Response: EPA thanks the commenter for the stated support of the proposed rule. Based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out all appropriate inquiries. 106 Commenter Organization Name: Crocetti, Charles Comment Number: 0110 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The proposed rule clearly establishes minimum qualification criteria for environmental professionals that are consistent with the level of education/ experience typically necessary to collect and interpret environmental data, and develop conclusions and recommendations based on analysis of the data collected.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Diamond, Jason Comment Number: 0251 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: The AAI rule takes into account both academic background and professional experience in the definition of the environmental professional ( EP) and encourages the application of professional judgement. I am pleased to see that the AAI rule establishes a specific definition of an EP and requires certain educational requirements, in addition to standards regarding the amount and type of training for professionals conducting an AAI. This provides for an objective standard to measure the credentials of a prospective environmental assessment provider. This is an improvement from the American Society for Testing and Materials ( ASTM) E 1527 00 definition of an EP, which only refers to " training and experience" and makes no mention of education.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Diamond, Jason Comment Number: 0251 Excerpt Number: 6 Excerpt Text: Again, I would like to express my support for the proposed AAI rule. The environmental assessment process needs to be held to a standard that establishes minimum education and experience qualifications for persons conducting AAI studies.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: NGWA Comment Number: 0265 Excerpt Number: 2 107 Excerpt Text: NGWA, in particular, wants to go on record as supporting the definition of Environmental Professional as proposed in the August 26, 2004 Federal Register. The definition of an Environmental Professional is especially critical given the proposed rule's performance based approach and its heavy reliance on the judgment of the Environmental Professional. The Environmental Professional definition was reached after extensive negotiations that considered, among other things, the interests of current practitioners who may have varying backgrounds, education and training. The negotiations resulted in a proposed rule that provides three different options for meeting the definition of Environmental Professional. Additionally, the proposed rule includes a grandfather provision that specifically balances the interest in continuing to perform site assessments of an individual, who does not meet one of the three options, against concerns that public health and environmental protection are achieved. The proposed rule also provides that individuals who do not meet either the definition of Environmental Professional or the grandfather provision may assist in the conduct of the inquiry under the responsible charge or supervision of an Environmental Professional.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Engels, Joseph Comment Number: 0287 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: As a practicing environmental professional with over 25 years of experience evaluating and remediating brownfields sites, I would like to comment that I strongly support the proposed All Appropriate Inquiry Rule. I am particularly encouraged by the establishment of minimum education and experience standards for environmental professional qualifications that are long overdue in this area of engineering and scientific practice. From my experience, persons who do not have an appropriate technical college degree relevant to this area of practice are not qualified to make sound technical decisions and to offer opinions of a technical nature. For example, we do not allow persons with just a high school education or an English degree to offer legal or medical opinions. This is an issue of protection of the public welfare.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Less, James Comment Number: 0290 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: My experience makes it clear to me that, unless they are handled properly, many types of properties, including brownfield sites, can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and 108 welfare. And handling them properly is not easy. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Anthony, Tony, et. al. Comment Number: 0292 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: We support the definition of an Environmental Professional.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Moors, Scott Comment Number: 0298 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Support of the performance standard Excerpt Text: I support the proposed rule and I urge the Agency to adopt it as proposed. The proposed AAI rule: ?? Encourages project/ client/ public sensitivity by permitting the flexibility derived from a performance based approach instead of a prescriptive approach. The rule would be applicable to any type of property. ?? Sets minimum qualification criteria for environmental professionals ( EPs). ?? Allows for professional judgment, which is critical in the proper evaluation of the risk associated with a particular site. ?? Requires a broader scope of environmental inquiry by building on and significantly improving the existing process ( ASTM E 1527) that is familiar to many clients ( users) who have all appropriate inquiry studies performed. This approach enhances the process and the familiarity will help avoid ? gconfusion? h among users and will also help reduce or limit the cost impacts.

Response: In the preamble to the final rule, EPA clarifies that only the individual overseeing the conduct of an all appropriate inquiries investigation must qualify as an environmental professional, as defined in the final rule. Other individuals may contribute to the investigation as long as their activities are conducted under the supervision or responsible charge of the individual qualifying as an environmental professional. In today's final rule, the Agency is retaining the recommendation that an individual who qualifies as an environmental professional conduct, or closely oversee the conduct of, the required onsite visual inspection of the property. 109 Based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency has made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out an all appropriate inquiries.

We agree with the commenter's assessment of the strengths of the performance based approach. It is the Agency's contention that the performance based approach effectuates Congressional intent. As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, the advantage of a performance based approach over a checklist approach to conducting the inquiries is that multiple sources of information need not be consulted for the same information.

The final rule ( as did the proposed rule) encourages environmental professionals to use discretion and professional judgment in determining the best sources of information and the best manner in which to obtain information, given the objectives of the regulations and the specific characteristics of the property being assessed. EPA anticipates that this flexible approach will prevent a waste of resources in the case of properties that may not require as rigorous of an investigation due to available information about a property or particular knowledge about a property that may not be available in the case of other properties, while at the same time maintaining adequate standards to ensure environmental protection in the case of all properties.

Commenter Organization Name: Davis, Colin Comment Number: 0300 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Support of the performance standard 110 Excerpt Text: I am in support of the proposed AAI rule due to: It establishes minimum qualifcation criteria for environmental professionals. Allows for professional judgement in evaluation of risk associated with a site. Encourages project/ client/ public sensitivity by permitting the flexibility derived from a performance based approach instead of a perspective approach. Broader scope of study by improving the current standard defined in ASTM E1527.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0298, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Erb, Ronald Comment Number: 0301 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Support of the performance standard Excerpt Text: I would like to add my support to the proposed rule for Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiry. I believe this service should be handled by persons with a minimum of training and expertise as outlined in the proposed rule. Site specific, performance based approaches are important in the type of work performed by environmental professionals.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0298, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Anonymous Comment Number: 0303 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Support of the performance standard Excerpt Text: I approve of the proposed rule for AAI. The precriptive approach currently used in the ASTM method is not applicable to many projects/ sites; therefore, a more flexible approach, as is proposed in the AAI is an improvement. The AAI proposed rule also sets mimimum qualifications for professions conducting the inquiries that are more appropriate to the inquiry process.

Response: EPA appreciates the outpouring of support received for the performance based approach to All Appropriate Inquiries. It is the Agency's contention that the performance based approach effectuates Congressional intent. As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, the advantage of a performance based approach over a checklist approach to conducting the inquiries is that multiple sources of information need not be consulted for the same information. 111 The final rule ( as did the proposed rule) encourages environmental professionals to use discretion and professional judgment in determining the best sources of information and the best manner in which to obtain information, given the objectives of the regulations and the specific characteristics of the property being assessed. EPA anticipates that this flexible approach will prevent a waste of resources in the case of properties that may not require as rigorous of an investigation due to available information about a property or particular knowledge about a property that may not be available in the case of other properties, while at the same time maintaining adequate standards to ensure environmental protection in the case of all properties.

Please also see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: QORE Property Sciences Comment Number: 0304 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: It is essential that when establishing a Standard for All Appropriate Inquiry that there also be a minimum standard of expertise of the person performing the investigation. As a professional engaged with performing and reviewing due diligence reports, I have seen far too many reports that did not address all the essential issues on a site and many omissions that could have resulted in danger to the public. I believe a college degree in an engineering or environmental field and at least one year experience performing due diligence work under the supervision of a more experienced professional should be the minimum required credentials for the individual performing the work.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: May, Thomas Comment Number: 0310 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I support the proposed rule. Of particular note is the education and training requirement for persons conducting AAI that I wish to single out as particularly important. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am fully supportive of the establishment of minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 112 Commenter Organization Name: Rose and Westra Comment Number: 0320 Excerpt Number: 8 Excerpt Text: R& W supports and commends the EPA for allowing persons not meeting the definition of EP to contribute to AAI investigations. This is necessary to provide an efficient Phase I ESA/ AAI market and maintain reasonable costs to prospective purchasers.

Response: EPA thanks the commenter for the stated support of the proposed provision. In the preamble to the final rule, EPA clarifies that only the individual overseeing the conduct of an all appropriate inquiries investigation must qualify as an environmental professional, as defined in the final rule. Other individuals may contribute to the investigation as long as their activities are conducted under the supervision or responsible charge of the individual qualifying as an environmental professional. In today's final rule, the Agency is retaining the recommendation that an individual who qualifies as an environmental professional conduct, or closely oversee the conduct of, the required onsite visual inspection of the property.

