Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back

Contaminants of Emerging Concern and Environmental Due Diligence Issues

Written by: Adam M. Dumville & Michael J. Quinn

Published in NH Bar News (9/18/2019)

Practitioners performing environmental due diligence have grown accustomed to the now routine use of Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments (ESA).  However, the adoption of new regulatory standards raises the possibility that standard ASTM-compliant ESAs may be insufficient to identify potential environmental risks. Specifically, so called contaminants of emerging concern (CECs), which include chemicals found in firefighting foam, water proof fabrics, pharmaceuticals, personal care goods and many more products have only very recently become regulated. However, CECs are not currently classified as “hazardous” under federal law, and therefore, are not regulated under the variety of environmental statutes and accordingly, are not assessed by standard Phase 1 ESAs.

The PFAS Issue

The class of CECs currently receiving the most attention are poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS),  man-made chemicals that include PFOA, PFOS, GenX.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) explains that PFASs can be found in: food packaged in PFAS-containing materials, processed with equipment that used PFAS, or grown in soil or water containing PFAS compounds; household products, such as water and stain repellant fabrics, non-stick products, polishes, waxes, paints, cleaning products; certain fire-fighting foams; and at facilities that engaged in chrome plating, electronics manufacturing or oil recovery. (https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas)

The Regulatory Landscape

As of September 30, 2019, New Hampshire will enforce Maximum Contaminant Limits (MCL) for ambient groundwater quality criteria for four PFAS substances at levels ranging from 11 ppt to 18 ppt.  See N.H. Code. Admin. R. Env-Or 603.03(b)–(c). See also Env-Dw 705.06 (establishing MCLs and Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) for PFAS in drinking water); Env-Wq 402, et seq. (modifying groundwater discharge permit criteria for PFAS).  The Department has an entire (https://www4.des.state.nh.us/nh-pfas-investigation/) devoted to its efforts with regard to PFAS which includes a sampling map that identifies those properties where PFAS testing has been done. These rules will affect municipalities as well as private entities. New Hampshire regulators estimate communities will need to spend $190 million on landfills, wastewater treatment plants and drinking water supplies to comply with the PFAS criteria.

A growing number of other states, including Massachusetts, Maine, New York, Vermont, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Wisconsin, California, and Alaska are in varying stages of regulating and/or assessing historical releases of PFAS.  On the national level, EPA has recommended that people not drink water containing a total concentration of PFOS and PFOA above 0.07 ug/L (70 parts per trillion (ppt)) and is working on establishing a MCLs for certain PFAS chemicals. What is important about this, for purposes of transactional, environmental due diligence, is that inconsistent standards may be adopted for PFAS nationwide in the very near future.

The potential costs associated with the study and remediation of PFAS could well  be enormous. New Jersey issued PFAS-focused orders to “Responsible Parties” and filed multiple lawsuits in 2019 against manufacturers and sellers of products that included PFAS. These administrative and judicial actions seek relief ranging from past costs incurred by the government, to costs of future investigations and remediation, and payment of Natural Resource Damages. In addition, New Jersey has threatened to seek treble damages. Using the threat of treble damages in an environmental enforcement will look very familiar to those who previously dealt with similar EPA “106 Orders” at Superfund sites.

The Phase 1 ESA

Environmental due diligence in accordance with established commercial and legal standards is well-recognized as a critical element of almost every transaction involving real property. An ESA incorporating “all appropriate inquires” by a qualified environmental professional, should be performed to determine whether there are conditions indicating past or current releases of petroleum or hazardous substances. An ESA is conducted according to ASTM standards, and must include, for example:

  • A review of historical records;
  • A review of  government environmental records;
  • Interviews with current and past property occupants; and
  • A physical site inspection

 

At the conclusion of a properly conducted  ESA, one may qualify for certain liability protections as an innocent landowner or a Bona Fide Perspective Purchaser.  See EPA Common Elements Guidance.  These legal protections may insulate a new owner from liability for pre-existing contamination if certain precautions were taken.  The performance of an ESA is an effective means of  identifying potential environmental problems— except, perhaps, CECs.

 

Parties engaged in transactions that involve the acquisition of real estate—and that take the prudent step of obtaining a pre-closing ESA—will want to  be aware of the potential presence of CECs, including PFAS, that the standard Phase 1 ESA may not address.  

What Should the Practitioner Do?

Unless/until the ASTM standard is revised to include PFAS, and perhaps other CECs, there are steps that a prudent practitioner should take during the ESA process. 

First, become knowledgeable about CECs generally.  This is not easy.  There are innumerable substances that may “emerge” in the future. Simply understanding the risk, however, is important.

Second,  be informed about substances that are under consideration for regulation.  EPA publishes technical fact sheets, that provide a summary of information on CECs that are being considered for new, or expanded regulation.  

Third, retain an experienced Environmental Professional to conduct the ESA and evaluate the potential CEC issues before the ESA begins. Practitioners should pay attention to the section of the ESA relating to the historic use of the site as well as adjacent property. Was a fire reported at the site or nearby, with the potential that firefighting foams containing PFASs were used?  Were there ever fire resistant aviation hydraulic fluids, photography and film products present at the site, or was PFAS used in a manufacturing process, to name a few?  If the site history shows the potential presence of CECs, further analysis is warranted.

Lastly, practitioners should be aware that a Phase I ESA still might not adequately address  CECs under state law.  There will likely be more variability among CEC standards than for more traditional compounds.  It is essential to determine in addition to federal environmental law, which State laws apply. 

As new compounds are developed each year, and the universe of CECs expands, risks identified  in environmental due diligence inquiries will develop apace.  Look for this to be an evolving issue that must be constantly reevaluated. 

Integrity and trust

At McLane Middleton we establish and maintain long-standing relationships with our clients to help us better achieve their unique goals over time. This approach to building trust requires that our esteemed lawyers and professionals use their broad, in-depth knowledge and work together with integrity to ascertain sound resolutions to legal matters for their clients.

Strength in numbers

McLane Middleton is made up of more than 105 attorneys who represent a broad range of clients throughout the region, delivering customized solutions. As a firm we are recognized as having the highest legal ability rating. The firm is rated Preeminent by Martindale Hubbell and is recognized as one of the nation's leading law firms in Chambers USA. Our attorneys are distinguished leaders in their respective practice areas.

Meet Our People

Commitment and collaboration

McLane Middleton's versatile group of attorneys and paralegals become trusted authorities on each case through collaboration. We work with our clients to learn their individual needs first and foremost and, together, we develop comprehensive solutions to their specific legal matters. This approach helps us exceed our clients' expectations efficiently and effectively, client by client, case by case.

Practice Areas

A history of excellence

McLane Middleton was established in 1919 in New Hampshire, and has five offices across two states. However, deep historical roots don't allow you to become innate. Our firm is organized, technological, and knowledgeable. Our history means we are recognized. But our reputation is built on the highest quality of service and experience in very specific areas of law.

The Firm

Intelligence paired with action

Our team continuously seeks opportunities to enhance their professional development and put key learnings to action. The pursuit of further insight guides us to volunteer service opportunities, speaking engagements, and teaching roles. Our lawyers are sought after thought leaders across their industries, and recipients of leadership awards throughout the region.