Encyclopedia of Environmental Science and Engineering, Volume I and II

BROWNFIELDS 163

of brownfields begins in the definitions and continues through

implementation.

Legally, the EPA uses the definition of brownfield

in Public Law 107-118 (HR 28869), the Small Business

Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, signed

into law January 11, 2002. This definition says that “within

certain legal exclusions, the term ‘brownfield site’ means

real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of

which may be complicated by the presence or potential pres-

ence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.”

Following the definition are pages of exclusions that pri-

marily detail sections of other laws with priority. The pri-

mary statutory authorities citied are: the Clean Water Act,

as amended in 1977; CERCLA of 1980, commonly called

Superfund; the RCRA, as amended in 1984; the Superfund

Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986;

the Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988; the Great Lake

Critical Programs Act of 1990; the Clean Air Act of 1990; the

Clean Water Act of 1990; and the Housing and Community

Development Act of 1992.

On many publications and Web pages on brownfields,

the EPA discusses them as “abandoned, idled or under-

used industrial and commercial facilities where expansion

or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived envi-

ronmental contamination.” This definition facilitates the

EPA’s Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative in

empowering states, communities, and other stakeholders

involved in brownfield revitalization to work together on

redevelopment.

The definitions of brownfields by states are varied, as are

the patterns of implementation. They vary from Missouri,

with one of the oldest and most defined brownfields pro-

grams; to Washington, with an operating program without a

definition; to Alaska, with no definition or program.

Missouri’s complex definition of brownfields comes

from its 1995 brownfields legislation in Chapter 447 of

the Revised Statutes of Missouri (commonly known as

the Brownfields Redevelopment Program). The Missouri

Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and the Missouri

Department of Economic Development jointly have the fol-

lowing definition. To be a brownfield in Missouri, a project

must meet two criteria:

1. All projects must enter and be accepted into the MDNR
   Voluntary Cleanup Program which provides property
   owners with oversight of and concurrence with all cleanup
   activities.


2. A project will be considered eligible if it meets the fol-
   lowing criteria:

(a) The property^ must have been abandoned for at least

three years or underutilized. Real property is under-

utilized if less than 35% of its commercially usable

space is used for its most commercially profitable and

economically productive use.

(b) The property is owned by a local, state, or federal gov-

ernmental agency, or by a private party who is to the

potential responsible party, and the project is endorsed

by the local municipality;

(c) The property is contaminated, or perceived to be con-

taminated, by a hazardous substance; and,

(d) The property is planned to undergo redevelopment

for a commercial, mixed-use, or industrial use that

is expected to create at least 10 jobs or retain at least

25 jobs, or some combination thereof.

The state of Washington discusses brownfields as “the short-

hand term for historically contaminated and underutilized or

vacant industrial property” on its Web page. In some litera-

ture it defines brownfields as “properties that are abandoned

or underused because of environmental contamination for

past industrial or commercial practices.” However, there is

not a definition in any state statute or regulation. If the public

thinks a site is a brownfield—it is. Nevertheless, Washington

maintains an active brownfields program, with a showcase

project in Seattle and King County as its model. That project

is discussed in the case study below.

ASSOCIATED ISSUES: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

AND BANKING

Many contaminated properties are located in areas such as

older urban centers, where a high proportion of the residents are

minorities, have low incomes, or do not have English as their

first language. These common problems reflect the economic

limitations faced by disadvantaged individuals. Therefore, dis-

advantaged communities must overcome special barriers to

effectively advocate for their community interests during the

review and permitting of projects with potential environmental

impacts. This created environmental injustice. In 1982, Warren

County was the poster child for environmental injustice and

documented racism. That year, citizens banded together and

made the Warren County PCB landfill protest a seminal event

for the environmental-justice movement. The North Carolina

Environmental Justice Network (NCEJN) was formed, and it

became a catalyst that galvanized people of color in the fight

for environmental justice. The struggle in Warren County was

the spark that lit that national environmental-justice movement

in the 1980s.

In its most basic interpretation, environmental justice

(EJ) is the principle that all people have the right to be pro-

tected from environmental pollution and to receive a fair

share of environmental benefits. It combines environmen-

tal protection with considerations of nondiscrimination and

civil rights. Many organizations have been formed on the

model of the NCEJN to support these principles locally.

Additionally, governments have provided support through

agencies such as the Oregon Governors Environmental

Justice Advisory Board.

EJ policies seek to level the playing field by providing

disadvantaged communities with technical and organiza-

tional support, by providing special scrutiny for proposed

projects in EJ communities that might result in significant

C002_002_r03.indd 163C002_002_r03.indd 163 11/18/2005 10:16:21 AM11/18/2005 10:16:21 AM