Commenter Organization Name: QORE, Inc Comment Number: 0324 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Adopt the rule as proposed Excerpt Text: We have long needed to establish a minimum level of qualifications for individuals performing environmental assessments, particularly those done in preparation for property transactions. The proposed rule accomplishes that goal and for this reason I support it.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Mille Lacs Ojibwe Comment Number: 0330 Excerpt Number: 5 Excerpt Text: The Band agrees that an undergraduate or graduate degree in any of the relevant disciplines of engineering, environmental or earth science is appropriate.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 113 Commenter Organization Name: Schultz, Michael Comment Number: 0331 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: I support the minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process. From my experience, unless many types of properties, including brownfield sites, are handled carefully, they can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and welfare. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment to effectively deal with these sites.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: DWR Consultants Comment Number: 0349 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  2.3.8  To ensure that EPs are qualified, a national test and/ or training should be established Excerpt Text: I fully support the enhancement for qualifications of Environmental Professionals. However, I think some sort of national test should be integrated into the process to ensure the " professionals" are qualified.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

EPA determined that the educational and professional experience qualifications included in the final definition of environmental professional are sufficient without the added burden of a testing requirement. Such a requirement would not only place additional burden upon qualified individuals, but the Agency or state governments would have the added burden of establishing scoring procedures and recordkeeping processes.

Commenter Organization Name: Smith, Michael Comment Number: 0360 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: As an owner of a 200 employee firm that performs environmental site assessments, I understand that even the apparently simplest brownfield engagement or environmental site assessment can pose latent risks. The only way to deal effectively with those risks is by relying on professionals who have the education, training, experience, and good judgment needed to know what to do when the situation they encounter is not identical to one described in a guide of some kind, or contemplated in a " one size fits all" standard. 114 For that reason, I am pleased that the proposed rule establishes realistic near and longterm definitions of " environmental professional," allows for and even encourages the application of the professional judgment needed to help consider and safeguard the public trust, and, in general, " raises the bar" such that better assessments will be performed, without necessarily increasing costs.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Denton, Robert Comment Number: 0381 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text:  My experience makes it clear to me that, unless they are handled properly, many types of properties, including brownfield sites, can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and welfare. And handling them properly is not easy. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. Professional qualifications are de facto requirements in every discipline of modern science and engineering, and it is appropriate that the same standard should apply to those practicing one of the cornerstones of environmental inquiry as well. As a State of West Virginia Licensed Remediation Specialist ( L. R. S.) I am a strong supporter of standardized, minimum qualifications in all stages of environmental practice.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Gallagher, Paul Comment Number: 0383 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I am an environmental professional who currently performs environmental assessments. I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from ASTM E 1527 process. I am a Certified Professional in the State of Ohio, which has a privatized program. If EPA continues to rely on the private sector to address environmental legacy issues, establishing the minimum criteria for those people that will provide opinions that affect public health and safety is essential.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 115 Commenter Organization Name: Dohms, Peter Comment Number: 0384 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: My experience makes it clear to me that, unless they are handled properly, many types of properties, including brownfield sites, can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and welfare. Properly handling such sites is not easy. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Heywood, Johanna Comment Number: 0387 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: My experience makes it clear to me that, unless they are handled properly, many types of properties, including Brownfield sites, can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and welfare. And handling them properly is not easy. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Intertox Comment Number: 0396 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text:  The proposed qualifications included in the definition of an environmental professional and the provisions allowing for individuals who do not qualify as environmental professionals to contribute to inquiry activities.

 Intertox applauds the U. S. EPA for providing the most comprehensive definition of an environmental professional. Especially significant is acknowledging that registered geologists and engineers are not the only professionals providing environmental assessment services. This proposed rule also allows non qualified environmental professionals to work under the supervision of qualified environmental professionals. 116 This should be of financial benefit to consultants and their clients as it is frequent practice of consultants to utilize the least experienced, least trained, and least compensated individual to conduct environmental site assessments.

 The proposed division of responsibilities for conducting all appropriate inquiries.

 The proposed rule allows for a reasonable division of responsibility in conducting all appropriate inquiries. As is common practice in consulting, the least experienced, least trained, and least compensated individual conducts the actual environmental site assessment with a final report review by a P. E. or geologist at a senior staff level or higher in a company. The proposed rule will allow this practice to continue.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Rybak, John Thomas Comment Number: 0412 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: Proposed Qualifications a) Page # 52576 b) View: I support the EP Qualifications. The proposed qualifications EP are appropriate and reasonable. These essentially match what the requirements Lending Institution Phase I users require.

c) Assumptions: Some level of educational and job training experience is relevant to performing Phase I assessments. The more education and/ or training should lead to better quality reports.

d) Burden: Some professionals will not qualify for EP under the AAI status, and will need to obtain more education and/ or experience. AAI does not preclude such individuals from obtaining the proper qualifications.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 117 <IP_ADDRESS> The License Requirement Should Not Be Revised to Allow Individuals Other than Professional Engineers and Professional Geologists to Qualify as EPs Commenter Organization Name: Vellone, Daniel A Comment Number: 0048 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  The proposed minimum requirements will improve quality of ESAs Excerpt Text: In my experience, unless environmental inquiries are handled properly, many types of properties, including Brownfield sites, can pose a potential threat to public welfare, safety, and health. Therefore, the person ( or firm) who is designated as being in " Responsible Charge" of the design and/ or leading the AAI study should have a minimum requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, It is encouraging to see that the EPA has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process, allowing otherwise " unqualified" persons acting in the public interest. As an " environmental professional" having education, experience, and professional licensure, I believe it is only those holding licensure as Professional Engineers or Professional Geologists who can be held accountable to the highest standards of professional conduct and place the public welfare above all other considerations.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Anonymous Comment Number: 0209 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The current language is appropriate. Requiring PE or PG certification for professionals conducting investigations will improve the quality and reliability of the process. Since Professional Engineers are prevented by law from practicing outside of their area of expertise, previous comments seeking to change this language have no basis. Furthermore, stringent licensing and education requirements are present in PE and PG certification that are not present in other certifications. Changing this language to include other groups of certified professionals will only serve to dilute the effectiveness of the current regulation.

Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that only licensed or certified Professional Engineers ( P. E. s) and Professional Geologists ( P. G. s) should be included in the definition of environmental professional for the purposes of conducting all appropriate inquiries. EPA determined that the types of activities included in the standards established by the 118 final rule may be performed by individuals with a broader range of qualifications. The final rule, while recognizing that P. E. s and P. G. s with three or more years of relevant full time experience meet the qualifications for an environmental professional, provides minimum educational and experience qualifications for additional individuals who qualify to oversee the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations. EPA believes that the qualifications included in the definition of environmental professional provide a good balance of educational and professional experience requirements.

Based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency has made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out an all appropriate inquiries.

Commenter Organization Name: Anonymous Comment Number: 0210 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: Comments by CHMM, REP, REM and other groups seeking to revise this definition as proposed only serve to undermine the rule's effectiveness. None of these certifications contain the stringent review and testing present in P. E. or P. G. The fractured state of certification and licensing in this field is the root problem driving this rule. Please do not allow these organizations to hijack this standard. If the industry was capable of certifying and regulating itself, there would be no need for this proposed rule. 119 Response: EPA determined that the types of activities included in the standards established by the final rule may be performed by individuals with a broader range of qualifications than those championed by the organizations cited by the commenter. The final rule, while recognizing that P. E. s and P. G. s with three or more years of relevant full time experience meet the qualifications for an environmental professional, provides minimum educational and experience qualifications for additional individuals who qualify to oversee the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations. EPA believes that the qualifications included in the definition of environmental professional provide a good balance of educational and professional experience requirements.

Based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency has made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out an all appropriate inquiries.

Commenter Organization Name: NSPE Comment Number: 0230 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: We would like to address section D of the rule ( page 52552 52555), which defines the proposed qualifications for an " environmental professional." We recommend the following revisions:

1. The proposed definition of an environmental professional should be restricted to 120 individuals who have demonstrated that they possess the necessary education, examination, and experience to assure that all appropriate inquires and environmental site assessments are undertaken in the fair and objective fashion intended by Congress.

2. The definition of environmental professional should be limited to individuals who hold a professional engineers or professional geologists license and/ or registration from a state, tribe, or U. S. territory and have the equivalent of three years of full time relevant experience. While fiscal protections of certain sectors of the market may be appropriate in some rulemakings, it seems ironic that the EPA is promoting a rule that may not aid in protecting the environment. In fact, it appears that certain protections may be reduced in the interests of broadening the market.

In the rule, EPA acknowledges that professional engineers and professional geologists have the specific education and training necessary to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases as envisioned by the proposed regulation, especially when coupled with three years of appropriate experience. EPA correctly references the rigors of the licensing and/ or certification processes employed for both professions. The Agency further acknowledges that these professionals are held responsible ( both legally and ethically) for safeguarding the public health, safety, and welfare by the governmental authorities issuing the respective professional credentials. Additionally, the Agency cites the ongoing and plenary supervisory role taken by the states to police professional misconduct.

