SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
FOR
EPA
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
NUMBER
2144.01
STANDARDS
AND
PRACTICES
FOR
ALL
APPROPRIATE
INQUIRIES
(
PROPOSED
RULE)
(
40
CFR
PART
312)

JULY
20,
2004
2
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
a)
Title
and
Number
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
b)
Short
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
2(
a)
Need
and
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
2(
b)
Practical
Utility
and
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
3(
a)
Nonduplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
3(
b)
Public
Notice
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
4(
a)
Respondents
and
SIC/
NAICS
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
 
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
.
.
18
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
6.
ESTIMATING
THE
HOUR
AND
COST
BURDEN
OF
THE
COLLECTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
Hours
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
6(
d)
Estimating
the
Annual
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
6(
g)
Public
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
41
1
1
The
process
most
prevalently
used
for
conducting
AAI
is
the
process
developed
by
the
American
Society
for
Testing
and
Materials
(
ASTM)
and
entitled
E1527,
Phase
I
Environmental
Site
Assessment
Process.
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
and
Number
of
the
Information
Collection
This
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
is
entitled
"
Standards
and
Practices
for
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
Proposed
Rule)
(
40
CFR
part
312)"
EPA
ICR
Number
2144.01.

1(
b)
Short
Characterization
The
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
is
proposing
Federal
standards
and
practices
for
conducting
all
appropriate
inquiries
(
AAI),
as
required
under
Section
101(
35)(
B)
of
the
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Act
(
CERCLA).
The
proposed
rule
would
establish
specific
regulatory
requirements
and
standards
for
conducting
AAI
into
the
previous
ownership,
uses,
and
environmental
conditions
of
a
property
for
the
purposes
of
meeting
the
AAI
provisions
necessary
to
qualify
for
certain
landowner
liability
protections
under
CERCLA.
The
standards
and
practices
proposed
today
also
would
be
applicable
to
persons
conducting
site
characterizations
and
assessments
with
the
use
of
grants
awarded
under
CERCLA
§
104(
k)(
2)(
B).

The
information
collection
requirements
in
the
proposed
rule
apply
to
any
person
who
may
seek
the
landowner
liability
protections
of
CERCLA
as
an
innocent
landowner,
contiguous
property
owner,
or
bona
fide
prospective
purchaser,
as
defined
in
the
proposed
rule.
Many
of
these
activities
are
already
undertaken
by
prospective
purchasers
under
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard,
and
are
usual
and
customary
business
practice.
1
In
addition,
the
Small
Business
Liability
Relief
and
Brownfields
Revitalization
Act
(
Pub.
L.
No.
107­
118,
115
stat.
2356,
"
the
Brownfields
Amendments")
established
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
as
the
interim
standard
for
AAI,
and
thus
as
one
requirement
for
qualifying
as
an
innocent
landowner,
bona
fide
purchaser,
or
contiguous
property
owner
during
the
interim
period.
This
ICR
presents
incremental
burden
associated
with
the
following
activities
that
are
in
addition
to
the
customary
and
usual
business
practices
in
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard:

°
Documentation
of
recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens.

°
Documentation
of
the
reason(
s)
for
any
difference
in
the
purchase
price
and
the
fair
market
value
of
the
subject
property.

°
Documentation
of
the
degree
of
obviousness
of
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in
or
to
the
subject
property.
2
A
smaller
number
of
respondents
are
expected
to
incur
burden
for
more
activities
as
they
transition
from
transaction
screens
to
the
AAI
activities.

In
Sections
1
through
5
of
this
ICR,
EPA
presents
a
comprehensive
description
of
the
new
information
collection
requirements
that
would
result
from
the
AAI
proposed
rule.
In
Section
6,
EPA
estimates
the
total
annual
hour
and
cost
burden
to
respondents
(
i.
e.,
any
firm,
regardless
of
the
nature
of
its
operations,
involved
in
a
commercial
real
estate
transaction
and
wanting
to
avail
itself
of
CERCLA
liability
defense)
associated
with
these
new
paperwork
requirements.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need
and
Authority
for
the
Collection
EPA
is
proposing
to
set
Federal
standards
and
practices
for
the
conduct
of
AAI.
This
regulatory
action
was
initiated
in
response
to
legislative
amendments
to
the
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Act
(
CERCLA).
The
Brownfields
Amendments
require
EPA
to
develop
regulations
establishing
standards
and
practices
for
how
to
conduct
AAI
and
promulgate
standards
within
two
years
of
enactment
of
the
Amendments.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility
and
Users
of
the
Data
The
proposed
rule
does
not
contain
any
requirements
to
notify
or
submit
information
to
EPA
or
any
other
government
entity.
It
does,
however,
require
that
the
environmental
professional,
on
behalf
of
the
property
owner,
document
the
results
of
the
AAI
in
a
written
report.
The
purpose
of
this
written
report
is
to
ensure
that
any
person
claiming
one
of
the
CERCLA
landowner
liability
protections
be
able
to
show
documentation
that
all
appropriate
inquiries
were
conducted
in
compliance
with
the
Federal
regulations,
should
such
documentation
be
required
by
a
court
of
law.

3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
None
of
the
new
information
required
by
the
proposed
rule
is
duplicative
of
any
information
required
by
the
existing
CERCLA
regulations.
3
3(
b)
Public
Notice
In
compliance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
of
1995,
EPA
has
issued
a
public
notice
in
the
Federal
Register
[
ADD
FR
NOTICE
DATE
AND
CITATION].
The
public
comment
period
extends
through
[
ENTER
DATE].
To
assist
the
public
in
commenting
on
the
proposal,
EPA
raised
a
number
of
issues
in
the
preamble
to
the
proposed
rule
and
asked
for
the
public
to
comment
on
them.
At
the
end
of
the
comment
period,
EPA
will
review
public
comments
received
in
response
to
the
notice
and
will
address
comments
received,
as
appropriate.

3(
c)
Consultations
EPA
incorporated
stakeholder
input
throughout
development
of
the
proposed
rule
by
engaging
in
a
negotiated
rulemaking.
EPA
initiated
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
by
identifying
appropriate
stakeholder
groups
and
soliciting
advice
and
input
from
public
and
private
sector
users
of
similar
standards.
Once
EPA
determined,
with
stakeholder
input,
that
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
was
appropriate,
the
Agency
identified
and
published
in
the
Federal
Register
(
68
FR
10675)
a
potential
list
of
interests,
requesting
comment
on
the
list
of
interests
and
stakeholders
that
should
be
included
in
the
process.
Following
receipt
of
public
comments
to
that
notice
and
conduct
of
a
public
hearing
to
gain
input,
EPA
established
a
negotiated
rulemaking
advisory
committee
under
the
provisions
of
the
Federal
Advisory
Committee
Act
(
FACA).
The
advisory
committee
included
a
balanced
membership
representing
the
various
interests
identified
either
by
EPA
or
by
public
commenters
as
having
a
significant
stake
in
the
outcome
of
the
rulemaking.
The
Agency
then
published
in
the
Federal
Register
a
notice
announcing
the
establishment
of
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
on
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee)
on
April
7,
2003
(
68
FR
16747).

The
committee
was
composed
of
25
members
and
each
member
of
the
committee
represented
a
specific
stakeholder
interest.
EPA
had
one
seat
on
the
committee,
and
that
Agency
member
represented
the
Federal
government's
own
set
of
interests.
A
neutral
facilitator
assisted
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
by
applying
proven
consensus
building
techniques
to
the
Committee's
activities.

All
meetings
of
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
were
open
public
meetings.
Members
of
the
public,
including
representatives
from
organizations
not
represented
on
the
Committee
were
welcomed
to
observe
Committee
discussions
during
each
meeting.
All
written
products
developed
by
the
Committee
were
made
available
to
the
public
on
EPA's
website
and
in
the
Agency's
rulemaking
docket.
Time
was
set
aside
during
each
meeting
of
the
Committee
to
hear
comments
from
the
public.
Members
of
the
public
also
had
the
opportunity
to
provide
written
comments
to
the
negotiated
rulemaking
committee
on
the
topics
considered
and
discussed
by
the
Committee.
The
openness
of
the
negotiated
rulemaking
process
allowed
for
continued
review
of
the
Committee
proceedings
by
the
public
and
allowed
the
Committee
to
give
full
consideration
to
input
offered
by
the
public
during
its
deliberations.
4
The
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
for
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
conducted
six
multiple­
day
meetings
over
the
course
of
an
eight­
month
period,
beginning
in
April
2003.
The
Committee
reached
consensus
on
the
provisions
of
a
proposed
rule
during
its
meeting
in
November
2003.
The
consensus
of
all
Committee
members
was
confirmed
in
December
2003
through
approval
of
the
facilitator's
summary
of
that
meeting,
including
the
text
of
the
consensusbased
proposed
regulatory
language.
The
Agency,
consistent
with
the
intent
of
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Act
and
in
compliance
with
the
Committee's
ground
rules,
is
using
the
Committee's
consensus
regulatory
language
as
the
basis
of
the
proposed
rule.

EPA
has
requested
public
comments
on
the
proposed
rule.
Public
comments
will
be
incorporated
into
the
ICR
supporting
the
final
rule,
as
appropriate.

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
proposed
rule
requires
that
a
report
of
AAI
be
prepared
only
once
for
a
property
transaction.
This
one­
time
report
preparation
is
necessary
to
ensure
that
any
person
claiming
one
of
the
CERCLA
landowner
liability
protections
be
able
to
show
documentation
that
all
appropriate
inquiries
were
conducted
in
compliance
with
the
CERCLA
statutory
provisions,
should
such
documentation
be
required
by
a
court
of
law.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
This
ICR
adheres
to
the
guidelines
stated
in
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
of
1995,
OMB's
implementing
regulations,
EPA's
ICR
Handbook,
and
other
applicable
OMB
guidance.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
As
discussed
above,
no
reports
of
information
must
be
submitted
to
EPA
or
any
other
agency;
therefore
there
should
be
no
concerns
associated
with
confidentiality.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
No
questions
of
a
sensitive
nature
are
included
in
the
information
collection
requirement
associated
with
the
proposed
rule.

4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents
and
SIC/
NAICS
Codes
The
following
is
a
list
of
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes
associated
with
industries
most
likely
affected
by
the
information
collection
requirements
covered
in
this
ICR.
Other
industries
not
listed
in
the
exhibit
may
also
be
affected.
5
Industry
Category
NAICS
Code
Manufacturing
31­
33
Wholesale
Trade
42
Retail
Trade
44­
45
Finance
and
Insurance
52
Real
Estate
531
Professional,
Scientific
and
Technical
Services
541
Accommodation
and
Food
Services
72
Repair
and
Maintenance
811
Personal
and
Laundry
Services
812
State,
Local
and
Tribal
Government
N/
A
Respondents
are
property
purchasers
or
environmental
professionals,
as
defined
in
§
312.10
of
the
proposed
rule.
EPA's
Brownfields
Grant
recipients
were
included
in
the
total
volume
of
respondents.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
Under
40
CFR
part
312,
EPA
is
proposing
standards
and
practices
for
AAI.
To
qualify
for
liability
protection
from
CERCLA,
persons
must
follow
the
standards
and
practices
listed
under
proposed
Sections
312.20
through
312.31.
These
standards
and
practices,
and
the
data
items
and
activities
associated
with
each,
are
described
in
the
following
paragraphs.

