautiful graphics) was the key to success. By the end of the planning process, the team made just under 2,000 connections.

2.  Boosting Economic and Social Vitality: Both public and private investment are leveraged in this plan, which will create job opportunities, increase affordable housing, and revitalize the local business scene. Five key brownfield sites have been identified as catalysts for change, with redevelopment plans that include residential units, commercial spaces, recreational facilities, and artful expression of neighborhood culture. These sites have the greatest immediate potential for reuse and their redevelopment would be transformative for Willimansett. Some of the key potential benefits to redevelopment identified across the five sites are the following:

• Many sites are in well-known and visible locations, offering the potential to stimulate additional investment and revitalization in the area, including the sustainable reuse of already developed land.
• For sites near the Connecticut RiverWalk and Bikeway, this frontage provides opportunities to create visual and physical connections to the waterfront. This offers unique opportunities for dining, and small businesses would benefit from proximity to the RiverWalk and Bikeway.
• Redevelopment of these sites allows for mixed-uses, including both residential and commercial. This contributes to job creation, shopping and dining options, and addresses the city’s existing housing demand.
• Residential development could be higher density than single-family. The reuse of these sites also provides an opportunity for affordable housing and home ownership.
• Improved streetscape and landscape features like tree plantings, bike amenities, and concessions can improve aesthetics and attract businesses and tenants. 
• Improved streetscapes can also enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety.

These projects are expected to draw more residents and visitors to the area, fueling local economic growth.

3. Environmental and Public Health Gains: Cleaning up hazardous brownfield sites also promises significant environmental and public health benefits. The plan will reduce contamination risks and transform neglected properties into safe, usable spaces for the community. 

4. A Focus on Connectivity: Improving infrastructure and neighborhood connectivity is a core component of the plan. Enhanced pedestrian pathways, bike lanes, and public transportation routes are proposed to better integrate Willimansett with the rest of Chicopee. The Connecticut RiverWalk and Bikeway, which runs along the neighborhood, will become even more of an asset than it already is by offering residents easier access to a network of recreational opportunities.

5. Cultural and Social Revitalization: In addition to economic and environmental goals, the plan emphasizes the importance of preserving Willimansett’s cultural heritage and finding creative ways to express the cultures of those currently living in the neighborhood. People invest in a place when it reflects their values. Public art installations, community events, and green spaces are part of the strategy to celebrate the neighborhood’s diverse population while fostering a strong sense of social cohesion. As the community becomes more diverse, it is essential to acknowledge Willimansett's industrial past while embracing new cultural identities. This balance will breathe new life into the neighborhood.

Looking ahead, the plan sets a precedent for urban redevelopment projects across the region. Willimansett’s transformation will not happen overnight, but this plan is a call to action. It is about creating a future where this neighborhood can thrive economically, environmentally, and socially. With a clear vision in place, the Willimansett Brownfields AWP represents a bold step toward a brighter future for one of Chicopee’s most historically rich neighborhoods and can be a model for other cities faced with similar challenges.

For more information about the Willimansett Brownfields Area-Wide Plan, visit the City of Chicopee’s website or contact the Department of Planning and Development at https://chicopeema.gov/365/Planning-Department.

The Author:

by Andrea Pedersen - Montrose Environmental

Brownfield Grants provide a unique opportunity to transform contaminated and underutilized properties into vibrant community assets. By understanding the various types of grants available and leveraging expert assistance, your community can effectively navigate the upcoming Brownfield Grant competition and maximize your chances of securing funding!

The EPA’s annual Brownfield Grant competition takes place in the fall. The Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is usually released between August and October, with applications due 8-10 weeks afterward.

Starting your preparations for the FY2025 Brownfield Grant competition well ahead of the deadline significantly boosts your chances of success. Early preparation allows ample time for comprehensive planning, engaging with the community and stakeholders, and crafting a compelling and thoughtful narrative. Continue reading to learn the best steps to take while preparing your application!

Identify key elements of your application.

Crafting a successful Brownfield Grant application requires strategic planning and the expertise of experienced grant writers. One of the first steps is to clearly define the project boundary and objectives. Presenting a well-defined target area and setting realistic goals for your project helps reviewers understand the scope and intent of your proposal. Additionally, providing compelling data to demonstrate the community’s need for the project is crucial. This could include statistics, case studies, or other relevant information that highlights the importance of the redevelopment.

Describing the key outcomes of the project and the benefits it will bring to the community is another essential element. This could include economic growth, environmental improvements, or social benefits. Equally important is outlining your strategies for engaging key stakeholders and educating community members about the benefits of brownfield redevelopment. Involving a diverse group of voices on the project steering committee ensures broad support and strengthens your application.