Professional engineers have been licensed in the United States for over 70 years and have a well deserved reputation for undertaking their duties with professionalism and honesty. The Engineer's Creed expressly states that engineers should " place service before profit, the honor and standing of the profession before personal advantage, and the public welfare above all other considerations."

NSPE's goal is to advance public health, safety, and welfare; not to displace individuals mid career. Individuals not licensed as professional engineers or professional geologists are at liberty to seek licensure in either of these fields. Also, those that are not licensed also have the opportunity to collaborate with someone who is already licensed, such as working as a sub consultant. This would also afford them the opportunity to work under the supervision of a qualified environmental professional. This compromise was not thoroughly explored by the working group that prepared these remarks, but there is no data to support the theory that the current market conditions related to professional site assessment services would be affected by this collaboration. Many people who possess the qualifications outlined in the proposed rule would likely be allowed to sit for a licensing exam. This licensing examination process would provide some objectivity in determining whether a candidate possessed the minimum abilities to perform the functions regulated by the proposed rule. By adding an objective basis to measuring the qualifications of an individual ( i. e., a combination of education, experience, and licensure) the public would be afforded the same protections used as justification for originally listing professional engineers and professional geologists as acceptable providers. 121 Response: Please see response to commenter number 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: NSPE Comment Number: 0230 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: Since enforcement and oversight is minimal in the proposed rule, the use of state licensed professionals would ensure that only duly qualified professionals are performing these services.

The Negotiated Rulemaking Committee is to be commended for its decision to not include certifications from independent professional certification organizations to define an environmental professional. While many such organizations may satisfy certain legitimacy concerns, it would seem that EPA's core purpose could be usurped by the administrative functions related to determining qualifications. Additionally, we feel that such a function is already being performed by government, albeit state governments, and this additional oversight function is simply unnecessary.

Response: Thank you for your comment. The final rule does not reference any private party professional certification standards. Such an approach would require that EPA review the certification requirements of each organization to determine whether or not each organization's certification requirements meet or exceed the regulatory qualifications for an environmental professional. Given that there may be many such organizations and given that each organization may review and change its certification qualifications on a frequent or periodic basis, we conclude that such an undertaking is not practicable. EPA does not have the necessary resources to review the procedures of each private certification organization and review and approve each organization's certification qualifications. Therefore, the final rule includes within the regulatory definition of an environmental professional, general performance based standards or qualifications for determining who may meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of conducting all appropriate inquiries. These standards include education and experience qualifications. The final rule does not recognize, or reference, any private organization's certification program within the context of the regulatory language. However, the Agency notes that any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in the final regulation will meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of this regulation.

Please also see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1. 122 Commenter Organization Name: NSPE Comment Number: 0230 Excerpt Number: 5 Excerpt Text: EPA has said in their rulemaking that they do not want to have to go through the vetting process, so it is NSPE's ultimate recommendation that the definition of an environmental professional continue to be limited to a professional engineer or professional geologist. This would ensure that there would be objective criteria established regarding the qualifications of environmental professionals and that there would be governmental entities at the state level in place to regulate those individuals.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Williams, Brian Comment Number: 0282 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I am a registered professional engineer and a registered professional geologist practicing in Montana, Idaho, and Washington states. I have worked within the ASTM standard E 1527 for many years, and I am glad that EPA is finally putting forth a rule to set standards for those persons defined as " environmental professionals". The current ASTM standard does not specify the level of education of those persons who perform the environmental studies governed by the proposed rule. As a professional engineer and geologist, I have seen MANY such reports developed by persons who were ( and continue to be) TOTALLY UNQUALIFIED to perform such services. In particular, many of those persons who are listed as CHMM's ( Certified Hazardous Materials Managers) have no formal education in the sciences on which they base their " opinions" . I attended one of the formative meetings of the CHMM " registration" committee, and none of those present was registered as an engineering or science professional in any state. Most had only a high school or 2 year college degree and only basic instruction in hazardous materials. At best, these people can be regarded only as trained technicians. Again, in particular, the CHMM organization " certifies" its members based on their payment of an organizational fee. There is no level of testing for technical or professional competence, such as is required for persons seeking licensure as engineers or geologists. In closure, I concur with the All Appropriate Inquiry rule proposed by the Agency. Absent adoption of this rule, it is my opinion that any nitwit who wants to call himself/ herself an " environmental professional" can do so, with the ability to make decisions regarding some of the most dangerous materials known to mankind.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1. 123 Commenter Organization Name: OSBGE Comment Number: 0291 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: OSBGE's opinion is that the EPA's proposed document in its current form will impede the State of Oregon's effectiveness in public protection from1 unqualified and nonregistered environmental practitioners who offer or provide the public practice of geology. As the draft is written, OSBGE is concerned about encouraging non registered individuals to undertake geologic services, under the guise of " environmental services'", in violation of Oregon State law.

Certain types of professional services covered by the proposed EPA definition of " environmental professional" may fall; within the public practice of geology in Oregon, including areas described within the " aill appropriate inquiry" language. For example, interpretation of geologic conditions used to determine 1) geologic or hydrogeologic conditions of the subject property and surrounding environment or 2) potential migration pathways ( e. g., groundwater flow direction) constitute the public practice of geology in Oregon. The practice of geology is regulated in Oregon and in most other States. OSBGE's statutory authority makes it clear that only Oregon Registered Geologists can provide these types of services.

During the past six years, several environmental reports ( prepared by unregistered " environmental professionals") that were referred to OSBGE for compliance review contained the public practice of geology, as defined by Oregon law. These reports can typically include contaminant fate and transport assessments, and the interpretation of groundwater conditions, gradient calculations, flow directions, etc., all of which constitute the practice of geology in Oregon. The public practice of geology by unregistered individuals is an actionable offense.

OSBGE's mission is to protect the public. Unregistered '" environmental professionals" are not obligated to follow a regulated " Code of Conduct", nor have they demonstrated the education and minimal competence necessary to provide the public practice of geology ( including hydrogeology). No regulatory body charged with public protection exists to test whether an environmental professional's work meets an acceptable standard. To encourage unregistered individuals to provide geologic services to the public breaches a legislative mandate established in 1977 in Oregon.

Response: The rule should not have the consequences described by the commenter. The final rule does not preempt state certifications for geologists or other professionals. The final rule at section 312.10( b)( 4) states, " The definition of environmental professional provided above does not preempt state professional licensing or registration requirements such as those for a professional geologist, engineer, or site remediation professional. Before commencing work, a person should determine the applicability of state professional licensing or registration laws to the activities to be undertaken as part of the inquiry identified in § 312.21( b). 124 Commenter Organization Name: DE Board of Geologists Comment Number: 0337 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The Delaware Board strongly agrees' with Section 312.10( b)( 4) of the proposed rule stating: The definition of environmental professional provided above does not preempt state professional licensing or registration requirements such as those for a professional geologist, engineer, or site remediation professional. Before commencing work, a person should determine the applicability of state professional licensing registration laws to the activities to be undertaken as part of the inquiry identified in Section 312.21( b). Delaware requires licensing of geologic and engineering professionals, and it would be inappropriate and possibly illegal for EPA defined " environmental professionals" to perform geologic or engineering characterizations involved in remediation of Brownfield sites.

The Delaware Board is opposed to any clauses included in the proposed rulemaking that involve grandfathering and references to unlicensed individuals that are somehow qualified by the federal government [ EPA or others] to perform this type of work and suggest that these references and clauses be removed entirely. The Board feels that professional licensure/ registration is best left to the states to regulate, not the federal government.

Response: Please see responses to comment numbers 0209 ( excerpt 1) and 0291 ( excerpt 1).

Commenter Organization Name: Foth & Van Dyke Comment Number: 0339 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: " Environmental Professional" is broadly defined to include certain persons who are not licensed professional engineers or professional geologists. In fact, the definition includes persons who do not even have a baccalaureate or higher degree in engineering or in any environmentally related field. We believe that allowing such inquiries be done by nonlicensed persons places consumers of these services in serious jeopardy of losing what would otherwise be a critical defense to potential liability for CERCLA imposed response costs. Without some licensing requirement, these consumers are left to fend for themselves when contracting for these services. On the other hand, requiring these environmental inquiries be done by licensed professional engineers or geologists provides these consumers the opportunity to, at the very least, check the persons credentials with the independent licensing entities, typically state or tribal licensing. boards, prior to the services being provided.

Accordingly, we recommend that the proposed definition of " Environmental 125 Professional" be limited to individuals who have demonstrated that they possess the necessary education, examination, and experience and who hold a professional engineers or professional geologists license and/ or registration from a state, tribe, or U. S. territory and have the equivalent of three years of full time relevant experience.