(
1)
Interviews
with
past
and
present
owners,
operators,
and
occupants
Section
312.23
of
the
proposed
rule
contains
requirements
for
interviews
with
past
and
present
owners,
operators,
and
occupants.
EPA
also
intends
this
proposed
provision
to
be
used
to
help
ensure
that
the
information
obtained
from
the
interviews
provides
sufficient
information,
in
conjunction
with
the
results
of
all
other
inquiries,
to
allow
the
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion
with
regard
to
conditions
at
the
property
that
may
be
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
(
and
pollutants,
contaminants,
petroleum
and
controlled
substances,
if
applicable).

The
proposed
rule
would
require
the
environmental
professional's
inquiry
to
include
interviewing
the
current
owner
and
occupant
of
the
subject
property.
In
addition,
the
proposal
provides
that
the
inquiry
of
the
environmental
professional
should
include
interviews
of
additional
individuals,
including
current
and
past
facility
managers
with
relevant
knowledge
of
the
property,
past
owners,
occupants,
or
operators
of
the
subject
property,
or
employees
of
current
and
past
occupants
of
the
subject
property
as
necessary
to
meet
the
proposed
objectives
and
in
accordance
with
the
proposed
performance
standards.
A
primary
objective
of
the
interviews
portion
of
AAI
is
to
obtain
information
regarding
the
current
and
past
ownership
and
uses
of
the
property,
and
6
obtain
information
regarding
the
conditions
of
the
property.
Although
the
proposed
rule
does
not
include
specific
questions
for
the
interviews,
it
requires
that
the
interviews
be
conducted
in
a
manner
that
achieves
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors.

In
the
case
of
properties
where
there
may
be
more
than
one
owner
or
occupant,
or
many
owners
or
occupants,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
the
inquiry
to
include
interviews
of
major
occupants
and
those
occupants
that
are
using,
storing,
treating,
handling
or
disposing
(
or
are
likely
to
have
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed)
of
hazardous
substances
(
or
pollutants,
contaminants,
petroleum,
and
controlled
substances,
as
applicable)
on
the
property.
The
specific
occupants
to
be
interviewed
and
the
total
number
of
occupants
to
be
interviewed
is
left
up
to
the
best
judgment
of
the
environmental
professional.
The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
the
interview
portion
of
AAI
be
conducted
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors
in
proposed
§
§
312.20(
d)
and
(
e).

In
the
case
of
abandoned
properties,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
the
inquiry
of
the
environmental
professional
to
include
interviews
with
one
or
more
owners
or
occupants
of
neighboring
or
nearby
properties.
The
conduct
of
AAI
includes
interviewing
at
least
one
owner
or
occupant
of
a
neighboring
property
to
obtain
information
regarding
past
owners
or
uses
of
property.
The
proposed
rule
defines
an
abandoned
property
as
a
"
property
that
can
be
presumed
to
be
deserted,
or
an
intent
to
relinquish
possession
or
control
can
be
inferred
from
the
general
disrepair
or
lack
of
activity
thereon
such
that
a
reasonable
person
could
believe
that
there
was
an
intent
on
the
part
of
the
current
owner
to
surrender
rights
to
the
property."
As
is
the
case
with
interviews
conducted
with
current
and
past
owners
and
occupants
of
the
property,
interview
questions
should
be
developed
prior
to
the
conduct
of
the
interviews,
and
tailored
to
gather
information
to
achieve
the
rule's
objectives
and
performance
factors.
The
data
items
gathered
in
and
respondent
activities
associated
with
interviews
with
past
and
present
owners,
operators,
and
occupants
are
presented
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
information
regarding
the
current
and
past
ownership
and
uses
of
the
property
and
condition
of
the
property.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Interview
the
current
owner
and
occupant
of
the
subject
property;

°
Interview
one
or
more
of
the
following
persons:

­
Current
and
past
facility
managers
with
relevant
knowledge
of
uses
and
physical
characteristics
of
the
property;

­
Past
owners,
operators,
or
occupants
of
the
subject
property;
7
­
Employees
of
current
and
past
occupants
of
the
subject
property;
and
­
In
the
case
of
abandoned
properties,
as
defined
in
§
312.10,
one
or
more
(
as
necessary)
owners
or
occupants
of
neighboring
or
nearby
properties
from
which
it
appears
possible
to
have
observed
uses
of,
and
releases
at,
such
abandoned
properties.

°
Document
results
of
all
interviews.

(
2)
Reviews
of
historical
sources
of
information
The
proposed
rule,
at
proposed
§
312.24,
would
require
the
inquiry
of
the
environmental
professional
to
include
a
review
of
historical
documents
and
records
for
the
subject
property
that
document
the
ownership
and
use
of
the
property
for
a
period
of
time
as
far
back
in
the
history
of
the
property
as
it
can
be
shown
that
the
property
contained
structures,
or
from
the
time
the
property
was
first
used
for
residential,
agricultural,
commercial,
industrial,
or
government
purposes.
Historical
documents
and
records,
among
others,
may
include
chain
of
title
documents,
land
use
records,
aerial
photographs
of
the
property,
fire
insurance
maps,
and
records
held
at
local
historical
societies.
Records
must
be
searched
for
information
on
the
property
covering
a
time
period
as
far
back
in
history
as
there
is
documentation
that
the
property
contained
structures
or
was
placed
into
use
of
some
form.
Historical
documents
and
information
should
be
reviewed
to
obtain
information
relevant
to
all
of
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
standards
of
proposed
§
§
312.20(
d)
and
(
e).
If
a
search
of
historical
sources
of
information
results
in
an
inability
of
the
inquiry
to
document
previous
uses
and
occupancies
of
the
property
as
far
back
in
history
as
there
is
documentation
that
the
property
contained
structures
or
was
placed
into
use
of
some
form
and
such
information
cannot
be
addressed
through
the
implementation
of
other
inquiries
or
regulatory
criteria,
then
the
unavailable
information
should
be
documented
as
a
data
gap
to
the
inquiries.
The
proposed
requirements
of
§
312.20(
f)
and
§
312.21(
c)(
2)
are
applicable
to
all
instances
in
the
AAI
that
result
in
data
gaps.

The
proposed
rule
would
not
require
that
any
specific
type
of
historical
information
be
collected.
The
proposed
rule
would
allow
the
purchaser
or
environmental
professional
to
use
professional
judgment
as
to
what
type
of
historical
documentation
may
provide
the
most
useful
information
about
a
property's
ownership,
uses,
and
potential
environmental
conditions.
EPA
is
proposing
that
the
review
of
historical
documents
requirement
allow
the
purchaser
and
environmental
professional
to
use
their
judgment,
in
accordance
with
generally
accepted
good
commercial
and
customary
standards
and
practices,
in
locating
the
best
available
sources
of
historical
information
and
reviewing
such
sources
for
information
necessary
to
comply
with
the
rule's
objectives
and
performance
factors.
The
data
items
gathered
and
respondent
activities
encountered
in
reviews
of
historical
sources
of
information
are
presented
below.
8
Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
previous
uses
and
occupancies
of
the
property
as
indicated
in
historical
documents.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Search
for
and
review
historical
documents
and
records
including,
but
not
limited
to,
aerial
photographs,
fire
insurance
maps,
building
department
records,
chain
of
title
documents,
and
land
use
records;
and
°
Document
the
previous
uses
and
occupancies
of
the
property.

(
3)
Search
for
recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens
For
purposes
of
this
rule,
recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens
are
encumbrances
on
property
for
the
recovery
of
incurred
cleanup
costs
on
the
part
of
a
state,
tribal,
or
Federal
government
agency
or
other
third
party.
Recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens
often
provide
an
indication
that
environmental
conditions
currently
or
previously
existed
on
a
property
that
may
have
included
the
release
or
threatened
release
of
a
hazardous
substance.
The
existence
of
an
environmental
cleanup
lien
should
be
used
as
an
indicator
of
potential
environmental
concerns
and
as
a
basis
for
further
investigation
into
the
potential
existence
of
ongoing
or
continued
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property.

EPA
is
proposing
at
§
312.25
that
the
search
for
recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens
be
performed
either
by
the
purchaser
or
through
the
inquiry
of
the
environmental
professional.
The
search
for
such
liens
may
not
necessarily
require
the
expertise
of
an
environmental
professional
and
therefore
may
be
more
efficiently
or
more
cost­
effectively
performed
by
the
purchaser
or
an
agent
of
the
purchaser.
Such
liens
may
be
included
as
part
of
the
chain
of
title
documents
or
may
be
recorded
in
some
other
format
by
state
or
local
government
agencies.
If
such
information
is
collected
by
the
purchaser
or
other
agent
of
the
purchaser,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
that
any
information
on
environmental
cleanup
liens
that
is
collected
on
the
part
of
the
purchaser
be
provided
to
the
environmental
professional.
The
environmental
professional
can
then
make
use
of
such
information
during
the
conduct
of
the
AAI
and
when
rendering
conclusions
or
opinions
regarding
the
environmental
conditions
of
the
property.
The
data
items
and
respondent
activities
for
a
search
for
recorded
environmental
cleanup
liens
are
presented
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
any
environmental
liens
on
the
property.
9
Respondent
Activities:

°
Search
for
the
existence
of
environmental
cleanup
liens
against
the
property
that
are
filed
or
recorded
under
Federal,
tribal,
state
or
local
law;
and
°
Document
existence
of
any
environmental
cleanup
liens
on
the
property.

(
4)
Review
Federal,
state,
tribal,
and
local
government
records
The
proposed
rule,
at
proposed
§
312.26,
would
require
that
Federal,
state,
tribal,
and
local
government
records
be
searched
for
information
necessary
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors,
including
information
regarding
the
use
and
occupancy
of
and
the
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property
and
conditions
of
nearby
or
adjoining
properties
that
could
have
an
impact
upon
the
environmental
conditions
of
the
subject
property.
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.26(
b),
requires
that
Federal,
tribal,
state,
and
local
government
records
be
searched
for
information
indicative
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property.
The
types
of
government
records
or
data
bases
of
records
searched
should
include:

°
Government
records
of
reported
releases
or
threatened
releases
at
the
subject
property,
including
previously
conducted
site
investigation
reports.

°
Government
records
of
activities,
conditions,
or
incidents
likely
to
cause
or
contribute
to
releases
or
threatened
releases,
including
records
documenting
regulatory
permits
that
were
issued
to
current
or
previous
owners
or
operators
at
the
property
for
waste
management
activities
and
government
records
that
identify
the
subject
property
as
the
location
of
landfills,
storage
tanks,
or
as
the
location
for
generating
and
handling
activities
for
hazardous
substances,
pollutants,
contaminants,
petroleum
or
controlled
substances.

°
CERCLIS
records
 
EPA's
Comprehensive
Environmental
Response,
Compensation,
and
Liability
Information
System
(
CERCLIS)
database
contains
general
information
on
sites
across
the
nation
and
in
the
U.
S.
territories
that
have
been
assessed
by
EPA,
including
sites
listed
on
the
National
Priorities
List
(
NPL).
CERCLIS
includes
information
on
facility
location,
status,
contaminants,
and
actions
taken
at
particular
sites.
CERCLIS
also
contains
information
on
sites
being
assessed
under
the
Superfund
Program,
hazardous
waste
sites
and
potential
hazardous
waste
sites.