A comprehensive project plan and detailed budget are also vital. Detail the steps involved in the assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment process, and provide a realistic budget that aligns with the proposed activities. Highlighting your past successes in managing other state or federal grants demonstrates your capability and reliability to potential funders. Finally, crafting a thoughtful narrative that includes a consistent theme throughout each section of the grant application will keep the attention of reviewers and help you score maximum points.

Find the right tools and resources to prepare your application.

To assist in the preparation process, the EPA’s Brownfields Program website offers guidelines, FAQs, and examples of successful applications, providing a wealth of information to help you get started. Grant writing workshops are another valuable resource, offering training on how to write compelling proposals with tips and best practices from experienced grant writers. Additionally, the EPA has dedicated Technical Assistance providers in each region who can connect you with grant writing services and review your draft application prior to submission.

Explore other EPA funding opportunities.

The EPA has introduced several new funding opportunities and program enhancements for FY2024 and FY2025. Up to $20 million per project is available to support redevelopment in historically marginalized communities affected by legacy pollution and climate change. Over $20 million is allocated for Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations to assess and clean up contamination on lands conveyed under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Additional funding is available for training residents in environmental remediation and green jobs. Enhanced support is also provided for communities needing help with grant applications and project planning.

Now you have it! The steps to take while preparing for your funding application. Be sure to reach out to the Montrose Brownfields team if you are ready to engage expert funding consultants. Brownfield Redevelopment Service & Consultants | Montrose Environmental (montrose-env.com)

The Author:

by Dr. Daniele Spirandelli - Haley & Aldrich

The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) in July 2023 adopted a new rule aimed at enhancing inland flood protection measures in the state (New Jersey Administrative Code [NJAC] 7:8 and 7:13). The rule is intended to mitigate the effects of increased extreme precipitation events due to climate change, such as Tropical Storm Ida, which, in September 2021, caused widespread damage to communities and infrastructure in fluvial flood areas (areas where rising waters in lakes, rivers, or streams cause flooding).

The NJDEP Inland Flood Protection Rule has significant implications for owners and developers of manufacturing, commercial, and industrial properties, who need to understand how the rule may impact their operations. In this article, we will discuss the key aspects of the rule and its potential effects on real estate owners and developers.

Key aspects of the New Jersey Inland Flood Protection Rule

The NJDEP Inland Flood Protection Rule outlines requirements and standards for new construction projects, as well as for the modification of existing buildings in flood-prone areas. The rule would not apply to new construction and certain renovation projects that:

• Would require and have received approval for flood hazard area (FHA) applications submitted prior to the effective date of the rule.
• Have received all federal, state, and local approvals required for construction.
• Have commenced construction activities prior to the effective date of the rules.
• Were not considered part of a regulated FHA prior to the effective date of the rules.

Key aspects of the rule include the following:

• The rule sets the required design flood elevation for occupiable building space and critical equipment to include a 2-foot factor of safety above 100-year fluvial base flood elevations mapped by NJDEP, (there is currently no elevation increase required), and a 3-foot factor of safety above 100-year fluvial base flood elevations mapped by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (up from the 1-foot elevation increase required currently). Tidal flooding requirements remain unchanged as part of this rule.
• As under current requirements, the design flood elevation can also be determined by a licensed engineer. The rule would require the licensed engineer to also adjust for future precipitation depth using projected future rainfall to calculate the 100-year peak flow rate, plus a factor of safety, as part of a hydraulic analysis. The future rainfall would be calculated using future precipitation depth adjustment factors published for each county by NJDEP to account for climate change impacts.
• Stormwater best management practices (BMPs) will be required to manage runoff from increased current design storms (i.e., hypothetical storm events) as well as future design storms, using current and future precipitation depth adjustment factors published for each county by NJDEP.
• Stormwater runoff can no longer be calculated using the rational or modified rational methods.
• Permits-by-rule, general permit, individual permit, or general permit-by-certification will be required to comply with applicable construction standards of the Uniform Construction Code (NJAC 5:23) and federal flood reduction standards (44 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60).