Response: Please see response to comment 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: ASBOG Comment Number: 0364 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The ASBOG ® Executive Committee and its Member Boards strongly concurs in Section 312.10( b)( 4) of the proposed rule which states:

" The definition of environmental professional provided above does not preempt state professional licensing or registration requirements such as those for a professional geologist, engineer, or site remediation professional Before commencing work, ( emphasis added), a person should determine the applicability of state professional licensing or registration laws to the activities to be undertaken as part of the inquiry identified in Section 312.21 ( b)."

All 29 of the ASBOG ® Member Board States require licensure/ registration for the professional practice of geology. It is inappropriate, and in some states possibly illegal, for the proposed " environmental professionals" to engage in the practice of geology in the environmental characterization and remediation of Brownfield sites.

Response: Please see response to comment numbers 0072 ( excerpt 2) and 0291 ( excerpt 1).

Commenter Organization Name: Hambley, Douglas Comment Number: 0394 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: While I am sure that many comments have been received that recommend that the proposed definition of Environmental Professional ( EP) be watered down, I would submit that there are very good reasons for the definition as it stands.

First and foremost, Phase II of an Environmental Site Assessment ( ESA) consists of a site investigation concerning soil and groundwater. Such soil invstigations are performed by environmental geologists and in states where there is licensing or certifications of geologists, such work is defined as requiring supervision by a licensed geologist.

Second, Phase I of an ESA includes a site visit where the primary focus is to identify 126 spills, stained soils, stressed vegetation, and chemical usage. This part of the work should be performed by an engineer or geologist. ( Although identification of stressed vegetation, which would require a biologist, was included in the above list, stressed vegetation is probably the least frequently encountered indicator of environmental problems.

The most compelling reason for the preference that the Environmental Professional should be a licensed Professional Engineer ( PE) or Professional Geologist ( PG) is the fact that by virtue of the licensing, a PE or PG can be held legally responsible for the validity of their work. Moreover, protection of the public is the raison d'etre for the licensing. Such legal responsibility is not provided with other certifications.

Finally, there are unfiortunately already too many persons performing Phase I ESAs who have neither the training nor the expertise to perform them correctly. Their attraction is primarily that they are generally inexpensive. Unfoirtunately, however, such ESAs are also quite often incomplete. Indeed, I have myself done ESAs that were required as follow ups because the initial submission ( by someone else) was found to be inadequate. Diluting the qualifications for the EP would send a strong signal that slipshod and unprofessional work is not only tolerated but encouraged. If the Agency is serious about requiring " All Appropriate Inquiry" it should also be adamant that the work be performed by properly qualified practitioners.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Geomatrix Consultants Comment Number: 0433 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: We agree with the proposed AAI requirements for qualifying practitioners especially with the requirement that a qualified EP perform the site visit. ESA's are frequently complicated enough that oversight by a professional engineer or geologist is crucial. This is particularly true because preliminary interpretations of contaminant fate and transport are made as part of any effort to evaluate risk from offsite sources. Furthermore, only someone trained and experienced in environmental science, hydrogeology, or engineering is qualified to make specific recommendations for remedial investigations and remedial options, in the event that contamination is strongly suspected.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0353, excerpt 4.

Commenter Organization Name: Ruhmann, Karl Comment Number: PM 0127 0002 Excerpt Number: 1 127 Excerpt Text: In saying that, the assessments that we see that were performed by nonengineers, or nonengineering firms, those companies are generally no longer in business. That would be my first comment.

My second comment was that when the ESA was performed by a registered engineer, we rarely take issue with their findings, and I can say that for several of the companies that are in this room.

In summary, excellence and due diligence is dependent upon the person performing the assessment. This is beneficial to the buyer of the property, the regulator, and the brownfields community, as a whole.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1. 128 <IP_ADDRESS> The Proposed Minimum Requirements Will Improve Quality of ESAs Commenter Organization Name: Virginia Geotechnical Services Comment Number: 0034 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  The proposed rule will improve quality of ESAs Excerpt Text: I am in support of the proposed rule for Standards and Practices for AAI. The qualifications section, in particular, has long been needed and will vastly improve the quality of environmental assessments by setting an appropriate level of qualifications and experience for persons holding themselves out as an " environmental professional." Because ASTM has proven it cannot address the qualifications issue, EPA is the only appropriate venue that can set this standard.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Cooper, Ivan A Comment Number: 0047 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: First, ASTM E 1527 in fact does not specify any qualifications necessary to be an environmental professional. Therefore I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

The definition of environmental professional proposed in the rule would prevent from leading AAI studies those who do not have the appropriate education, training, and experience. I understand that my registrations, certifications, and direct experience will allow me to serve as an environmental professional under the rule, and it will allow me to train others and share my experience and knowledge to supply the next generation of environmental professionals to perform these services.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Vellone, Daniel A Comment Number: 0048 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  The license requirement should not be revised to allow individuals other than professional engineers and professional geologists to qualify as EPs 129 Excerpt Text: In my experience, unless environmental inquiries are handled properly, many types of properties, including Brownfield sites, can pose a potential threat to public welfare, safety, and health. Therefore, the person ( or firm) who is designated as being in " Responsible Charge" of the design and/ or leading the AAI study should have a minimum requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, It is encouraging to see that the EPA has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process, allowing otherwise " unqualified" persons acting in the public interest. As an " environmental professional" having education, experience, and professional licensure, I believe it is only those holding licensure as Professional Engineers or Professional Geologists who can be held accountable to the highest standards of professional conduct and place the public welfare above all other considerations.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Malivuk, John Comment Number: 0060 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: ASTM E1527 does not specify qualifications and I am glad that the Agency has established minimum education and experience requirements for professionals engaged with AAI studies. This important feature is currently missing from the process. The definition of environmental professional proposed in the rule would prevent those without appropriate education, training and experience from performing such services. Next, my part of Ohio has environmentally impacted sites and the broader scope of the environmental inquiry provides users and the public with confidence that AAI studies will be protective of human health and the environment and thusly promote productive use of properties consistent with the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act. In other words, it appears that the proposed Rule balances the concerns of the many involved parties without compromising the environment now or in the future. Third, the proposed rule significantly improves the existing environmental inquiry process for property transactions. This permits environmental professionals to continue to provide the expertise that those performing ASTM E1527 studies. Not having to learn a new process will ensure cost effectiveness in consultant services. Last, the rule will help the best performers obtain the most work, by raising the standards for those performing AAI services. It should raise the level of awareness of those who procure such services that qualifications matter Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 130 Commenter Organization Name: Thacker, Barry K Comment Number: 0071 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: As an owner of a firm that performs environmental site assessments, I understand that brownfield engagements and environmental site assessment can pose latent risks. The only way to deal effectively with those risks is by relying on professionals who have the education, training, experience, and good judgment needed to know what to do when the situation they encounter is not identical to one in a " cook book" guide. For that reason, I am pleased that the proposed rule establishes realistic near and long term definitions of " environmental professional' 1 and encourages the application of the professional judgment needed to help consider and safeguard the public trust. I think that the change " raises the bar" such that better assessments will be performed in a cost effective manner.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Cheeks, J. Richard Comment Number: 0083 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: First, ASTM E 1527 in fact does not specify any qualifications necessary to be an environmental professional. Therefore I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies. This important feature is missing from the current process.

The definition of environmental professional proposed in the rule would prevent from leading AAI studies those who do not have the appropriate education, training, and experience. I understand that, while my certifications will not allow me to serve as an environmental professional under the rule, they will allow me to continue to work under qualified environmental professionals in my firm and continue to increase my knowledge. In fact, the proposed regulations create an incentive for excellence, which I appreciate.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: McHugh, Dan Comment Number: 0085 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I am particularly pleased with these items in the rule: Defined Environmental 131 Professional ( EP): Persons with less than the required experience, as stated clearly in the rule, should not be evaluating site data to determine due diligence implications. Each day, I utilize experience I have gained over 10 years to decide if additional inquiry is warranted. A clear definition of EP has been a glaring weakness in the industry. The science background is controversial but reasonable. Understanding chemical properties, degradation, movement, and impacts are aspects of ESAs that are not easily understood by people with non science backgrounds. Someone who has a business background may not understand chemical properties and may not fully understand which facilities should be a concern Data Gap Identification: This will provide clear information as to the completeness of each report and improve the quality of the reports.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Fulk, Kevin J Comment Number: 0086 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Adopt the rule as proposed Excerpt Text: I support the proposed rule because it establishes minimum qualifications for an environmental professional and will provide a better approach for developers / landowners to handle redevelopment on brownfield sites in our nations urban areas than what currently exists.

The minimum qualifications for an environmental professional will help the industry apply a higher level of qualifications/ experience to solve environmental issues for real estate development and redevelopment. This EPA legislation should also give developers a higher level of confidence to tackle brownfields sites, which will significantly aid in " protecting human health and the environmental" for generations to come.