°
Government­
maintained
records
of
public
risks
(
if
available)
 
the
AAI
government
records
search
should
include
a
search
for
available
records
documenting
public
health
threats
or
concerns
caused
by,
or
related
to,
activities
currently
or
previously
conducted
at
the
site.
10
°
Emergency
Response
Notification
System
(
ERNS)
records
­
ERNS
is
EPA's
data
base
of
oil
and
hazardous
substance
spill
reports.
The
data
base
can
be
searched
for
information
on
reported
spills
of
oil
and
hazardous
substances
by
state.

°
Government
registries,
or
publicly
available
lists
of
engineering
controls,
institutional
controls,
and
land
use
restrictions.
The
AAI
government
records
search
must
include
a
search
for
registries
or
publicly
available
lists
of
recorded
engineering
and
institutional
controls
and
recorded
land
use
restrictions.
Such
records
may
be
useful
in
identifying
past
releases
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property
or
identifying
continuing
environment
conditions
at
the
property.

In
the
case
of
all
the
government
records
listed
above,
the
requirements
of
this
criterion
may
be
met
by
searching
data
bases
containing
the
same
government
records
mentioned
in
the
list
above
that
are
accessible
and
available
through
government
entities
or
private
sources.
The
review
of
actual
records
is
not
necessary,
provided
that
the
same
information
contained
in
the
government
records
and
required
to
meet
the
requirements
of
this
criterion
and
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
standards
for
these
regulations
is
attainable
by
searching
available
data
bases.

In
addition
to
reviewing
government
records,
or
databases
of
information
contained
in
government
records,
for
information
about
the
subject
property,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
that
government
records
for
nearby
and
adjoining
properties
be
reviewed
to
assess
the
potential
impact
to
the
subject
property
from
hazardous
substances
and
petroleum
contamination
migrating
from
contiguous
or
nearby
properties.
The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
government
records
be
searched
to
identify
information
relative
to
the
proposed
objectives
and
in
accordance
with
the
performance
factors
on:
(
1)
adjoining
and
nearby
properties
for
which
there
are
governmental
records
of
reported
releases
or
threatened
releases
(
e.
g.,
properties
currently
listed
on
the
National
Priorities
List
(
NPL),
properties
subject
to
corrective
action
orders
under
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA),
properties
with
reported
releases
from
leaking
underground
storage
tanks);
(
2)
adjoining
and
nearby
properties
previously
identified
or
regulated
by
a
government
entity
due
to
environmental
conditions
at
a
site
(
e.
g.,
properties
previously
listed
on
the
NPL,
former
CERCLIS
sites
with
notices
of
no
further
remedial
action);
and
(
3)
adjoining
and
nearby
properties
that
have
government­
issued
permits
to
conduct
waste
management
activities
(
e.
g.,
facilities
permitted
to
manage
RCRA
hazardous
wastes).

In
the
case
of
government
records
searches
for
nearby
properties,
the
proposed
rule
(
at
§
312.26(
c))
includes
minimum
search
distances
for
obtaining
and
reviewing
records
or
data
bases
concerning
activities
and
facilities
located
on
nearby
properties.
For
nearby
properties,
the
proposed
rule
includes
proposed
minimum
search
distances
(
e.
g.,
properties
located
either
within
one
mile
or
one
half
mile
of
the
subject
property)
for
each
type
of
record
to
be
searched
to
facilitate
defining
the
scope
of
the
records
searches.
In
the
case
of
two
types
of
records,
records
of
RCRA
small
quantity
and
large
quantity
generators
and
records
of
registered
storage
tanks,
the
AAI
search
need
only
identify
RCRA
generators
and
storage
tanks
located
on
adjoining
properties
11
(
the
proposal
contains
no
requirement
to
search
for
these
two
types
of
government
records
for
other
nearby
properties).
The
proposed
rule
would
allow
for
the
environmental
professional
to
adjust
any
or
all
of
the
proposed
minimum
search
distances
for
any
of
the
record
types,
based
upon
professional
judgment
and
the
consideration
of
site­
specific
conditions
or
circumstances.
The
proposed
rule
provides
that
the
environmental
professional
may
consider
one
or
more
of
the
following
factors
when
determining
an
alternative
appropriate
search
distance:

°
The
nature
and
extent
of
a
release;

°
geologic,
hydrogeologic,
or
topographic
conditions
of
the
subject
property
and
surrounding
environment;

°
land
use
or
development
densities;

°
the
property
type;

°
existing
or
past
uses
of
surrounding
properties;

°
potential
migration
pathways
(
e.
g.,
groundwater
flow
direction,
prevalent
wind
direction);
or
°
other
relevant
factors.

The
proposed
rule
would
require
environmental
professionals
to
document
the
rationale
for
making
any
modifications
to
the
required
minimum
search
distances
included
in
the
proposed
regulation.
The
data
items
and
activities
associated
with
reviews
of
Federal,
state,
local
and
tribal
government
records
are
described
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
information
indicative
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property;
and
°
Documentation
of
instances
where
alternative
search
distances
are
used.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Search
Federal,
tribal,
state,
and
local
government
records
for
information
indicative
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property;
and
°
Document
any
environmental
information
on
the
property
found
in
these
records.
12
(
5)
Visually
inspect
the
facility
and
adjoining
properties
(
a)
Visual
inspections
of
the
subject
property
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.27,
would
require
that
a
visual
on­
site
inspection
be
conducted
of
the
subject
property.
The
proposed
visual
on­
site
inspection
requirements
include
inspecting
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
visually
inspecting
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
of.
Included
in
the
proposed
rule
is
a
requirement
that
a
visual
onsite
inspection
of
the
subject
property
be
conducted
in
all
but
a
few
very
limited
cases
and
that
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
on­
site
inspection
(
e.
g.,
weather
conditions,
physical
obstructions)
be
documented.

We
note
that
persons
conducting
AAI
with
grant
money
awarded
under
CERCLA
§
104(
k)(
2)(
B)
must,
during
the
on­
site
visual
inspection,
inspect
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
visually
inspect
any
other
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed.
In
addition,
depending
on
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
grant
or
cooperative
agreement,
the
on­
site
visual
inspection
requirements
could
include
inspecting
the
facilities,
improvements,
and
other
areas
of
the
property
where
pollutants,
contaminants,
petroleum
and
petroleum
products,
or
controlled
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed.

The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
where
access
to
the
property
is
not
readily
available,
the
purchaser
make
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
the
property.
In
addition,
the
proposal
notes
that
the
mere
refusal
of
a
property
owner
to
allow
the
purchaser
to
have
access
to
the
property
does
not
constitute
an
unusual
circumstance,
absent
the
making
of
good
faith
efforts
to
otherwise
gain
access.
The
proposed
rule,
at
proposed
§
312.10,
would
define
"
good
faith"
as
"
the
absence
of
any
intention
to
seek
an
unfair
advantage
or
to
defraud
another
party;
an
honest
and
sincere
intention
to
fulfill
one's
obligations
in
the
conduct
or
transaction
concerned."

In
those
unusual
circumstances
where
a
purchaser
or
an
environmental
professional,
after
good
faith
efforts,
cannot
gain
access
to
a
property
and
therefore
cannot
conduct
an
on­
site
visual
inspection,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
that
the
property
be
visually
inspected,
or
observed,
by
another
method,
such
as
through
the
use
of
aerial
photography,
or
be
inspected,
or
observed,
from
the
nearest
accessible
vantage
point,
such
as
the
property
line
or
a
public
road
that
runs
through
or
along
the
property.
In
addition,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
that
the
AAI
report
includes
documentation
of
efforts
undertaken
by
the
purchaser
or
the
environmental
professional
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
subject
property
and
includes
an
explanation
of
why
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
subject
property
were
unsuccessful.
The
proposed
rule
also
would
require
that
the
AAI
report
include
documentation
of
other
sources
of
information
that
were
consulted
to
obtain
information
necessary
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors.
This
documentation
should
include
comments
from
the
environmental
professional
who
13
signs
the
report,
regarding
any
significant
limitations
to
the
ability
of
the
environmental
professional
to
identify
conditions
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property,
that
may
arise
due
to
the
inability
of
the
purchaser
or
environmental
professional
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
property.
The
data
items
and
respondent
activities
for
visual
inspections
of
the
subject
property
are
presented
below.

Data
Item:

°
Document
results
of
inspection
of
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
of;

°
Document
any
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
on­
site
inspection
(
e.
g.,
weather
conditions,
physical
obstructions);

°
In
cases
where
access
to
the
property
cannot
be
obtained,
documentation
of
efforts
undertaken
by
the
purchaser
or
the
environmental
professional
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
subject
property
and
includes
an
explanation
of
why
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
subject
property
were
unsuccessful;
and
°
In
cases
where
access
to
the
property
cannot
be
obtained,
documentation
of
visual
inspection
or
observation
of
the
property
by
other
methods.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Visually
inspect
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
of;

°
Document
the
results
of
visual
inspections
of
the
property;

°
In
cases
where
ready
access
to
the
property
cannot
be
obtained,
make
good
faith
efforts
to
obtain
access
to
the
property;

°
In
cases
where
access
cannot
be
obtained
and
the
property
cannot
be
visually
inspected,
visually
inspect
or
observe
the
property
by
another
method,
such
as
through
the
use
of
aerial
photography
or
from
the
nearest
accessible
vantage
point,
such
as
the
property
line
or
a
public
road
that
runs
through
or
along
the
property;

°
Document
efforts
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
subject
property
and
include
an
explanation
of
why
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
subject
property
were
unsuccessful;
and
14
°
Document
other
sources
of
information
that
were
consulted
to
obtain
information
necessary
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors.

(
b)
Visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
The
proposed
rule,
at
proposed
§
312.27,
would
require
that
AAI
include
visual
inspections
or
observations
of
properties
that
adjoin
the
subject
property.
Visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
may
provide
useful
information
on
the
potential
for
the
subject
property
to
be
affected
by
migrating
contamination
from
adjoining
properties.
EPA
is
proposing
that
visual
observations
of
adjoining
properties
be
conducted
from
the
subject
property's
property
line,
one
or
more
public
rights­
of­
way,
or
other
vantage
point
(
e.
g.,
via
aerial
photography).
Where
practicable,
a
visual
on­
site
inspection
is
recommended
and
may
provide
greater
specificity
of
information.
The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
the
visual
observations
of
adjoining
properties
include
observing
areas
where
hazardous
substances
currently
may
be,
or
previously
may
have
been,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed.
Visual
inspections
or
observations
of
adjoining
properties
otherwise
also
should
be
conducted
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
goals
for
AAI.
Physical
limitations
to
the
visual
inspections
or
observations
of
adjoining
properties
should
be
noted.
The
data
items
and
respondent
activities
for
visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
are
as
follows.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
results
of
visual
inspection
of
adjoining
properties
and
any
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
inspection
or
observation
of
the
adjoining
properties.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Visually
inspect
adjoining
properties,
including
observing
areas
where
hazardous
substances
currently
may
be,
or
previously
may
have
been,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed;
and
°
Document
results
of
visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
and
any
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
inspections
or
observations
of
adjoining
properties.