Impacts for property owners and developers

The NJDEP Inland Flood Protection Rule will likely have significant impacts on commercial, manufacturing, and industrial property owners and developers. These effects could include:

• Higher construction costs. Compliance with the new flood protection standards and stormwater BMPs will likely increase construction costs, especially for projects in flood-prone areas. Developers may need to invest in additional engineering, design, and construction measures to meet the new requirements, such as floodproofing or elevating critical equipment and increasing stormwater detention capacity.
• Delays in construction. Meeting the new flood protection standards may require additional time for design, approvals, and construction. This could result in delays in project timelines, which can affect project profitability.
• Changes in property values. Properties located in flood-prone areas may experience changes in value because of the new flood protection standards. Buyers and sellers may need to factor in the cost of compliance with the new requirements when negotiating deals.
• Compliance challenges. Compliance with the new flood protection standards may challenge some real estate owners and developers, especially those with existing buildings in flood-prone areas. Retrofitting existing buildings to meet the new standards may require significant investment, which could be an obstacle to compliance.

How owners and developers can prepare for the New Jersey Inland Flood Protection Rule

The rule represents a significant development for manufacturing, commercial, and industrial properties in the state. Stakeholders should be aware of the new requirements and understand how those requirements could affect their operations. By proactively considering property flood exposure and evaluating stormwater management practices and flood resilience measures, real estate owners and developers can better prepare for compliance and mitigate any potential negative effects on their operations.

Please contact the author of this article for more information on this rule and how to prepare.

The Author:

by Dawn Santoianni, Principal Consultant; Heather Good, Associate, Hydrogeologist; and Sarah Sieloff, Technical Expert - Haley & Aldrich

How are you setting your strategy? 

As environmental consultants, we hear questions from many clients about environmental justice (EJ). They’re wondering what the current focus on EJ means for them, whether that focus will continue, and how to create an effective and actionable EJ strategy. 

EJ might seem like a new concept, but the term has been around for several decades. In recent years, EJ has risen in prominence at both the state and federal levels. Offices of Environmental Justice have formed within multiple agencies, laws have been passed, policies have changed, and grant guidelines have shifted. With over four decades of combined experience tracking environmental trends and forging constructive stakeholder relationships, we can confidently say that the current policy focus on EJ will not fade.  

There are multiple benefits to developing an EJ strategy. Developers who don’t pay attention to the evolving EJ landscape may face permitting, enforcement, reputational, and relationship risks. And on the flip side, a focus on EJ doesn’t have to be a protective maneuver — it can also support your firm’s environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals, bolster stakeholder relationships, and make meaningful improvements in communities.   

With the current and anticipated ongoing focus on EJ, understanding how you can position your organization is more important than ever. 

Staying current in an evolving landscape

In practice, EJ will look different for different communities, sites, and development plans. For example, some will focus on risk mitigation or pollution prevention. Others will need to make improvements that address the underlying factors contributing to a community’s EJ concerns — lack of green space, traffic generated by construction or the completed devleopment, or legacy contamination issues.

A key component of determining how your company might engage with EJ is understanding which communities have EJ concerns. EJ concerns in a community are typically characterized by harms and risks. Some communities are disproportionately affected by historical pollution burdens, which, when combined with socioeconomic stressors such as poverty, linguistic isolation, and lower levels of education, can result in more adverse health and economic impacts. However, there is no single definition of EJ, which is evident in the large number and variety of EJ screening tools that are available. Tools like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s EJScreen or the federal government’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool show how environmental and socioeconomic factors intersect across geographies. While these tools can provide data and perspective on community concerns, they don’t reveal everything, such as public sentiment or local data. Nor do these screening tools recommend specific actions or tactics. That’s where an EJ strategy comes in — it provides a roadmap for addressing EJ concerns. 

Environmental Justice Mapping/Screening Tools for the BCONE geography Connecticut Delaware   Maine Maryland   Massachusetts   New Hampshire New Jersey New York Pennsylvania   Rhode Island Vermont

It’s challenging to keep up with and interpret state and federal regulatory, permitting, and funding actions on EJ. This is yet another reason companies can benefit from a proactive — not reactive — EJ strategy.  

Working with public sector partners 

With the rising prominence of EJ at the state and federal levels, there is an increased focus on EJ in the public sector. By preparing an EJ strategy, you can position yourself to work more productively with public sector partners.   

Many federal grants now require applicants to demonstrate how EJ has shaped their application and will inform future projects. This is especially key as legislation like the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act continue to swell agency coffers with grant funding. There are also impacts at the state level, including funding and permitting decisions. As of early 2023, more than 20 states had enacted EJ policies that define EJ or overburdened communities; stood up dedicated EJ task forces, offices, and commissions; established screening tools, impact reports, and scorecards; and mandated community involvement in environmental and land-use decision-making.  

Developing an EJ strategy speaks volumes, not only about your firm’s commitment to this issue but also about your knowledge of the wider policy and regulatory landscape. A programmatic or enterprise-level EJ strategy can also help support broader company ESG goals, build constructive relationships with the communities you serve, and maintain brand reputation with business partners, investors, employees, and other stakeholders. 