I urge the Agency to adopt the rule as proposed.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Simon, Richard M Comment Number: 0089 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: As an owner and President of a firm that performs environmental site assessments, I know better than most that even the apparently simplest brownfield engagement or environmental site assessment can pose latent risks. The only way to deal effectively with those risks is by relying on professionals who have the education, training, experience, and good judgment needed to know what to do when the situation they encounter is not 132 identical to one described in a guide of some kind, or contemplated in a standard of one kind or another. For that reason, I am pleased that the proposed rule establishes realistic near and long term definitions of ' environmental professional,' allows for and even encourages the application of the professional judgment needed to help consider and safeguard the public trust, and, in general, ' raises the bar' such that better assessments will be performed, and for not that much more money.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Belaire, Kent Comment Number: 0267 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The proposed AAI rule significantly improves the existing environmental inquiry process for real estate transactions. Many types of properties, including Brownfield sites can pose a danger to public health, safety, and welfare. The professional responsible for designing and overseeing the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment to effectively deal with those potential risks. The AAI rule takes into account both academic background and experience in the definition of the environmental professional ( EP). The AAI rule requires specifics regarding the educational requirements as well as the amount and type of training that is required to conduct an assessment. The AAI rule also requires the EP to remain current in his field through continuing education or training and to be able to demonstrate such effort. This provides for an objective standard to measure the credentials of a prospective environmental assessment provider. This is a much better than the ASTM definition of EP which only refers to " training and experience" and makes no mention of education.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Billington, Edward Comment Number: 0284 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I am particularly supportive of establishing minimum licensing, education, and experience requirements for Environmental Professionals and in encouraging a performance based approach, rather than a prescriptive approach. The public is best served by having minimum criteria for those who conduct environmental investigations for brownfields. The risks to the public in the resulting use of the properties can be high and need to be mitigated by having trained and experienced professionals in a direct role. The use of licensed engineers and geologists, who have already met a minimum standard for this type of work, is the logical criteria to use. 133 Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Anonymous Comment Number: 0286 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I understand that this docket sets minimum qualification criteria for environmental professionals. I strongly endorse the creation of qualification criteria as described in this docket. I feel that the public is owed the assurance that the individual conducting the work has a proven track record of professional judgment, which is critical in the proper evaluation of the risk associated with a particular site.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Willis, George Comment Number: 0288 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Support of the performance standard Excerpt Text: I like the fact that it sets a minimum qualification and criteria level for the professionals in the environmental practice area. It is performance based and includes an education component which is not unlike the successful professional practices found in the engineering industry. The use of professional judgement in evaluating site risk is imperative and supported by the rule. If adopted, the All Appropriate Inquiry Rule should go a long way towards improving the quality of the practitioners in the field and more significantly, actually protecting human health and the environment.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Foppe Technical Group Comment Number: 0289 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Adopt the rule as proposed Excerpt Text: As an environmental company that performs AAI, we would like to add our voice in support of the proposed rule. It is imperative that the technical nature of a Phase I be performed by well trained, competent professionals. The proposed rules elevated the requirements to a necessary level to ensure that competent work is performed. 134 Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Anonymous Comment Number: 0302 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: Please count this as a message in support of the proposed AAI rule. I am an environmental professional and see a broad range of environmental services provided. Not requiring professional credentials to provide these services has been a mistake and the public is not served by subprofessional opinions on the environmental condition of sites. The public will be better protected by professionals providing these services.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: QORE, Inc Comment Number: 0307 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  Adopt the rule as proposed Excerpt Text: I think this is a good and necessary standard. Minimum qualification criteria for environmental professionals must be set. The public will be provided with the confidence that AAI studies will be protective of human health and the environment that does not currently exist with the ASTM process. I am pleased to support the AAI rule.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: QORE Property Sciences Comment Number: 0308 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: Brownfields often have complex histories and potentially severe health and safety implications if not managed professionally. Only individuals that have substantial expertise in geology, hydrology, chemistry, engineering and risk assessments should be allowed to perform All Appropriate Inquiries. Personnel without this background have no basis for determining if a site is appropriate for brownfield development. In order to keep the public's trust in this critical decision making process, let's keep the bar high on those responsible for performing AAI's. 135 Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Lampkin, Charles Comment Number: 0376 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I have read the proposed new regulations on CERCLA and approve of the changes. I currently serve on the ASTM E 50 Committee that wrote the ASTM 1527 Guidelines. I particularly support the new requirements on the Environmental Professional. During the course of my environmental practice I am asked to update Phase Is that have been prepared by others. I find that when the reports have been prepared by subprofessionals there is not much information that I can use in the updates. I receive advertisments from several licensing organizations that will issue a license after taking a 24 hour course. There are very few requirements on experience and education. I think that by requiring a Registered Engineer or Geologist to prepare the Phase Is, the quality of the reports will improve.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Templeton, Sharon Comment Number: 0407 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: Currently there are individuals and companies without sufficient experience and qualifications who are providing environmental due diligence studies for simple and complex properties. Unless these studies are performed properly, many types of properties, including brownfield sites, can pose a real danger to public health, safety, and welfare. The person who designs and leads the AAI study must have the requisite education, training, experience, and judgment. For that reason, I am glad to see that the Agency has established minimum education and experience qualifications for " environmental professionals" involved with AAI studies.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Wike, Dennis Comment Number: PM 0127 0003 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: So one of the things that I see from this standpoint is that the requirement to have environmental professionals have minimum qualifications is a very good one, and I 136 welcome it.

What I have seen, I have worked on the industry side, as well as the consulting, and have reviewed thousands of Phase I's. And unfortunately, the general mind public looks for a piece of paper or a report and doesn't know anything about the quality of what they have received.

I'm very happy to see the EPA's comments on the transaction screen and its lacking in ability to protect from the CERCLA liability. I think these unqualified folks that do Phase I's are doing a disservice to their clients.

Having minimum standards is good. There might be some consideration that, well, there will be a lack of folks that can do this work. I don't think that's the case. I think what has happened is that many of the folks that can do the work have just decided not to do the work, because of the fact that there are so many people out there that will do it for next to nothing, and the general public, the client  not the sophisticated client, but the general client out there doesn't know the difference.

So from this standpoint, I do believe that we are making great improvements, getting it in the proposed standard. I think we're moving in the right direction. I think the EPA has done a very good job.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Langston, Jeff Comment Number: PM 0127 0006 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  <IP_ADDRESS>  The proposed rule will improve quality of ESAs Excerpt Text: And I just want to mention that I'm in favor of the proposed rule, and for the reasons  the favorable reasons that have been mentioned by others. I don't want to restate those, but specifically, I do want to comment on the definition of the environmental professional that the rule would require, and I believe that that definition for the environmental professional would result in increased quality of the environment assessment and the due diligence reports.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0072, excerpt 2. 137 2.1.2 Revise the License Requirement to Include Licensed or Certified Professionals Other than Professional Engineers and Professional Geologists Commenter Organization Name: Lind, Peter A Comment Number: 0052 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I encourage you to allow qualified licensed design professionals, not simply PE's and PG's, to be a part of the solution.

I strongly support changing the proposed regulation to allow " licensed design professionals" qualified for conducting AAI's. Then add a definition for " licensed design professional" as commonly written in state statutes. Recognize states are responsible for licensing professionals, not feds.

Response: The final rule recognizes, and includes within the definition of environmental professional, any individual licensed or certified by a state or tribal government to perform site assessments, provided the individual also has three or more years of fulltime relevant experience.

EPA notes that based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency has made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on 138 this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out an all appropriate inquiries.

In the preamble to the final rule, EPA clarifies that only the individual overseeing the conduct of an all appropriate inquiries investigation must qualify as an environmental professional, as defined in the final rule. Other individuals may contribute to the investigation as long as their activities are conducted under the supervision or responsible charge of the individual qualifying as an environmental professional. In today's final rule, the Agency is retaining the recommendation that an individual who qualifies as an environmental professional conduct, or closely oversee the conduct of, the required onsite visual inspection of the property.

Commenter Organization Name: American Institute of Architects Comment Number: 0102 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: AIA is concerned that this restrictive definition excludes architects and other design professionals who, through their specialized training and relevant professional experience, have achieved the requisite skills and credentials to manage and oversee " all appropriate inquiries." Architects and other design professionals with specialized environmental training commonly investigate, conduct, supervise and manage environmental site assessments, building renovations and site remediations involving asbestos, lead paint, radon, and other toxic and environmentally harmful materials; as well as underground storage tank removals and the recycling of ozone depleting refrigerants. Architects with specialized environmental training are commonly acknowledged by the other professionals in the field to have the technical education, skills and environmental sensitivity to undertake these activities and deliver superior results. Should the definition currently proposed become final, these practitioners will no longer be able to practice their trade. Building owners, their representatives, lawyers, real estate managers and financial institutions will no longer be able to retain them to do the work they have studied for and practiced effectively to date.