(
6)
Inclusion
of
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
on
the
part
of
the
defendant
The
proposed
rule,
at
proposed
§
312.28,
would
require
that
AAI
include
specialized
knowledge
on
the
part
of
the
prospective
purchaser
of
the
subject
property,
the
area
surrounding
the
subject
property,
the
conditions
of
adjoining
properties,
as
well
as
other
experience
relative
to
the
inquiries
that
may
be
applicable
to
identifying
conditions
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
at
the
subject
property.
The
proposed
rule
also
would
require
that
the
results
of
the
inquiries
take
into
account
any
specialized
knowledge
related
to
the
property,
surrounding
areas,
15
and
adjoining
properties
held
by
the
persons
responsible
for
undertaking
the
inquiries,
including
any
specialized
knowledge
on
the
part
of
the
environmental
professional.
Each
data
item
and
respondent
activities
associated
with
inclusion
of
specialized
knowledge
is
described
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
any
of
the
prospective
purchaser's
and
the
environmental
professional's
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
relating
to
the
subject
property,
the
area
surrounding
the
subject
property,
the
conditions
of
adjoining
properties,
and
other
experience
relative
to
the
inquiries
that
may
be
applicable
to
identifying
conditions
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
at
the
subject
property.

Respondent
Activity:

°
Document
any
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
of
the
prospective
purchaser.
(
7)
Relationship
of
purchase
price
to
the
value
of
the
property
if
the
property
was
not
contaminated
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.29,
would
require
that
the
purchaser
of
the
property
consider
whether
or
not
the
purchase
price
paid
for
the
property
reflects
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property,
if
the
property
were
not
contaminated.
The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
the
purchaser
consider
whether
any
differential
between
the
purchase
price
and
the
value
of
the
property
is
due
to
the
presence
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
at
the
property.

The
proposed
rule
does
not
require
that
a
real
estate
appraisal
be
conducted
to
achieve
compliance
with
this
criterion.
The
required
determination
may
be
made
by
comparing
the
price
paid
for
a
particular
property
to
prices
paid
for
similar
properties
located
in
the
same
vicinity
as
the
subject
property,
or
by
consulting
a
real
estate
expert
familiar
with
properties
in
the
general
locality
and
who
may
be
able
to
provide
a
comparability
analysis.
Significant
differences
in
the
purchase
price
and
market
value
of
a
property
should
be
noted
and
the
reasons
for
any
differences
should
be
noted.
Data
items
and
respondent
activities
for
determining
the
relationship
of
purchase
price
to
value
of
property
are
listed
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
any
difference
between
purchase
price
and
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property,
assuming
the
property
is
not
contaminated
and
whether
any
difference
is
due
to
the
presence
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
at
the
property.

Respondent
Activities:
16
°
Determine
prices
paid
for
similar
properties
located
in
the
same
vicinity
of
the
subject
property
or
contact
a
real
estate
expert
who
can
perform
a
comparison;
and
°
Compare
and
document
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property
to
the
purchase
price
paid
and
note
any
differences
and
possible
reasons
for
the
difference.

(
8)
Document
commonly
known
or
reasonably
ascertainable
information
about
the
property
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.30,
would
require
landowners,
EPA's
Brownfields
Grant
recipients,
and
environmental
professionals
conducting
the
AAI
investigation
to
consider
commonly
known
information
about
the
potential
environmental
conditions
at
a
property.
Commonly
known
information
generally
is
information
available
in
the
local
community
that
may
be
ascertained
from
the
owner
or
occupant
of
a
property,
members
of
the
local
community,
including
owners
or
occupants
of
neighboring
properties
to
the
subject
property,
local
or
state
government
officials,
local
media
sources,
and
local
libraries
and
historical
societies.
Much
of
this
information
may
be
incidental
to
other
information
collected
during
the
inquiries,
but
such
information
may
be
valuable
to
identifying
conditions
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
at
the
subject
property.

The
collection
and
use
of
commonly
known
information
about
a
property
should
be
done
in
connection
with
the
collection
of
all
other
required
information
for
the
purposes
of
achieving
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors
contained
in
proposed
§
312.20.
EPA
recommends
that
persons
undertaking
AAI
make
efforts
to
collect
information
on
the
subject
property
from
a
variety
of
sources,
including
sources
located
in
the
community
in
which
the
property
is
located,
to
the
extent
necessary
to
achieve
the
objectives
and
performance
factors
of
§
312.20(
d)
and
(
e).
Opinions
included
in
the
AAI
report
should
be
based
upon
a
balance
of
all
information
collected.
All
information
collected,
including
information
available
from
the
local
community,
should
be
considered
in
the
final
evaluation.
The
data
item
and
respondent
activities
associated
with
documentation
of
commonly
known
or
reasonably
ascertainable
information
about
the
property
are
listed
below.

Data
Item:

°
Documentation
of
commonly
known
or
reasonable
ascertainable
information
about
potential
environmental
conditions
at
the
property.

Respondent
Activities:

°
During
the
course
of
collection
of
information
under
other
AAI
activities,
document
information
about
environmental
conditions
at
the
property;
and
17
°
Consider
the
information
in
the
final
evaluation
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
property.

(
9)
Document
degree
of
obviousness
of
the
presence
of
or
likely
presence
of
contamination
at
the
property
and
the
ability
to
detect
the
contamination
by
appropriate
investigation
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.31,
would
require
that
persons
conducting
the
AAI
activities
consider
all
the
information
collected
during
the
conduct
of
the
inquiries
in
totality
to
ascertain
the
potential
presence
of
a
release
or
threatened
release
at
the
property.
Persons
conducting
AAI,
following
the
collection
of
all
required
information,
should
be
able
to
assess
whether
or
not
an
obvious
conclusion
may
be
drawn
that
there
is
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
(
or
other
substances,
pollutants
or
contaminants)
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property.
In
addition,
the
proposed
rule
would
require
parties
to
consider
whether
or
not
the
totality
of
information
collected
prior
to
acquiring
the
property
indicates
that
the
parties
should
be
able
to
detect
a
release
or
threatened
release
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property.
Listed
below
are
the
respondent
activities
associated
with
documenting
the
degree
of
obviousness
of
the
presence
of
or
likely
presence
of
contamination
at
the
property
and
the
ability
to
detect
the
contamination
by
appropriate
investigation.

Data
Item:

°
No
data
items
are
collected
specifically
for
this
activity.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Consider
all
of
the
information
collected
in
the
above
AAI
investigation
activities;

°
Assess
whether
or
not
an
obvious
conclusion
may
be
drawn
that
there
is
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property;
and
°
Consider
whether
the
information
gathered
indicates
that
parties
should
be
able
to
detect
a
release
or
threatened
release
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property.

(
10)
Prepare
a
report
of
all
appropriate
inquiries
The
proposed
rule
would
require
that
a
written
report
documenting
the
results
of
the
AAI
include
an
opinion
of
an
environmental
professional
as
to
whether
the
AAI
conducted
identified
conditions
indicative
of
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in
or
to
the
subject
property.
The
proposed
rule
also
would
require
that
the
report
identify
data
gaps
in
the
information
collected
that
affect
the
ability
of
the
environmental
professional
to
render
such
an
opinion
or
determine
the
significance
of
data
gaps.
18
The
proposed
rule,
at
§
312.21(
d),
would
require
that
the
environmental
professional
who
conducts
or
oversees
the
AAI
sign
the
written
report.
The
data
item
and
respondent
activities
associated
with
preparation
of
a
report
of
AAI
are
described
below.

Data
Item:

°
Written
and
signed
report
documenting
the
results
of
AAI
activities.

Respondent
Activities:

°
Write
a
report
summarizing
the
documentation
and
results
of
AAI
activities;

°
Identify
in
the
report
any
data
gaps
that
affect
the
ability
of
an
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion
on
conditions
that
indicate
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property;
and
°
Sign
the
report
and
include
the
two
statements
required
in
§
312.21(
d).

5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
 
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
There
are
no
Agency
activities
associated
with
the
information
collection
requirements
for
new
practices
and
standards
for
AAI.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
All
of
the
information
collected
under
the
proposed
listing
would
be
maintained
in
a
written
report
kept
by
the
purchaser
for
purposes
of
documenting
that
the
AAI
activities
were
conducted
for
establishing
an
innocent
landowner
defense
or
for
the
purposes
of
claiming
the
bona
fide
prospective
purchaser
or
contiguous
property
owner
liability
protection,
if
needed.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
For
the
purposes
of
assessing
the
impacts
of
the
proposed
rule
on
small
entities,
small
entity
is
defined
as:
(
1)
a
small
business
that
is
defined
by
the
Small
Business
Administration
by
category
of
business
using
the
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
and
codified
at
13
CFR
121.201;
(
2)
a
small
governmental
jurisdiction
that
is
a
government
of
a
city,
county,
town,
school
district
or
special
district
with
a
population
of
less
than
50,000;
and
(
3)
a
19
2
In
the
EIA,
the
average
incremental
cost
per
ESA
is
estimated
as
a
range.
The
incremental
cost
presented
in
this
ICR
represents
the
upper
bound
of
the
estimated
range.
small
organization
that
is
any
not­
for­
profit
enterprise
which
is
independently
owned
and
operated
and
is
not
dominant
in
its
field.

Because
all
non­
residential
property
transactions
could
be
affected
by
the
proposed
rule,
large
numbers
of
small
entities
could
be
affected
to
some
degree.
However,
EPA
estimates
that
the
effects,
on
the
whole,
will
not
be
significant
for
small
entities.
The
"
Economic
Impact
Analysis
of
the
Proposed
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
Regulation
(
EIA)"
estimated
that
for
the
majority
of
small
firms
the
cost
of
conducting
a
Phase
I
ESA
would
increase,
on
average,
by
$
47.2
For
the
small
percentage
of
entities
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
to
Phase
I
ESAs,
the
average
cost
increase
per
ESA
would
be
$
1,454.
Annualizing
the
incremental
cost
per
property
transaction
over
10
years
at
a
seven
percent
discount
rate
produces
an
estimate
for
the
average
annual
cost
increase
per
establishment
per
property
transaction.
For
the
majority
of
small
entities,
the
average
annual
cost
increase
per
establishment
per
property
transaction
would
be
$
7.
For
the
small
percentage
of
properties
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
to
Phase
I
ESAs,
the
average
annual
cost
increase
per
establishment
per
property
transaction
would
be
$
207.
Thus,
the
cost
impact
to
small
entities
is
not
estimated
to
be
significant.
A
more
detailed
summary
of
the
analysis
of
the
potential
impacts
of
the
proposed
rule
to
small
entities
is
included
in
the
EIA.

Although
the
proposed
rule
will
not
have
a
significant
economic
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities,
EPA
nonetheless
considered
impacts
to
small
entities
in
the
development
of
the
rule.
As
described
in
Section
II.
F
of
the
preamble,
EPA
developed
the
proposed
rule
using
a
negotiated
rulemaking
committee.
The
interests
of
small
entities,
including
small
businesses
and
small
communities,
were
represented
on
the
Negotiated
Rulemaking
Committee
for
All
Appropriate
Inquiries.
Committee
members
representing
small
entities,
including
representatives
from
small
environmental
services
firms
and
representatives
from
organizations
representing
small
and
rural
communities,
participated
in
each
meeting
of
the
Committee.
The
proposed
rule
includes
provisions
that
are
the
direct
result
of
input
from
these
representatives
to
the
Committee.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
Under
the
proposed
rule,
persons
and
businesses
purchasing
commercial
property
or
any
property
that
will
be
used
for
commercial
purposes
and
who
may,
after
purchasing
the
property,
want
or
need
to
claim
protection
from
CERCLA
liability
for
releases
or
threatened
releases
of
hazardous
substances
will
have
to
perform
and
document
AAI
and
prepare
a
written
report
before
purchase
of
the
property.
The
environmental
professional
who
conducts
or
oversees
AAI
must
sign
the
report
and
include
two
statements,
as
proposed
in
§
312.21(
d).
20
6.
ESTIMATING
THE
HOUR
AND
COST
BURDEN
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
Hours
Many
of
the
activities
included
in
the
AAI
rule
are
part
of
customary
and
usual
business
practices.
The
activities
that
would
be
required
under
the
proposed
rule
are
much
the
same
activities
as
those
currently
undertaken
when
conducting
due
diligence
in
accordance
with
the
commonly
used
ASTM
E1527­
2000
Phase
I
Environmental
Site
Assessment
Standard.
The
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
is
widely
and
routinely
used
as
a
due
diligence
tool
for
commercial
property
transactions.
As
described
in
the
EIA,
persons
and
businesses
have
been
performing
Phase
I
ESAs
using
the
ASTM
standard
for
years
for
the
purposes
of
securing
a
mortgage
and
obtaining
environmental
insurance,
as
well
as
to
qualify
for
the
CERCLA
innocent
landowner
defense.
Therefore,
many
of
the
activities
included
in
the
proposed
rule
are
activities
that
are
part
of
standard
customary
and
usual
business
practices
and
do
not
represent
incremental
costs
or
burdens
to
the
regulated
community.