Components of an effective EJ strategy

Your EJ strategy will be unique to your organizational and situational needs, but there are some common approaches and tools that we use when developing an EJ strategy. 

Using EJ screening tools to understand local context 

How we can think of EJ Demonstrating care for our communities Understanding community concerns relating to historical environmental liabilities and cumulative impacts Informing mitigation and remediation solutions, getting community buy-in Considerations for permitting new facilities, including renewables Developing robust community engagement plans Enhancing stakeholder relationships and reputation Mitigating risk across our portfolio

The federal government and many states have developed publicly available EJ or equity screening tools that provide access to environmental, demographic, and socioeconomic data. These tools can help companies better understand the communities in which they operate and potential EJ risks.   

While EJ screening tools can be a helpful starting point, they have several limitations and challenges. Each tool uses different datasets, and some require an experienced user to navigate them. They provide descriptive results but cannot be the only source of information — local data and public sentiment are also important. To fully understand their EJ risks, companies should conduct site-specific assessments. These assessments typically consider results from screening tools but supplement that information with site-specific factors such as current operations, potential community risks, and historical impacts.   

Improving internal alignment 

For companies just beginning to develop an EJ strategy, internal education is often an important first step. For example, we recently began helping a client develop its plan to address EJ concerns at sites across the country. In discussions with stakeholders, we learned that workers at those sites didn’t have a unified understanding of what EJ entails or why it matters to their work. We developed training materials and a workshop to facilitate alignment, which in turn has helped the company align goals and internal communications.

Developing a communications strategy  

Sustained, responsive communication with community stakeholders and regulators is essential to EJ strategy. Companies could consider how they will prepare for tough questions about their own EJ track records, as well as about environmental and health issues not related to their operations: Communities will often bring all their concerns to the table, and companies need to know how to field questions on those concerns to foster good relationships and build trust. 

From ESG to community engagement or permitting decisions, addressing EJ as part of your business strategy or operations is a critical business requirement, and it’s only going to become more essential moving forward. More information is better — for your firm, your community, your reputation, and your relationships.

The Authors:

by Rick Shoyer, LSRP, Montrose Environmental

On April 19, 2024, the U.S. EPA classified perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances under CERCLA, also known as Superfund. This designation directly affects the scope of the ASTM E1527-21 Standard Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), mandating that PFOA and PFAS be included.  Here are some key considerations in developing your due diligence strategy: 

Know Where to Research Reportable Incidents 

Entities must promptly report any new or ongoing releases of PFOA and PFOS exceeding 1 pound. Past releases require reporting only if they remain active. Knowing where to research the reportable incidents can aid in assessing risk. 

Identify PFAS Uses

Identifying historical uses of PFOA and PFOS, and other PFAS, presents challenges due to their varied names and structures not always listed on Safety Data Sheets.  Conduct thorough reviews of historical records, permits, and facility documentation to uncover past fluorochemical use. Interviews with long-term employees and visual inspections can provide additional insights.

Consider Consequences of Phase II Diligence 

Before initiating Phase II investigations, assess contractual and regulatory risks, potential reporting obligations triggered by sampling, and implications for worker exposure and waste disposal.

Review the Regulatory Landscape

Familiarize yourself with TSCA requirements for reporting PFAS production, use, and disposal since 2011, and utilize EPA tools to identify nearby PFAS contamination sources.

As PFOA and PFOS become subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny, gathering and updating property information demands careful attention to new obligations and potential impacts on operations. Understanding these requirements is crucial before committing to further investigative steps.

About the Author:

by Jeffrey Campbell, Peak Environmental, A Nova Group GBC Company

The New Jersey Economic Development Authority (NJEDA) kicked off the Brownfield Redevelopment Incentive Program (BRIP) in 2023 to provide funding to support redevelopment of under-utilized real estate in New Jersey. In May 2024 the program issued its first funding approval for a project in Elmwood Park, in Bergen County, New Jersey. The award was acknowledged as a great start for the BRIP by NJEDA CEO @Tim Sullivan, NJDEP Commish @Shawn LaTourette, and Bergen County Executive @Jim Tedesco. Also in attendance, @Mayor Robert Colletti confirmed the positive economic impact that the redevelopment will bring.

The Program will award up to $50M per year to fund project tasks from assessment through remediation, including demolition costs. BRIP funds can be stacked with other EDA programs, and the credit is transferable. Eligibility is very broad. The applicant does not need to own the property, but also cannot take title until a Redevelopment Agreement is signed. Successful applicants receive a one-time tax credit issued the year the remediation is complete. Similar to typical real estate projects, interested real estate developers should assemble a team of professionals to guide them through the application process.