AIA requests that the definition of " environmental professional" be revised to include individuals with relevant experience and holding a baccalaureate or higher degree in architecture or a similar design related field, and individuals with relevant experience and holding a current license in architecture or a design related field.

Response: The definition of environmental professional in the final rule does not specifically recognize architects as environmental professionals. The Agency does not support a conclusion that all architects meet the qualifications necessary to oversee and supervise all appropriate inquiries investigations based merely upon the fact that an individual holds a degree in architecture or practices as an architect. However, the final rule includes in the final definition of environmental professional experience and educational qualifications that many practicing architects may possess. In addition, the final rule 139 provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments.

Commenter Organization Name: Lind, Peter Comment Number: 0107 Excerpt Number: 1 Other Sections: NEW  2.3.1  Professional engineer certification and professional geologist certification do not ensure high level of professional ability Excerpt Text: The present definition for " environmental professional" in the PROPOSED REGULATION is too restrictive by omitting the words, " licensed architects" and " architectural accredited institutions". Similar to licensed engineers and licensed geologists, licensed architects are design professionals.

To simply allow the grandfathering of, for example; a licensed " electrical engineer" to conduct surface and subsurface investigations because the " engineer" is licensed and has had three years of AAI relevant experience is NOT fair to a licensed architect having similar AAI relevant environmental experience. Nor is it appropriate for the client and general public to feel safe that a licensed geologist is absolutely qualified to sign off on an environmental site assessment of a " facility" or " building structure" on the subject site. Think about it, a licensed architect having specialized environmental training may be better qualified in ESA matters concerning facility, function and their processes that may, or may not, have contaminated site surface or subsurface, yet is not expressly " qualified" under any of the four proposed qualifications by the exclusion of these terms, including the grandfather provisions.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0102, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Lind, Peter Comment Number: 0107 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: Therefore, may I recommend consideration of the following changes to the 312.10 definitions:

1. Add " licensed architect" to section 312.10 ( b)( 2)( i) and ( b)( 4) 2. Add " architectural accredited institution" to section 312.10 ( b)( 2)( iii)

Response: Please see response to comment number 0102, excerpt 1. 140 Commenter Organization Name: Fishman, Betty Comment Number: 0138 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: The credential I work with the Certified Hazardous Materials Manager ® ( CHMM ® )  is a professional credential that is accredited by the Council of Engineering and Scientific Specialty Boards and adheres to the stringent ASTM E1929 98 Standard Practice for Assessment of Certification Programs for Environmental Professionals. CHMMs are bound by their Code of Ethics to practice only within their areas of expertise. Furthermore, all CHMMs are required to remain current by qualifying for recertification every five years.

A Master Level CHMM must have an appropriate accredited baccalaureate or higher degree and at least seven ( 7) years of relevant experience, which exceeds the experience level in this proposal. We would be pleased to see EPA recognize the Master Level CHMM as a means of qualifying for the Environmental Professional, along with the licenses and registrations already included in the proposed rules. If it cannot be adopted at this late date into the rule itself, we would be pleased to see reference to the Master Level CHMM as a qualifying credential in EPA guidance materials.

Response: The definition of an environmental professional in the final rule includes individuals who hold a Baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution of higher education in engineering or science and have the equivalent of five ( 5) years of full time relevant experience in conducting environmental site assessments, or all appropriate inquiries. In addition, individuals with ten years of full time relevant experience in conducting environmental site assessments, or all appropriate inquiries qualify as environmental professionals for the purpose of conducting all appropriate inquiries. Individuals with these qualifications most likely will possess sufficient specific education, training, and experience necessary to exercise professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases to the surface or subsurface of a property, sufficient to meet the objectives and performance factors included in § § 312.20( e) and ( f) of the final rule.

In addition to the qualifications for environmental professionals mentioned above, EPA is retaining the proposed provision to include within the definition of an environmental professional individuals who are licensed to perform environmental site assessments or all appropriate inquiries by the Federal government ( e. g., the Bureau of Indian Affairs) or under a state or tribal certification program, provided that these individuals also have three years of full time relevant experience. We contend that individuals licensed by state and tribal governments, or by any department or agency within the federal government, to perform all appropriate inquiries or environmental site assessments, should be allowed to qualify as an environmental professional under today's regulation. State and tribal agencies may best determine the qualifications defining individuals who " possess sufficient specific education, training, and experience necessary to exercise 141 professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases... to the surface or subsurface of a property, sufficient to meet the rule's objectives and performance factors" within any particular state or tribal jurisdiction.

The final rule does not recognize or reference any private party professional certification standards. Such an approach would require that EPA review the certification requirements of individual organizations to determine whether or not each organization's certification requirements meet or exceed the regulatory qualifications for an environmental professional. Given that there may be many such organizations and given that each organization may review and change its certification qualifications on a frequent or periodic basis, we conclude that such an undertaking is not practicable. EPA does not have the necessary resources to review the procedures of each private certification organization and review and approve each organization's certification qualifications. Therefore, the final rule includes within the regulatory definition of an environmental professional, general performance based standards or qualifications for determining who may meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of conducting all appropriate inquiries. These standards include particular education and experience qualifications. The final rule does not recognize, or reference, any private organization's certification program within the context of the regulatory language. However, the Agency notes that any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in today's final regulation will meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of this regulation.

Commenter Organization Name: Peyton, J. Comment Number: 0216 Excerpt Number: 3 Other Sections: NEW  2.1.3  Revise the rule to exclude the license requirement from the definition of the EP Excerpt Text: Also, please consider accepting the Certified Environmental Professional, Qualified Environmental Professional, Registered Environmental Manager, and Certified Industrial Hygienist certifications as equivalent to engineering and geology certifications. These 4 certifications are recognized by the Council of Science and Engineering Certification Board, which means that EPA can rely on the rigor of these certifications without having to monitor them. It is simply unfair to recognize some politically connected certifications but not others that are even more appropriate. Or, do not recognize any certifications, including the engineering and geology ones.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0138, excerpt 2. 142 Commenter Organization Name: Stevens, Scott Comment Number: 0225 Excerpt Number: 4 Other Sections: NEW  2.3.1  Professional engineer certification and professional geologist certification do not ensure high level of professional ability Excerpt Text: It is important that professional designations for conducting inquiries be placed on the same level. Engineers should not be given special status in this industry as that designation does automatically bring with it the needed skill set to protect the public health. Instead, place all professional designations on the same level and make level of experience the deciding factor.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0138, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: Kamiya, Mark Comment Number: 0248 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: I would also suggest that the rule ( 312.10) include state recognized license or certification in the definition which is consistent with the PE and PG designations. This additional language would clarify what the states current responsibilities are and allow the states to license/ certify environmental professionals to their appropriate standards.

Response: EPA is retaining the proposed provision to include within the definition of an environmental professional individuals who are licensed to perform environmental site assessments or all appropriate inquiries by the Federal government ( e. g., the Bureau of Indian Affairs) or under a state or tribal certification program, provided that these individuals also have three years of full time relevant experience. We contend that individuals licensed by state and tribal governments, or by any department or agency within the federal government, to perform all appropriate inquiries or environmental site assessments, should be allowed to qualify as an environmental professional under today's regulation. State and tribal agencies may best determine the qualifications defining individuals who " possess sufficient specific education, training, and experience necessary to exercise professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases... to the surface or subsurface of a property, sufficient to meet the rule's objectives and performance factors" within any particular state or tribal jurisdiction.

Commenter Organization Name: Roeser, Daniel Comment Number: 0249 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: 143 I strongly recommend that non governmental, professional organization certifications, such as the Certified Hazardous Materials Manager ( CHMM) credential, be recognized as qualification equivalent to the PE or PG credential. As a basis for relevant knowledge, it is hard to imagine that a CHMM who has demonstrated capabilities in the specific areas of practice pertinent to AAI by experience, study and test is any less qualified than a registered professional mechanical or electrical engineer, each of which is automatically qualified ( with three years experience) to perform AAI assessments. The CHMM certification is based on testing, a strict Code of Ethics, and the loss of certification if that Code is violated. The effectiveness, and acceptance by the EPA, of non governmental, professional organization standards is demonstrated in the designation of ASTM standards as interim criteria for AAI.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0138, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: AIPG Comment Number: 0253 Excerpt Number: 2 Excerpt Text: The profession of geology is not regulated in every state, tribe, or U. S. territory. Unlike some professions, many states do not have a registration or licensure program for Professional Geologists. Therefore, the rule as it is written will place the burden of certification upon the individual professional geologist to apply for the Environmental Professional credential. The U. S. EPA will be required to process and verify the accuracy and completeness of each application. To alleviate some of the burden on the profession and the agency, and to move toward a nation wide level of coherence of professional capabilities, AIPG recommends that the rule be modified to include the AEPG credential Certified Professional Geologist ( CPG) in the definition of Environmental Professional.