Although
the
most
common
AAI
process
conducted
as
part
of
typical
commercial
real
estate
transactions
is
the
current
ASTM
E1527
Phase
I
Environmental
Site
Assessment
Standard,
this
standard
is
not
used
for
assessing
all
commercial
properties.
For
properties
where
a
purchaser
has
reason
to
believe
that
property
is
not
contaminated
a
less
stringent
and
less
costly
assessment
tool
often
was
used
in
the
past.
This
process,
often
called
a
"
transaction
screen"
may
involve
only
a
site
visit
and
a
search
for
and
review
of
property­
specific
documents
and
some
government
records.
The
"
transaction
screen"
often
was
deemed
sufficient
for
undeveloped
properties
or
properties
where
a
prospective
buyer
has
reason
to
believe
that
no
adverse
environmental
conditions
exist
at
the
site.
The
process
that
was
most
prevalently
used
to
conduct
transaction
screens
for
commercial
properties
is
the
ASTM
E1528
standard.

As
part
of
the
Brownfields
Amendments
to
CERCLA,
Congress
established
interim
standards
for
AAI
and
provided
that
the
interim
standards
will
remain
in
effect
until
EPA
promulgates
final
federal
standards.
For
properties
purchased
after
May
31,
1997,
the
interim
standard
established
by
Congress
is
the
current
ASTM
E1527
standard.
Since
January
11,
2002,
any
prospective
property
owner
seeking
to
qualify
for
the
innocent
landowner
defense,
the
contiguous
property
owner
liability
protection,
or
to
qualify
as
a
bona
fide
prospective
purchaser
must
conduct
AAI
using
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
prior
to
acquiring
a
property.
The
less
stringent
transaction
screen
(
ASTM
E1528)
is
not
an
interim
standard
and
does
not
meet
the
requirements
for
obtaining
the
CERCLA
liability
protections.

In
Exhibit
1,
EPA
estimates
the
respondents'
incremental
hourly
burden
associated
with
the
new
paperwork
requirements
that
would
result
from
standards
and
practices
included
in
the
proposed
rule
that
go
beyond
the
customary
and
usual
business
practices
of
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard.
Exhibit
2
estimates
the
respondents'
incremental
hourly
burden
associated
with
the
new
paperwork
requirements
that
would
result
from
the
proposed
rule
for
those
parties
currently
using
the
transaction
screen
(
ASTM
E1528)
to
assess
property
prior
to
purchase.
21
3
The
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS)
2002
national
employment
and
wage
data
from
the
Occupational
Employment
Statistics
Survey
by
Occupation
is
available
at
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
news.
release/
ocwage.
t01.
htm.
For
the
purpose
of
this
ICR,
EPA
used
specific
labor
categories
as
defined
by
the
BLS.
The
managerial
labor
category
corresponds
to
the
environmental
engineer
labor
category.
The
technical
staff
labor
category
corresponds
to
the
environmental
scientist
and
specialist
(
including
health)
labor
category.
The
clerical
staff
labor
category
corresponds
to
the
administrative
assistant
(
secretaries,
except
legal,
medical,
and
executive)
labor
category.
4
The
fringe
benefits
factor
of
39
percent
was
calculated
using
the
BLS
data
from
Employer
Cost
for
Employee
Compensation,
Civilian
Workers
in
Private
Industry
(
December
2002),
now
available
at
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
news.
release/
archives/
ecec_
03182003.
pdf.
The
overhead
factor
was
calculated
using
the
data
from
the
7th
Annual
Government
Contractor
Industry
Survey:
Pulse
of
Vital
Industry,
Grant
Thornton,
2001.
The
derived
overhead
factor
of
59
percent
represents
a
weighted
average
factor
and
accounts
for
the
variation
in
overhead
factors
across
companies
of
different
sizes.
Both
exhibits
include
burden
hours
(
total
and
by
labor
type)
per
respondent,
as
well
as
the
overall
burden
hours
for
all
respondents.

In
an
effort
to
estimate
the
labor
hour
burden
and
costs
per
respondent
more
accurately,
we
separated
Phase
I
ESAs
into
individual
labor
activities
and
estimated
the
labor
time
and
O&
M
costs
associated
with
each
labor
activity.
Each
of
the
activities,
except
reading
the
regulation,
is
performed
every
time
a
Phase
I
ESA
is
conducted.
Therefore,
the
number
of
responses
per
year
covered
under
this
ICR
is
the
number
of
Phase
I
ESAs
performed
annually.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
EPA
estimates
the
annual
respondent
costs
associated
with
the
new
paperwork
requirements
in
Exhibits
1
and
2.
These
costs
are
based
on
the
cost
of
labor
and
operation
and
maintenance
(
O&
M).

Labor
Costs
For
purposes
of
this
analysis,
EPA
estimates
an
average
hourly
respondent
labor
cost
(
including
fringe
and
overhead)
of
$
67.00
for
managerial
staff,
$
51.90
for
technical
staff,
and
$
27.60
for
clerical
staff.
As
discussed
in
the
economic
impact
analysis
for
the
proposed
rule,
the
unit
labor
cost
by
occupation
was
calculated
using
the
median
national
wage
rate
from
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS)
2002
national
employment
and
wage
estimates.
The
BLS
estimates
are
based
on
the
Occupational
Employment
Statistics
Survey
by
Occupation.
3
The
rates
are
expressed
in
2003
dollars
using
the
BLS
employment
cost
index
for
wages
and
salaries
in
services.
The
rates
are
loaded
with
fringe
at
39
percent
(
the
BLS
average
national
fringe
estimate)
and
overhead
at
59
percent
of
total
compensation.
4
Using
the
total
burden
hours
discussed
in
Section
6(
a)
and
the
hourly
wage
rates
outlined
in
this
section,
Exhibits
1
and
2
illustrate
the
labor
costs
associated
with
the
information
collection
requirements
covered
in
this
ICR.
22
Capital
Costs
Capital
costs
usually
include
any
produced
physical
good
needed
to
provide
the
needed
information,
such
as
machinery,
computers,
and
other
equipment.
EPA
does
not
anticipate
that
respondents
will
incur
capital
costs
in
carrying
out
the
information
collection
requirements
covered
in
this
ICR.

Operation
&
Maintenance
Costs
O&
M
costs
are
those
costs
associated
with
a
paperwork
requirement
incurred
continually
over
the
life
of
the
ICR.
They
are
defined
by
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
of
1995
as
"
the
recurring
dollar
amount
of
costs
associated
with
O&
M
or
purchasing
services."
For
this
ICR,
O&
M
costs
include
incidental
photocopying/
reproducing
and
mailing
costs.
These
O&
M
costs
are
shown
in
Exhibits
1,
2
and
3.

6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
As
stated
earlier,
there
are
no
Agency
activities
associated
with
the
new
information
collection
requirements
for
AAI
standards
and
practices.
All
information
collected
during
an
environmental
site
assessment
and
the
prepared
written
report
are
to
be
kept
by
the
respondent.
Thus,
there
is
no
Agency
burden
or
cost
associated
with
this
proposed
rule.

6(
d)
Estimating
the
Annual
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
In
this
section,
EPA
first
describes
the
respondent
universe
affected
by
the
new
information
collection
requirements
resulting
from
the
proposed
standards
and
practices
for
AAI.
Exhibit
1
displays
the
burden
associated
with
transitioning
from
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
to
the
standards
in
the
AAI
proposed
rule,
and
Exhibit
2
displays
the
burden
incurred
in
transitioning
to
the
proposed
rule
requirements
from
transaction
screens.
EPA
then
estimates
the
annual
aggregate
burden
to
respondents
under
the
proposed
rule.

The
universe
estimates
and
assumptions
used
in
the
development
of
this
ICR
are
based
on
the
economic
impact
analysis
prepared
for
the
proposed
rule.

Respondent
Universe
Table
1
presents
the
annual
number
of
respondents
transitioning
to
the
proposed
AAI
standards
and
practices
from
the
ASTM
Phase
I
ESAs
and
from
transaction
screens.
It
shows
that
EPA
expects
an
average
annual
total
of
271,669
respondents
to
perform
the
AAI
Phase
I
ESA
under
the
proposed
rule.
Of
these,
8,150
respondents
are
expected
to
transition
from
23
5
EPA
assumed
that
three
percent
of
Phase
I
ESAs
are
transitioning
from
transaction
screens.
The
EIA
prepared
for
the
proposed
rule
provides
more
detail
about
the
method
used
for
calculating
the
number
of
respondents.
6
As
of
the
writing
of
this
ICR,
Environmental
Data
Resources
(
EDR),
Inc.
is
likely
the
only
firm
collecting
data
characterizing
the
Phase
I
ESA
industry
on
a
continuing
and
systematic
basis
at
the
national
level.
The
most
recent
publicly
available
source
of
information
on
Phase
I
ESA
industry
is
the
Benchmarking
Survey
of
Environmental
Professionals:
Nuts
and
Bolts
of
the
Phase
I
Process
conducted
by
EDR
in
2002,
which
shows
that
transaction
screens
and
263,519
from
Phase
I
ESAs.
5
EPA's
Brownfields
Grant
recipients
were
included
in
the
total
volume
of
Phase
I
ESAs.

Table
1
Respondents
Subject
to
Information
Collection
Requirements
of
the
Proposed
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
Regulation
Year
Transition
from
Phase
I
ESAs
Transition
from
Transaction
Screens
Total
Number
of
Respondents
2004
255,770
7,910
263,680
2005
263,442
8,148
271,590
2006
271,346
8,392
279,738
Annual
Average
263,519
8,150
271,669
The
following
paragraphs
discuss
these
universe
estimates
in
relation
to
the
proposed
rule
and
existing
customary
and
usual
business
practices
under
the
ASTM
standards.

A.
Annual
Respondent
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
under
the
Proposed
Rule
for
Transitioning
from
ASTM
E1527
Based
on
the
universe
data
presented
in
Table
1,
EPA
estimated
respondent
burden
associated
with
all
of
the
new
paperwork
requirements
under
the
proposed
rule
in
Exhibit
1.
A
discussion
of
the
assumptions
used
in
developing
these
burden
estimates
follows.

(
1)
Reading
the
Regulations
EPA
estimates
that
on
average
263,519
respondents
will
transition
from
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
be
subject
to
the
new
paperwork
requirements
under
the
proposed
rule.
For
the
purpose
of
this
ICR,
we
assumed
that
only
the
personnel
involved
in
performing
Phase
I
ESA
would
read
the
regulation.
Data
on
the
average
number
of
employees
performing
Phase
I
ESA
per
firm
in
environmental
site
assessment
industry
are
not
readily
available.
We,
therefore,
used
various
data
sources
in
the
analysis
and
developed
an
estimate
of
12,500
respondents
reading
the
regulation
for
0.5
hours
each.
6
24
only
10
percent
of
the
firms
performed
250
to
500
Phase
I
ESAs,
and
only
11
percent
of
the
firms
performed
500
or
more
ESAs
in
2002.
The
EDR
survey
results
indicate
that
conducting
Phase
I
ESAs
is
not
the
primary
activity
for
most
of
the
firms
surveyed.
Therefore,
the
first
step
in
the
analysis
was
to
derive
the
average
annual
revenues
per
firm
generated
from
performing
Phase
I
ESAs.
Using
the
EDR
data
on
the
distribution
of
surveyed
firms
by
volume
of
Phase
I
ESAs
performed
in
2001
and
the
EDR
estimate
of
the
average
price
per
Phase
I
ESA
in
2001,
we
estimated
that
in
2001,
firms
generated,
on
average,
$
0.5
million
from
Phase
I
ESA
business.
The
next
step
in
the
analysis
was
to
estimate
the
average
revenues
per
employee.
Using
the
US
Census
Bureau
data,
we
estimated
that
the
average
revenue
per
employee
in
environmental
consulting
services
industry
in
2001
was
approximately
$
94,000.
To
calculate
the
average
number
of
employees
involved
in
performing
Phase
I
ESAs,
we
divided
the
estimated
average
annual
revenues
per
firm
generated
from
Phase
I
ESA
business
by
the
estimated
average
annual
revenues
per
employee.
We
estimated
that
firms
have,
on
average,
five
employees
performing
Phase
I
ESAs.
We
then
multiplied
this
estimate
by
the
EDR's
estimate
of
firms
in
the
ESA
industry
to
calculate
the
total
number
of
respondents
that
would
read
the
AAI
regulation
(
5
*
7,500
=
37,500).
Annualizing
the
total
number
of
respondents
over
three
years,
we
calculated
that
12,500
respondents
would
read
the
regulation
annually
(
37,500
/
3
=
12,500).
7
EPA
estimates
that
15
percent
of
all
commercial
properties
subject
to
the
AAI
requirements
are
abandoned
(
263,519
*
0.15
=
39,528).
8
It
should
be
noted
that
this
ICR
presents
the
incremental
burden
associated
with
the
activities
that
go
beyond
the
customary
and
usual
business
practices
in
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard.
Because
the
ICR
does
not
(
2)
Interviews
with
Property
Owner(
s),
Operators,
and
Occupants
(
312.23)

Under
proposed
section
312.23,
the
AAI
must
include
interviews
with
current
owner
and
occupant
of
the
subject
property
since
they
will
have
information
about
current
property
uses,
and
may
have
information
about
past
uses
as
well.
The
proposed
rule
states
that
interviews
with
past
owners
and
occupants,
current
and
past
facility
managers,
and
employees
of
current
and
past
occupants
of
the
subject
property
should
be
conducted
to
the
extent
necessary
to
learn
the
full
history
of
the
subject
property.
The
proposed
rule's
requirements
do
not
differ
significantly
from
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard.
Therefore,
the
proposed
rule
is
not
expected
to
add
any
additional
burden.

Under
proposed
section
312.23,
the
AAI
conducted
on
abandoned
properties
must
include
interviews
with
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
or
nearby
properties
where
owners
and
occupants
may
have
observed
uses
of
or
releases
at
the
abandoned
property.
7
The
ASTM
E1527­
2000
does
not
impose
specific
requirements
or
give
guidance
with
respect
to
who
should
be
interviewed
when
the
subject
property
is
abandoned.
The
proposed
rule
explicitly
requires
that
only
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
properties
be
interviewed,
and
does
not
require
interviews
with
past
owners,
occupants,
and
operators.
The
proposed
rule's
requirement
eliminates
the
hour
burden
associated
with
the
search
for
past
owners
and
occupants
of
the
subject
property,
and
adds
an
incremental
burden
associated
with
the
search
for
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
properties.
Locating
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
properties
is
expected
to
be
less
time
consuming
than
locating
past
owners,
operators,
and
occupants
of
the
subject
property.
Therefore,
in
the
cases
of
abandoned
properties,
the
hour
burden
for
conducting
interviews
under
the
proposed
rule
is
likely
to
be
slightly
lower
than
under
the
current
ASTM
standard.
8
25
present
the
net
burden
under
the
proposed
rule
relative
to
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard,
a
decrease
in
the
hour
burden
associated
with
the
interview
requirement
for
abandoned
properties
is
not
reflected
in
this
ICR.
9
EPA
estimates
that
31
percent
of
all
properties
subject
to
the
AAI
requirements
is
undeveloped
or
residential.
The
rest
of
the
properties
are
used
for
commercial
or
industrial
purposes.
(
3)
Reviews
of
Historical
Sources
of
Information
(
312.24)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
is
required
to
perform
a
search
for
historical
documents
and
records
to
determine
the
ownership
and
use
of
the
subject
property.
The
review
may
include
among
others,
chain
of
title
documents,
land
use
records,
and
aerial
photographs.
These
activities
are
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practices
and
will
not
add
any
incremental
burden
to
the
263,519
respondents
that
would
have
been
performing
a
Phase
I
ESA.

(
4)
Search
for
Recorded
Environmental
Cleanup
Liens
(
312.25)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
a
search
for
environmental
cleanup
liens
on
the
subject
property
is
required.
EPA
assumed
that
the
property
purchaser
will
choose
the
least
costly
option
and
perform
the
search
himself
and
provide
the
results
to
the
environmental
professional
for
documentation
in
the
report.
EPA
estimates
that
the
incremental
hourly
burden
ranges
from
0.5
hours
for
undeveloped
and
residential
property
to
1
hour
for
commercial
and
industrial
property.
For
purposes
of
this
ICR,
EPA
expects
all
263,519
respondents
transitioning
from
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
to
the
proposed
AAI
standard
to
incur
a
weighted
average
of
0.85
hours
each
year.
9
These
burden
hours
are
for
documentation
of
search
results,
as
the
search
itself
is
already
customary
and
usual
business
practice.

(
5)
Review
Federal,
State,
and
Local
Government
Records
(
312.26)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
is
required
to
review
Federal,
state,
and
local
government
records
regarding
the
use
and
occupancy
of
and
the
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property
and
conditions
of
nearby
or
adjoining
properties.
Reviewing
and
documenting
these
government
records
is
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practice
and
will
not
add
any
additional
burden
to
the
respondents.

(
6)
Visual
Inspection
of
the
Facility
and
Adjoining
Properties
(
312.27)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
is
required
to
visit
the
site.
The
person
must
visually
inspect
and
document
the
subject
property
as
well
as
adjoining
properties.
As
these
activities
are
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practices,
the
respondents
will
have
no
additional
hourly
burden
due
to
the
proposed
regulation.
26
(
7)
Inclusion
of
Specialized
Knowledge
or
Experience
on
the
Part
of
the
Defendant
(
312.28)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
is
required
to
include
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
relating
to
the
subject
property.
As
these
activities
are
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practices,
the
respondents
will
have
no
additional
hourly
burden
due
to
the
proposed
regulation.

(
8)
Relationship
of
Purchase
Price
to
Value
of
the
Property
(
312.29)

The
proposed
AAI
regulation
would
require
that
the
purchaser
of
the
property
consider
whether
or
not
the
purchase
price
paid
for
the
property
reflects
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property
if
the
property
was
not
contaminated.
The
purchaser
may
consult
with
a
real
estate
expert
to
determine
what
price
other
similar
properties
have
sold
at.
EPA
estimates
that
15
percent
(
i.
e.,
15%
x
263,519
=
39,528)
of
all
respondents
transitioning
from
Phase
I
ESAs
to
the
AAI
standard
will
perform
these
needed
activities.
39,528
respondents
will
incur
an
average
of
0.5
hours
additional
burden
to
comply
with
the
proposed
regulation.
EPA
assumed
that
the
potential
purchaser
would
investigate
the
purchase
price
of
the
property,
an
activity
already
performed
under
the
ASTM
standard,
and
then
provide
the
information
to
the
environmental
professional
for
documentation.
Therefore,
the
incremental
burden
is
associated
with
the
environmental
professional's
documentation
of
the
information.

(
9)
Commonly
Known
or
Reasonably
Ascertainable
Information
on
the
Property
(
312.30)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
conducting
the
AAI
must
consider
and
document
any
commonly
known
or
reasonably
ascertainable
information
on
the
property
that
may
have
been
discovered
incidentally.
Documenting
these
findings
is
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practice
and
will
not
add
additional
hourly
burden
to
the
respondents.

(
10)
Degree
of
Obviousness
of
the
Presence
of
or
Likely
Presence
of
Contamination
(
312.31)

Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
conducting
the
AAI
is
required
to
consider
all
the
information
collected
during
the
course
of
inquiries
in
totality.
The
environmental
professional
must
determine
whether
or
not
an
obvious
conclusion
may
be
drawn
on
the
presence
of
contamination
on
the
subject
property.
EPA
estimates
that
15
percent
of
all
respondents
transitioning
from
Phase
I
ESAs
to
the
AAI
standard
(
i.
e.,
15%
x
263,519
=
39,528)
will
perform
these
newly
required
activities.
EPA
estimates
that
the
incremental
hourly
burden
ranges
from
0.5
hours
for
undeveloped
and
residential
property
to
1
hour
for
commercial
and
industrial
property.
For
purposes
of
this
ICR,
EPA
expects
39,528
respondents
to
incur
a
27
weighted
average
of
0.85
hours
each
year.