The Elmwood Park project was supported by BCONE member companies Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC (“CSG Law”) and Peak Environmental, A Nova Group, GBC Company (Peak Environmental). CSG Law managed the application through eligibility requirements, environmental liability issues, financial aspects, developer qualifications, and environmental costs and planning. Peak provided due diligence services and conducted site characterization tasks necessary to complete a remediation cost estimate and schedule. Peak Environmental confirmed discharges occurred, provided an LSRP to oversee the project, evaluated possible off-site migration of contaminants, identified building material risks, and developed reasonable remediation costs. With the funding phase of the project complete, CSG and Peak Environmental will work with the developer to complete a remedial investigation, select a final remediation strategy, comply with green remediation requirements, obtain permits needed, and execute the remedial action.

About the Author:

Link to NJEDA BRIP page https://www.njeda.gov/brownfield-redevelopment-incentive/

Link to CSG Blog  https://www.csglaw.com/newsroom/csg-law-alert-csg-client-obtains-first-approval-under-the-brownfield-redevelopment-incentive-program/

Link to Peak Blog https://peak-environmental.com/2024/06/12/peak-environmental-supports-first-brip-financing-approval/

by George Naslas, PG, LSP - Weston & Sampson

The redevelopment of brownfield sites is often associated with the revitalization of a property to bring it back into productive use, generate local tax revenue, and increase local employment. Redevelopment can also be part of a green or open space development, such as a riverwalk, park, or rail trail. Sometimes the conversion of a brownfield site into open space can be the catalyst required to help transform a neighborhood and spur economic development. In other cases, a brownfield site simply needs to be removed or cleaned up because it is a public nuisance and a blight on the neighborhood. 

In the Village of Woodsville within the Town of Haverhill in northwestern New Hampshire, a derelict house along a former railroad corridor had been used for many years as a drug lab to manufacture and sell methamphetamines. The town fought to shut down the operation but was hampered by jurisdictional issues with law enforcement. Eventually, operations ended and the building lay dormant, obliging the town to take title. Now, what to do with the property?

When a community inherits a property with potential for legacy issues, the ability to sell it is often challenging. For many communities, this results in the parcel remaining abandoned and at risk for trespassers and arson. These risks put an additional burden on the community due to increased police and/or fire department presence.

For municipalities with limited financial resources, blighted properties like this can become a huge liability. For the Woodsville, the presence of this blighted structure was a blot on the landscape and a barrier to redevelopment along Railroad Street, which parallels Main Street and is highly visible.

Based on these factors, the town chose to demolish the building, but questions remained about the potential impacts to the site from the former drug manufacturing operations, which represented a barrier to the eventual sale of the property. Further complicating the matter, there were rumors of dangerous objects in the building and the possibility of an animal carcass buried in the yard. The town initially spent a significant sum to hire a contractor to decontaminate the building. Plus, there was a fuel tank in the dirt basement and indications of potential releases to the subsurface.

To remedy the situation, the town pursued and secured funds from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) Brownfields Program to assess the site for hazardous building materials and demolish the building so the subsurface below the building could be accessed. 

Using the NHDES funds, combined with additional funds from the US EPA Brownfield Program, our team developed a sampling plan which was approved by the EPA. Because the building occupied about half the lot and there were other materials dumped at the site, including an abandoned trailer, sequencing of the project was important. 

A hazardous building materials inventory was conducted inside the building to evaluate the presence of asbestos-containing materials, lead-based paint, and other wastes that would require removal prior to demolition. Following that, the building was sealed and placed under negative air pressure while asbestos and other materials were abated by a licensed contractor. Once it was demonstrated there was no residual asbestos, the contractor removed remaining materials from the site and demolished the building, filling in and grading the basement to prevent a dangerous condition.

Following demolition and site restoration, we further evaluated the site for the potential of lingering impacts from the drug manufacturing operations, such as volatile organic compounds. We also conducted a ground penetrating radar survey to identify potential buried objects and retained a drilling subcontractor to advance soil borings through the former basement and other locations to evaluate potential impacts to soil. No impacts were found. 

Oh, and the rumored animal carcass? We never found one.

Once completed, the clearing and removal of this abandoned property represented a tremendous win for the village and the Town of Haverhill as a whole. By removing the blight and addressing public safety concerns, the town now has an asset that can be either sold for revenue or tied into a proposed nearby rail trail. Sometimes removing blight is the only catalyst that is needed.   

(This article was originally published in the November 3, 2023, issue of the New England Real Estate Journal)

About the Author: