2 / 6
Journal of Environmental Research
March 29-31, 2018
Vienna, Austria
Environmental Science & Technology 2018
Page 14
4
th
Edition of International Conference on
Environmental Science
& Technology
There have been a number of changes regarding how
contaminated properties are investigated and remediated the
Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation
Act, commonly referred to as Superfund, was passed in 1980.
This paper discusses five of these fundamental changes and
discusses how understanding the changes may help to identify
how contaminated properties are investigated and remediated
in the future:
1. The regulatory approach has changed from an
enforcement-driven process to a voluntary, property
transaction-based process. As a result, more properties
have been investigated and remediated and the
interaction between government agencies and the
“regulated community” has improved.
2. The investigationand remediationprocess has changed
as a result of the availability of published regulatory
guidelines, industry standards and in particular numeric
risk-based criteria. This process now often considers
factors such as land use, sustainability, soil reuse and
cross media impacts
3. The migration of soil vapor into buildings is now a
common environmental concern in addition to impacts
to soil and groundwater.
4. The opportunity for community involvement in the
decision making process has changed as a results of
the increased use of the internet and social media.
5. Funding and financing mechanisms have changed
and now often rely on economic development-based
financing and industry-specific reimbursement
programs.
Government policies will continue to play a central role and the
public will likely play an ever-increasing role as contaminated
properties are investigated and remediated; however, the
majority of investigation and remediation activities will likely
continue to be the result of property redevelopment projects
and real estate transactions. Adequate funding to address
contaminated properties that do not present an opportunity for
economic development will continue to be a challenge.
Keywords — environmental, investigation, redevelopment,
remediation.
Biography
Kenneth M. Haberman has over 35 years of experience specializing in the
areas of environmental investigation and remediation and regulatory poli-
cy development. Ken served as the President of
Landmark Environmental,
LLC
from 2000 to 2015. Ken is currently an Executive Vice-President. Ken
is a former Board Chair of
Minnesota Brownfields,
a non-profit organization
that promotes current brownfields initiatives. Prior to the establishment of
Landmark, Ken was a Vice-President at Barr
Engineering Company
. Ken
also worked for the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
for nearly sixteen
years, primarily as a manager in the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup
Program and the Superfund Program. Ken has a Master’s Degree in Envi-
ronmental Studies from Bemidji State University and a Bachelor’s Degree
in Biology and Earth Science from the University of Minnesota. Ken partici-
pated in the Fellowship Program at the University of Minnesota, Humphrey
Institute of Public Affairs in 1999 and 2000.
khaberman@landmarkenv.comFour decades of environmental investigation
and remediation of contaminated properties
in the United States –What has changed and
what does the future hold?
Kenneth M. Haberman
Landmark Environmental, LLC, USA
Kenneth M. Haberman, J Environ Res, Volume 2