(
11)
Prepare
a
Report
of
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
312.21)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1527­
2000
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
a
written
report
detailing
the
documentation
and
results
of
AAI
activities
must
be
prepared.
In
addition,
the
report
must
identify
any
data
gaps
in
the
information
that
affect
the
ability
of
the
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion.
Documenting
the
AAI
findings
is
considered
customary
and
usual
business
practice
and
will
not
add
additional
hourly
burden
to
the
respondents.
Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
written
report
must
be
at
least
reviewed
by
an
environmental
professional.
The
review
of
the
written
report
by
the
environmental
professional
is
consistent
with
the
current
industry
practices.
EPA
estimates
that
all
263,519
respondents
will
be
required
to
perform
these
activities
under
the
proposed
rule.
28
EXHIBIT
1
ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
ASTM
E1527­
2000
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Reading
the
Regulations
Read
the
regulations
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.50
$
29.73
$
0.00
$
0.00
12,500
6,250
$
371,563
Subtotal
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.50
$
29.73
$
0.00
$
0.00
12,500
6,250
$
371,563
Interviews
with
the
Property
Owners,
Operators,
and
Occupants
(
312.23)

Interview
the
subject
property
owner,
occupant(
s),
and/
or
operators
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
223,991
0
$
0
Interview
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
and/
or
nearby
properties
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
0
$
0
Document
results
of
all
interviews
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
varies
0
$
0
Reviews
of
Historical
Sources
of
Information
(
312.24)

Search
for
and
review
historical
documents
and
records
including,
but
not
limited
to,
aerial
photographs,
fire
insurance
maps,
building
department
records,
chain
of
title
documents,

and
land
use
records
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Document
the
previous
uses
and
occupancies
of
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Search
for
Recorded
Environmental
Cleanup
Liens
(
312.25)

Document
the
results
of
the
search
for
environmental
cleanup
liens
filed
or
recorded
under,
federal,
tribal,
state
or
local
law
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.85
$
43.86
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
222,674
$
11,557,943
Document
existence
of
any
environmental
cleanup
liens
on
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.85
$
43.86
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
222,674
$
11,557,943
Review
Federal,
State,
and
Local
Government
Records
(
312.26)

Search
federal,
tribal,
state,
and
local
government
records
for
information
indicative
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Document
any
environmental
information
on
the
property
found
in
these
records
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
29
EXHIBIT
1
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
ASTM
E1527­
2000
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Visually
Inspect
the
Facility
and
Adjoining
Properties
(
312.27)

Visual
inspections
of
the
subject
property
Visually
inspect
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
of
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Document
the
results
of
visual
inspections
of
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
In
cases
where
ready
access
to
the
property
cannot
be
obtained,
make
good
faith
efforts
to
obtain
access
to
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
In
cases
where
access
cannot
be
obtained
and
the
property
cannot
be
visually
inspected,
visually
inspect
or
observe
the
property
by
another
method,
such
as
through
the
use
of
aerial
photography
or
from
the
nearest
accessible
vantage
point,

such
as
the
property
line
or
a
public
road
that
runs
through
or
along
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Document
of
efforts
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
subject
property
and
include
an
explanation
of
why
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
subject
property
were
unsuccessful
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Documentation
other
sources
of
information
that
were
consulted
to
obtain
information
necessary
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
Visually
inspect
adjoining
properties,
including
observing
areas
where
hazardous
substances
currently
may
be,
or
previously
may
have
been,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Document
results
of
visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
and
any
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
inspections
or
observations
of
adjoining
properties
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
30
EXHIBIT
1
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
ASTM
E1527­
2000
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Inclusion
of
Specialized
Knowledge
or
Experience
on
the
Part
of
the
Defendant
(
312.28)

Document
any
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
on
the
part
of
the
defendant
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Relationship
of
Purchase
Price
to
the
Value
of
the
Property
if
the
Property
was
not
Contaminated
(
312.29)

Document
the
explanation(
s)
for
any
difference
in
the
purchase
price
and
the
market
value
of
the
subject
property
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
19,764
$
1,025,752
Subtotal
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
19,764
$
1,025,752
Commonly
Known
or
Reasonably
Ascertainable
Information
About
the
Property
(
312.30)

During
the
course
of
collection
of
information
under
other
all
appropriate
inquiries
activities,
document
information
about
environmental
conditions
at
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Consider
the
information
in
the
final
evaluation
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Degree
of
Obviousness
of
the
Presence
of
or
Likely
Presence
of
Contamination
at
the
Property
and
the
Ability
to
Detect
the
Contamination
by
Appropriate
Investigation
(
312.31)

Consider
all
of
the
information
collected
in
the
all
appropriate
inquiries
investigation
activities
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.40
$
20.76
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
15,811
$
820,598
Document
the
degree
of
obviousness
of
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property
0.00
0.45
0.00
0.45
$
23.10
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
17,590
$
913,093
Subtotal
0.00
0.85
0.00
0.85
$
43.86
$
0.00
$
0.00
39,528
33,401
$
1,733,691
31
EXHIBIT
1
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
ASTM
E1527­
2000
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Prepare
a
Report
of
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
312.21)

Write
a
report
detailing
the
documentation
and
results
of
all
appropriate
inquiries
activities
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Identify
in
the
report
any
data
gaps
that
affect
the
ability
of
an
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion
on
conditions
that
indicate
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Sign
the
report
and
include
the
two
statements
required
in
§
312.21(
d)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
263,519
0
$
0
TOTAL
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
282,089
$
14,688,949
Note:
In
the
cases
where
the
AAI
requirements
are
different
for
different
respondents,
the
respondents
and/
or
labor
hours
cannot
be
summed
up
across
activities.
In
those
cases,
totals
are
denoted
as
"
varies."
For
example,
the
proposed
AAI
regulation
requires
interviews
with
the
current
owner/
occupants
of
the
subject
property
in
the
cases
where
the
property
is
not
abandoned
(
223,991
respondents)
and
interviews
with
neighboring
property
owners/
occupants
in
the
cases
where
the
subject
property
is
abandoned
(
39,528
respondents).
32
10
EPA
estimates
that
15
percent
of
all
commercial
properties
subject
to
the
AAI
requirements
are
abandoned.
B.
Annual
Respondent
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
under
the
Proposed
Rule
for
Transitioning
from
Transaction
Screens
Based
on
the
universe
data
presented
in
Table
1,
EPA
estimated
respondent
burden
associated
with
all
of
the
new
paperwork
requirements
under
the
proposed
rule
in
Exhibit
2.
A
discussion
of
the
assumptions
used
in
developing
these
burden
estimates
follows.

(
1)
Reading
the
Regulations
EPA
estimates
that
8,150
respondents
will
be
subject
to
the
new
paperwork
requirements
under
the
proposed
rule.
EPA
assumed
that
the
majority
of
firms
affected
by
the
rule
likely
perform
many
more
Phase
I
ESAs
every
year
than
transaction
screens.
Therefore,
we
assumed
that
respondents
will
read
regulations
in
order
to
perform
AAI
when
transitioning
from
the
ASTM
standard
for
Phase
I
ESA
and,
to
avoid
double
counting,
placed
all
of
the
burden
hours
for
reading
the
regulations
under
Exhibit
1.

(
2)
Interviews
with
Property
Owner(
s),
Operators,
and
Occupants
(
312.23)

Under
proposed
section
312.23,
the
respondents
seeking
CERCLA
liability
protection
will
be
required
to
conduct
interviews
with
property
owner(
s)
and
occupants.
The
ASTM
E1528
standard
for
transaction
screens
requires
the
environmental
professional
to
interview
the
owner
or
occupant.
The
AAI
proposal
requires
the
interview
with
current
owner
and
occupant
of
the
subject
property
since
they
will
have
information
about
current
property
uses,
and
may
have
information
about
past
uses
as
well.
In
the
case
of
abandoned
properties,
the
AAI
Phase
I
ESA
must
include
interviews
with
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
or
nearby
properties
where
owners
and
occupants
may
have
observed
uses
of
or
releases
at
the
abandoned
property.
10
EPA
estimates
that
all
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
will
incur
an
additional
0.3
hours
to
conduct
interviews
and
0.3
hours
to
document
the
findings.

(
3)
Reviews
of
Historical
Sources
of
Information
(
312.24)

The
proposed
regulation
requires
AAI
to
include
a
search
for
historical
documents
and
records
to
determine
the
ownership
and
use
of
the
subject
property.
The
review
may
include
among
others
things,
chain
of
title
documents,
land
use
records,
and
aerial
photographs.
These
activities
are
not
required
by
the
transaction
screen
standard
and
will
add
approximately
3.7
hours
of
additional
burden
to
the
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens.

(
4)
Search
for
Recorded
Environmental
Cleanup
Liens
(
312.25)
33
11
This
requirement
is
expected
to
affect
only
the
properties
with
a
perceived
risk
of
contamination
or
likely
contamination,
where
the
market
has
already
discounted
the
price
for
the
perceived
risk.
EPA
assumes
that
15
percent
of
the
properties
will
be
affected.
The
assumption
is
based
on
the
EDR
estimate
that
between
10
and
15
These
activities
are
not
required
by
the
transaction
screen
standard
and,
therefore,
EPA
expects
all
8,150
respondents
to
incur
an
average
of
2.0
hours
of
additional
burden
each
year.
EPA
assumed
that
the
property
purchaser
will
choose
the
least
costly
option
and
perform
the
search
himself
and
provide
the
results
to
the
environmental
professional
for
documentation
in
the
report.

(
5)
Review
Federal,
State,
and
Local
Government
Records
(
312.26)

Under
both
the
current
ASTM
E1528
standard
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
is
required
to
review
government
records
regarding
the
use
and
occupancy
of
and
the
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property
and
conditions
of
nearby
or
adjoining
properties.
However,
the
review
is
required
to
be
more
thorough
under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation
and
therefore
add
additional
hourly
burden.
EPA
expects
all
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
to
incur
an
incremental
burden
of
5.4
hours
per
year.

(
6)
Visual
Inspection
of
the
Facility
and
Adjoining
Properties
(
312.27)

Both
the
transaction
screen
and
the
proposed
AAI
regulation
require
site
visits.
However,
the
AAI
regulation
specific
requirements
for
visual
inspections
of
both
the
facility
and
adjoining
properties
add
additional
hourly
burden
to
the
respondents.
EPA
estimates
that
all
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
the
transaction
screens
will
incur
an
incremental
burden
of
2.9
hours
each
year.

(
7)
Inclusion
of
Specialized
Knowledge
or
Experience
on
the
Part
of
the
Defendant
(
312.28)

The
proposed
regulation
would
require
persons
conducting
AAI
to
include
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
relating
to
the
subject
property
in
the
written
report.
These
newly
required
activities
performed
by
all
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
each
year
will
add
approximately
3.7
hours
of
burden.

(
8)
Relationship
of
Purchase
Price
to
Value
of
the
Property
(
312.29)

The
proposed
AAI
regulation
would
require
that
the
purchaser
of
the
property
consider
whether
or
not
the
purchase
price
paid
for
the
property
reflects
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property
if
the
property
was
not
contaminated.
The
purchaser
may
consult
with
a
real
estate
expert
to
determine
what
price
other
similar
properties
have
sold
at.
EPA
estimates
that
15
percent
of
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens,
total
of
1,223
respondents,
will
incur
an
average
of
0.5
hours
additional
burden
to
comply
with
the
proposed
regulation.
11
EPA
34
percent
of
Phase
I
ESAs
lead
to
Phase
II
ESAs.
Since
it
is
uncertain
what
type
of
properties
(
in
terms
of
size
and
type)
the
additional
requirement
may
impact,
EPA
assumes
that
all
properties
are
equally
likely
to
be
affected.

12
Based
on
the
EDR
estimate
of
the
likelihood
that
a
Phase
I
will
lead
to
a
more
comprehensive
environmental
site
investigation,
EPA
assumed
that
15
percent
of
properties
would
be
affected
by
this
requirement.
Since
it
is
uncertain
what
type
of
properties
(
in
terms
of
size
and
type)
the
additional
requirement
may
impact,
EPA
assumed
that
all
properties
are
equally
likely
to
be
affected.
assumed
that
the
potential
purchaser
would
investigate
the
purchase
price
of
the
property,
an
activity
already
performed
under
the
ASTM
standard,
and
then
provide
the
information
to
the
environmental
professional
for
documentation.
Therefore,
the
incremental
burden
is
associated
with
the
environmental
professional's
documentation
of
the
information.

(
9)
Commonly
Known
or
Reasonably
Ascertainable
Information
on
the
Property
(
312.30)

Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
conducting
the
AAI
must
consider
and
document
any
commonly
known
or
reasonably
ascertainable
information
on
the
property
that
may
have
been
discovered
incidentally.
Documenting
these
findings
will
add
2.3
hours
of
additional
hourly
burden
to
the
all
8,150
respondents
transitioning
from
transaction
screens.