In 1963, AIPG established baseline qualifications for granting the Certified Professional Geologist ( CPG) title. The CPG title attests to the public that those geologists who hold this title have undergone peer review, and have been deemed competent practitioners who are worthy of public trust. The high standards for obtaining the title have earned it wide recognition. The primary purpose of AIPG, to strengthen geological science as a profession, remains undiminished. AIPG is organized into thirty six Sections nationwide and has certified almost 11,000 CPGs since its founding. The CPG credential is recognized not only in the U. S. but also internationally; the CPG credential is recognized by the European Federation of Geologists, by the Canadian Securities Administrators under National Instruments 43 101 and 51 101, and by the Australian Stock Exchange as a " Recognized Overseas Professional Organization."

By including the CPG credential in the definition of Environmental Professional, the U. S. EPA can be assured of the consistent application of high standards in those states that do not have registration or licensure programs, while allowing for the mobility of highly credentialed professionals across state boundaries. Approximately 40% of ADPG 144 membership is in states without programs, and approximately 75% of AIPG membership identifies itself as engaged in environmental practice. EPA can minimize duplicative effort required to process the credentials of individual applicants ( i. e. the professional geologist that does not live in a state with a registration or licensure program) by listing the CPG credential in the rule itself. In this way, much of the EPA administrative burden is obviated.

AIPG does not review and modify its certification qualifications on a frequent or periodic basis. Since its inception more than 40 years ago, AIPG has maintained a high standard for the CPG title. The education and experience requirements for AIPG certification meet or exceed those of all of the state registration and licensure programs. These include: a baccalaureate or higher; minimum of 36 semester hours in geological sciences; a minimum of 8 years experience with a bachelor degree, 7 years with a master degree, 5 years with a doctorate; and adherence to the AIPG Code of Ethics.

Response: Although the final rule recognizes tribal and state licensed P. E. and P. G. s and other such government licensed environmental professionals with three years of experience to be environmental professionals, the rule does not restrict the definition of an environmental professional to these licensed individuals. The definition of an environmental professional also includes individuals who hold a Baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution of higher education in engineering or science and have the equivalent of five ( 5) years of full time relevant experience in conducting environmental site assessments, or all appropriate inquiries. In addition, individuals with ten years of full time relevant experience in conducting environmental site assessments, or all appropriate inquiries qualify as environmental professionals for the purpose of conducting all appropriate inquiries. Individuals with these qualifications most likely will possess sufficient specific education, training, and experience necessary to exercise professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases to the surface or subsurface of a property, sufficient to meet the objectives and performance factors included in § 312.20( e) and ( f).

In addition to the qualifications for environmental professionals mentioned above, EPA is retaining the proposed provision to include within the definition of an environmental professional individuals who are licensed to perform environmental site assessments or all appropriate inquiries by the Federal government ( e. g., the Bureau of Indian Affairs) or under a state or tribal certification program, provided that these individuals also have three years of full time relevant experience. We contend that individuals licensed by state and tribal governments, or by any department or agency within the federal government, to perform all appropriate inquiries or environmental site assessments, should be allowed to qualify as an environmental professional under today's regulation. State and tribal agencies may best determine the qualifications defining individuals who " possess sufficient specific education, training, and experience necessary to exercise professional judgment to develop opinions and conclusions regarding the presence of releases or threatened releases... to the surface or subsurface of a property, sufficient to 145 meet the rule's objectives and performance factors" within any particular state or tribal jurisdiction.

In the case where a state or tribal government does not have a professional licensing or certification program, the final rule provides other options for qualifying as an environmental professional ( i. e., experience and educational requirements). EPA does not have an environmental professional licensing program and has no plans to establish such a program. The commenter is incorrect in asserting that in those cases where a state does not have a licensing program for professional geologies, " the U. S. EPA will be required to process and verify the accuracy and completeness of each application."

Also, in the final rule, EPA is not recognizing private, non governmental organizations whose certification requirements meet the environmental professional qualifications included in the final rule. The final rule does not reference any private party professional certification standards. Such an approach is not necessary and would require that EPA review the certification requirements of each organization to determine whether or not each organization's certification requirements meet or exceed the regulatory qualifications for an environmental professional. Given that there may be many such organizations and given that each organization may review and change its certification qualifications on a frequent or periodic basis, we conclude that such an undertaking is not practicable. EPA does not have the necessary resources to review the procedures of each private certification organization and review and approve each organization's certification qualifications. Therefore, the final rule includes within the regulatory definition of an environmental professional, general performance based standards or qualifications for determining who may meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of conducting all appropriate inquiries. These standards include education and experience qualifications. The final rule does not recognize, or reference, any private organization's certification program within the context of the regulatory language. However, the Agency notes that any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in today's final regulation will meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of this regulation.

Based upon the input received from the public commenters, EPA determined that the definition of environmental professional included in today's final rule establishes a balance between the merits of setting a high standard of excellence for the conduct of all appropriate inquiries through the establishment of stringent qualifications for environmental professionals and the need to ensure that experienced and highly competent individuals currently conducting all appropriate inquiries are not displaced.

Commenter Organization Name: AIPG Comment Number: 0253 Excerpt Number: 4 146 Excerpt Text: Adding also to the importance of this issue is the proliferation of automated, Internetbased platforms for creating data summaries and maps of the subject area. These give the erroneous impression of thoroughness to the point of even showing groundwater flow direction and the relative elevation of surrounding sites that have the potential to impact the subject site. These presentations can be very misleading and, if used by an unqualified EP, may lead to serious oversights with significant consequences. The judgment of a qualified geologist, taking advantage of all available geologic and hydrogeologic information sources, is necessary for this purpose.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0209, excerpt 1.

Commenter Organization Name: Wallace, Ronald Comment Number: 0254 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: My comments pertain to 40 CFR Part 312 Subpart B  Definitions and References.

Professional Engineers ( P. E.) and Professional Geologists ( P. G.) with three years of relevant, full time experience are currently deemed to meet the definition of Environmental Professional. The public can inquire through the individual state boards to verify that a particular individual is properly licensed.

For unlicensed individuals who qualify for Environmental Professional based on five years of relevant experience, and for individuals who will qualify under the " grandfather" clause based on ten years of relevant experience, there is no proposed system for the public to verify these credentials.

I strongly recommend that the Rule be written to specifically recognize and accept holders of the AIPG Certified Professional Geologist ( CPG) designation as Environmental Professionals, AIPG's CPG meets the educational and exceeds the work experience of a licensed P. G. The individual would still be required to demonstrate three years of relevant, full time experience under these proposed rules.

Response: Please see response to comment number 0253, excerpt 2.

Commenter Organization Name: IPEP Comment Number: 0266 Excerpt Number: 3 Excerpt Text: Professional Certifications 147 The Negotiated Rulemaking Committee that developed the proposed regulation for conducting AAIs is to be commended for its efforts to include a broad spectrum of the stakeholders and require that only highly qualified and competent environmental professionals be specified for the performance of such real property environmental assessments. However, the outcome of the effort failed to adequately address a number of major issues related to ( i) the specification of objective criteria and procedures for use in bestowing professional credentials on environmental professionals, and ( ii) the established credentialing mechanism that is already in place at the national level that will better protect the public's interest regarding the performance of AAI activities than the proposal embodied in the subject docket. This letter addresses these issues, and points out the specific strengths and weakness of the proposal with regard to the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in § 312.10 ( b)( 1). It recommends that the definition be made more objective and directly tied to environmental professionals who will have met national competency standards which are compliant with ASTM E1929 98, Standard Practice for the Assessment of Certification Programs for Environmental Professionals: Accreditation Criteria.

IPEP strongly endorses the EPA concept of defining an Environmental Professional, as discussed in Section III( D) of the October 23, 2003 NODA regarding the proposed Burden Reduction Rule, and believes that the comments IPEP submitted to that proposed rule have equal merit with regard to the subject proposed rule. In particular, IPEP believes that the following quote from the preamble to the EPA's October 23, 2003 proposed regulations, is equally applicable to the proposed AAI regulations, such that EPA should "... establish an environmental professional performance standard based on membership in a recognized professional organization. This would be consistent with our principle of allowing the regulated community to meet our standards at the lowest possible cost. The challenge we faced in developing a performance standard was determining which professional organizations are legitimate. Commenters helped by offering the suggestion that we recognize only the organizations which meet the criteria for assessing certification programs for environmental professionals established by the American Society for Testing and Materials ( ASTM). ASTM is a nonprofit organization that provides a forum for the development and publication of voluntary, consensus standards for materials, products, systems, and services. The advantage of an ASTM standard is that it is developed by individuals with a diversity of backgrounds, expertise, and knowledge. Through a consensus approach, the standards that are developed reflect the needs of all the stakeholders."