(
10)
Degree
of
Obviousness
of
the
Presence
of
or
Likely
Presence
of
Contamination
(
312.31)

Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
environmental
professional
conducting
the
AAI
is
required
to
consider
all
the
information
collected
during
the
course
of
inquiries
in
totality.
The
environmental
professional
must
determine
whether
or
not
an
obvious
conclusion
may
be
drawn
on
the
presence
of
contamination
on
the
subject
property.
EPA
expects
1,223
respondents
to
incur
one
additional
hour
of
burden
each
year
due
to
these
activities.
12
(
11)
Prepare
a
Report
of
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
312.21)

Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
a
written
report
detailing
the
documentation
and
results
of
AAI
activities
must
be
prepared.
In
addition,
the
report
must
identify
any
data
gaps
in
the
information
that
affect
the
ability
of
the
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion.
Under
the
proposed
AAI
regulation,
the
written
report
must
be
at
least
reviewed
and
supervised
by
an
environmental
professional.
EPA
estimates
that
all
8,150
respondents
that
are
transitioning
from
transaction
screens
will
be
required
to
perform
these
activities
under
the
proposed
rule
and
incur
4.4
additional
hours
of
burden.
35
EXHIBIT
2
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
TRANSACTION
SCREENS
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Visually
Inspect
the
Facility
and
Adjoining
Properties
(
312.27)

Visual
inspections
of
the
subject
property
Visually
inspect
the
facilities
and
any
improvements
on
the
property,
as
well
as
areas
on
the
property
where
hazardous
substances
may
currently
be
or
in
the
past
may
have
been
used,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
of
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
4,075
$
211,493
Document
the
results
of
visual
inspections
of
the
property
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
4,075
$
211,493
In
cases
where
ready
access
to
the
property
cannot
be
obtained,
make
good
faith
efforts
to
obtain
access
to
the
0.00
0.90
0.00
0.90
$
46.71
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
7,335
$
380,687
cannot
be
visually
inspected,
visually
inspect
or
observe
the
property
by
another
method,
such
as
through
the
use
of
aerial
photography
or
from
the
nearest
accessible
vantage
point,

such
as
the
property
line
or
a
public
road
that
runs
through
or
along
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
0
$
0
Document
of
efforts
to
obtain
on­
site
access
to
the
subject
property
and
include
an
explanation
of
why
good
faith
efforts
to
gain
access
to
subject
property
were
unsuccessful
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
0
$
0
Documentation
other
sources
of
information
that
were
consulted
to
obtain
information
necessary
to
achieve
the
proposed
objectives
and
performance
factors
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
4,075
$
211,493
Visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
Visually
inspect
adjoining
properties,
including
observing
areas
where
hazardous
substances
currently
may
be,
or
previously
may
have
been,
stored,
treated,
handled,
or
disposed
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
$
12.98
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
2,038
$
105,787
Document
results
of
visual
inspections
of
adjoining
properties
and
any
physical
limitations
to
the
visual
inspections
or
observations
of
adjoining
properties
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
$
12.98
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
2,038
$
105,787
Subtotal
0.00
2.90
0.00
2.90
$
150.52
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
23,636
$
1,226,740
36
EXHIBIT
2
ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
TRANSACTION
SCREENS
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Reading
the
Regulations1
Read
the
regulations
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.50
$
29.73
$
0.00
$
0.00
0
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.50
$
29.73
$
0.00
$
0.00
0
0
$
0
Interviews
with
the
Property
Owners,
Operators,
and
Occupants
(
312.23)

Interview
the
subject
property
owner,
occupant(
s),
and/
or
operators
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.30
$
15.57
$
0.00
$
0.00
6,928
2,078
$
107,869
Interview
owners
and
occupants
of
neighboring
and/
or
nearby
properties
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.30
$
15.57
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
367
$
19,042
Document
results
of
all
interviews
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.30
$
15.57
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
2,445
$
126,896
Subtotal
0.00
varies
0.00
varies
varies
$
0.00
$
0.00
varies
4,890
$
253,807
Reviews
of
Historical
Sources
of
Information
(
312.24)

Search
for
and
review
historical
documents
and
records
including,
but
not
limited
to,
aerial
photographs,
fire
insurance
maps,
building
department
records,
chain
of
title
documents,

and
land
use
records
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.00
$
103.80
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
16,300
$
1,025,270
Document
the
previous
uses
and
occupancies
of
the
property
0.00
1.70
0.00
1.70
$
88.23
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
13,855
$
719,075
Subtotal
0.00
3.70
0.00
3.70
$
192.03
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
30,155
$
1,744,345
Search
for
Recorded
Environmental
Cleanup
Liens
(
312.25)

Document
the
results
of
the
search
for
environmental
cleanup
liens
filed
or
recorded
under,
federal,
tribal,
state
or
local
law
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.00
$
103.80
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
16,300
$
845,970
Document
existence
of
any
environmental
cleanup
liens
on
the
property
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0.00
0
0
$
0
Subtotal
0.00
2.00
0.00
2.00
$
103.80
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
16,300
$
845,970
Review
Federal,
State,
and
Local
Government
Records
(
312.26)

Search
federal,
tribal,
state,
and
local
government
records
for
information
indicative
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
subject
property
0.00
4.40
0.00
4.40
$
228.36
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
35,860
$
2,040,434
Document
any
environmental
information
on
the
property
found
in
these
records
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
$
51.90
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
8,150
$
422,985
Subtotal
0.00
5.40
0.00
5.40
$
280.26
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
44,010
$
2,463,419
1
Burden
hours
for
reading
the
regulations
are
included
with
respondents
in
Exhibit
1.
37
EXHIBIT
2
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
TRANSACTION
SCREENS
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Inclusion
of
Specialized
Knowledge
or
Experience
on
the
Part
of
the
Defendant
(
312.28)

Document
any
specialized
knowledge
or
experience
on
the
part
of
the
defendant
0.00
3.70
0.00
3.70
$
192.03
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
30,155
$
1,744,345
Subtotal
0.00
3.70
0.00
3.70
$
192.03
$
0.00
$
22.00
8,150
30,155
$
1,744,345
Relationship
of
Purchase
Price
to
the
Value
of
the
Property
if
the
Property
was
not
Contaminated
(
312.29)

Document
the
explanation(
s)
for
any
difference
in
the
purchase
price
and
the
market
value
of
the
subject
property
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
612
$
31,737
Subtotal
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
612
$
31,737
Commonly
Known
or
Reasonably
Ascertainable
Information
About
the
Property
(
312.30)

During
the
course
of
collection
of
information
under
other
all
appropriate
inquiries
activities,
document
information
about
environmental
conditions
at
the
property
0.00
1.30
0.00
1.30
$
67.47
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
10,595
$
549,881
Consider
the
information
in
the
final
evaluation
of
environmental
conditions
at
the
property
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
$
51.90
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
8,150
$
422,985
Subtotal
0.00
2.30
0.00
2.30
$
119.37
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
18,745
$
972,866
Degree
of
Obviousness
of
the
Presence
of
or
Likely
Presence
of
Contamination
at
the
Property
and
the
Ability
to
Detect
the
Contamination
by
Appropriate
Investigation
(
312.31)

Consider
all
of
the
information
collected
in
the
all
appropriate
inquiries
investigation
activities
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
612
$
31,737
Document
the
degree
of
obviousness
of
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
property
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.50
$
25.95
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
612
$
31,737
Subtotal
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
$
51.90
$
0.00
$
0.00
1,223
1,224
$
63,474
38
EXHIBIT
2
(
continued)

ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
PROPERTIES
TRANSITIONING
FROM
TRANSACTION
SCREENS
Hours
and
Costs
Per
Respondent
Per
Activity
Total
Hours
and
Costs
Managerial
Technical
Clerical
Number
Total
Total
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
$
67.00/
hr
$
51.90/
hr
$
27.60/
hr
Response
Labor
Capital
O&
M
of
Hours/
Cost/

ACTIVITY
Hours
Hours
Hours
Hours
Cost
Costs
Costs
Responses
Year
Year
Prepare
a
Report
of
All
Appropriate
Inquiries
(
312.21)

Write
a
report
detailing
the
documentation
and
results
of
all
appropriate
inquiries
activities
2.00
1.00
0.00
3.00
$
185.90
$
0.00
$
42.00
8,150
24,450
$
1,857,385
Identify
in
the
report
any
data
gaps
that
affect
the
ability
of
an
environmental
professional
to
render
an
opinion
on
conditions
that
indicate
a
release
or
threatened
release
of
hazardous
substances
on,
at,
in,
or
to
the
subject
property
0.00
0.90
0.00
0.90
$
46.71
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
7,335
$
380,687
Sign
the
report
and
include
the
two
statements
required
in
§
312.21(
d)
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.50
$
33.50
$
0.00
$
0.00
8,150
4,075
$
273,025
Subtotal
2.50
1.90
0.00
4.40
$
266.11
$
0.00
$
42.00
8,150
35,860
$
2,511,097
TOTAL
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
205,587
$
11,857,800
Note:
In
the
cases
where
the
AAI
requirements
are
different
for
different
respondents,
the
respondents
and/
or
labor
hours
cannot
be
summed
up
across
activities.
In
those
cases,
totals
are
denoted
as
"
varies."
39
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Hour
and
Cost
Burden
Respondent
Tally
EPA
presents
the
total
annual
respondent
burden
and
cost
for
the
new
information
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
proposed
rule
in
Exhibits
1
and
2.
Exhibit
3
shows
that
the
annualized
respondent
burden
under
the
proposed
rule
is
estimated
to
be
487,676
hours
and
total
cost
is
estimated
as
$
26,546,749
annually.

Agency
Tally
There
are
no
Agency
activities
associated
with
the
new
information
collection
requirements.
Thus,
there
is
no
Agency
hour
or
cost
burden
associated
with
this
rule.

6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
In
Burden
This
is
a
new
proposed
rule;
therefore
there
are
no
existing
information
collection
requirements
and
no
change
in
burden.
40
EXHIBIT
3
TOTAL
ANNUAL
ESTIMATED
RESPONDENT
BURDEN
AND
COST
Total
Total
Total
Total
Total
Capital
O&
M
Hours
per
Labor
Costs
Costs
per
Costs
Costs
Year
per
Year
Year
Properties
Transitioning
From
ASTM
E1527
$
0
$
0
282,089
$
14,688,949
$
14,688,949
Properties
Transitioning
From
Transaction
Screens
$
0
$
880,200
205,587
$
10,977,600
$
11,857,800
TOTAL
$
0
$
880,200
487,676
$
25,666,549
$
26,546,749
41
6(
g)
Public
Burden
Statement
There
is
no
public
reporting
burden
from
the
new
information
collection
requirements
in
the
proposed
rule.
The
average
hourly
recordkeeping
burden
from
the
new
requirements
ranges
between
one
and
25
hours
per
respondent
per
year,
depending
on
whether
the
respondent
is
transitioning
from
the
ASTM
E1527­
2000
or
ASTM
E1528.
The
average
burden
per
response
is
1.8
hours.
This
burden
includes
time
for
reading
the
regulations,
performing
and
documenting
AAIs,
and
keeping
the
report,
as
specified.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.

To
comment
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques,
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
No.
SFUND­
2004­
0001,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
OSWER
docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
at
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
Federal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744
and
the
number
for
the
Superfund
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
0270.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
docket
ID
number
identified
above.
Also,
you
can
send
comments
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
No.
(
SFUND­
2004­
0001).