" ASTM E1929 98, Standard Practice for the Assessment of Certification Programs for Environmental Professionals: Accreditation Criteria assesses the credibility of certification programs for environmental professionals. Under these standards, the certifying body must have a program to evaluate individual competence for certification that is objective and based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to function in the specialty area. Applicants must document their level of education, supply reference 148 materials, sign and abide by a code of ethics established by the certifying body, and pass a comprehensive examination. The ASTM standard also requires that environmental certification programs be accredited by an independent entity ."

" Therefore, we are considering allowing only professionals certified by organizations meeting the ASTM standard to conduct a limited number of the certifications. Under this standard, anyone who certifies the operation of facilities must ( a) be licensed to practice in the state where the facility is located or recognized by a certification program that is compliant with ASTM E1929 98 Standard Practice for the Assessment of Certification Programs for Environmental Professionals: Accreditation Criteria, and ( b) have the knowledge and experience to undertake the tasks required for the certification."

IPEP endorses incorporation into the AAI regulations such a performance standard for Environmental Professional Certifications. Further, as discussed in more detail below, based on concerns raised by others in their comments on EPA's original Burden Reduction Rule proposal, IPEP suggests that condition ( b) be modified to read: ( b) have the knowledge, experience and, where required by local or state regulation, appropriate license or registration under applicable law or regulation, to undertake the tasks required for the certification.

As licenses for registered professional engineers and registered professional geologists issued by the individual states and territories do not specify the practice discipline of the individual registrant, it is critical that there be linkage between the holding of a license and the qualifications and experience required to conduct AAI to qualify for certain landowner liability protections under CERCLA. It should also be recognized that granting of licensure by a state or territory or certification by an accredited certification program only assures that a practicing environmental professional has met the minimum criteria necessary for such licensure or certification, and does not provide assurance that the individual is highly competent or expert in the conduct of AAI at CERCLA or Brownfields sites or other properties previously developed and used for commercial or industrial purposes.

Response: EPA is not recognizing private, non governmental organizations whose certification requirements meet the environmental professional qualifications included in the final rule. The final rule does not reference any private party professional certification standards. Therefore, there is no need to reference or depend upon a standard that assesses professional certification standards. Given the performance based qualifications provided in the final definition of an environmental professional, such an approach is not necessary. The final rule does not recognize, or reference, any private organization's certification program within the context of the regulatory language. However, the Agency notes that any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in today's final regulation will meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of this regulation. 149 Based upon public comments received in response to the proposed rule on the issue of qualifications for the environmental professional, the Agency made a few modifications to the proposed definition of environmental professional. Many commenters pointed out that the proposed definition placed too much emphasis on educational requirements and did not allow persons with a significant number of years of experience in performing environmental assessments to qualify as environmental professionals, for the purposes of the all appropriate inquiries rule, if they do not have a college degree in science or engineering. In response to the concerns raised by commenters, the final rule provides that individuals that do not meet the required educational requirement ( i. e., do not have a Baccalaureate or higher degree in a field of engineering or science from an accredited institution of higher education) will qualify as an environmental professional if they have ten ( 10) years of relevant full time experience in the conduct of all appropriate inquiries investigations, or Phase I environmental site assessments. In addition, today's final rule does not include the proposed " grandfather clause."

The Agency made every effort to take public comment into consideration while promulgating the final all appropriate inquiries rule. To this end the above mentioned changes have been made to the standards set out for environmental professionals. It is the opinion of the Agency that the modified standards will establish sufficiently high standards for environmental professionals, ensuring environmental responsibility and health protection. Additionally, we believe that the modified standards are also superior in that they are more fair than the proposed standards. We hope the balance struck on this issue will result in both environmental protection and a fair gauge of an environmental professional's ability to carry out all appropriate inquiries.

Commenter Organization Name: IPEP Comment Number: 0266 Excerpt Number: 7 Excerpt Text: Appendix A The Institute of Professional Environmental Practice and The Qualified Environmental Professional and Environmental Professional Intern Credentials The Institute of Professional Environmental Practice ( IPEP), which is headquartered in Pittsburgh, PA, is an independent, not for profit certifying organization for the Qualified Environmental Professional ( QEP) and the Environmental Professional Intern ( EPI) certifications. More information on these two credentials is included below. Additional information can be found at www. ipep. org. IPEP's mission is to improve the practice and educational standards of environmental professionals and to administer the QEP and EPI application, examination, and certification process. The Institute is governed by a Board of Trustees and conducts business in accordance with the Board's adopted Bylaws and Policies & Procedures for Certification. 150 Individuals certified by the Institute agreed to abide by the IPEP Code of Ethics, which requires certificants to:

( 1) Hold paramount protection of human health and natural environment;

( 2) Comply with applicable statutes, regulations, and standards;

( 3) Undertake and accept responsibility for professional assignments only when qualified;

( 4) Provide professional opinion based on adequate knowledge derived from good science, thoughtful deliberation, and honest conviction;

( 5) Act as faithful agent, maintain confidentiality and avoid conflict of interest but, where potential arises, disclose circumstances expediently and fully ( 6) Avoid professional practice while under the influence of thought impairing substance;

( 7) Maintain competence through continuing professional development;

( 8) Act with fairness, courtesy and good faith; give credit where due; and accept/ give constructive, honest, and fair professional comment;

( 9) Communicate clearly the potential consequences if professional decisions or judgments are overruled or disregarded; and ( 10) Exercise honesty, objectivity, and diligence.

The Qualified Environmental Professional ( QEP ® ) credential administered by IPEP is one of only a select handful of certification programs in the environmental profession that comply with ASTM E1929 98 Standard Practice for the Assessment of Certification Programs for Environmental Professionals: Accreditation Criteria [ Footnote: Other CESB accredited certification programs that meet the ASTM standard: Certified Environmental Professional ( CEP) by the Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals ( ABCEP), Diplomate Environmental Engineer ( DEE) by the American Academy of Environmental Engineers ( AAEE), Certified Industrial Hygienist ( CIH) by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene ( ABIH), Certified Safety Professional ( CSP) by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals ( BCSP), Certified Professional Environmental Auditor ( CPEA) by the Board of Environmental, Health & Safety Auditor Certifications ( BEAC), and Certified Hazardous Materials Manager ( CHMM) by the Academy of Certified Hazardous Materials Management ( ACHMM).]. The QEP ® is the only such credential that requires a certificant to comprehend the multi media relationships among air, land, and water and is multi discipline with regard to the qualifications and experience of its members. There are more than 1000 QEPs and 100 EPIs in 22 countries around the world. 151 Response: In the final rule, EPA is not recognizing private, non governmental organizations whose certification requirements meet the environmental professional qualifications included in the final rule. The final rule does not reference any private party professional certification standards. Such an approach is not necessary and would require that EPA review the certification requirements of each organization to determine whether or not each organization's certification requirements meet or exceed the regulatory qualifications for an environmental professional. Given that there may be many such organizations and given that each organization may review and change its certification qualifications on a frequent or periodic basis, we conclude that such an undertaking is not practicable. EPA does not have the necessary resources to review the procedures of each private certification organization and review and approve each organization's certification qualifications. Therefore, the final rule includes within the regulatory definition of an environmental professional, general performance based standards or qualifications for determining who may meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of conducting all appropriate inquiries. These standards include education and experience qualifications. The final rule does not recognize, or reference, any private organization's certification program within the context of the regulatory language. However, the Agency notes that any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in today's final regulation will meet the definition of an environmental professional for the purposes of this regulation.

Based upon the input received from the public commenters, EPA determined that the definition of environmental professional included in today's final rule establishes a balance between the merits of setting a high standard of excellence for the conduct of all appropriate inquiries through the establishment of stringent qualifications for environmental professionals and the need to ensure that experienced and highly competent individuals currently conducting all appropriate inquiries are not displaced.

Commenter Organization Name: Rose and Westra Comment Number: 0320 Excerpt Number: 7 Excerpt Text: R& W further recommends the addition of certifications from the following organizations as sufficient to meet the " Environmental Professional" standard: a " Qualified Environmental Professional" by the Institute of Professional Environmental Practice and persons on the National Registry of Environmental Professionals. These organizations are both nationally recognized. Requirements for certification include a baccalaureate or higher degree related to science and engineering. In addition, an applicant for certification under these organizations must possess 4 to 15 years of experience. These requirements for certification are entirely consistent with the qualifications that the Proposed Rules, § 312.10( 2), currently finds sufficient to meet the " Environmental Professional" definition. 152 Response: Please see response to comment number 0266, excerpt 7.

Commenter Organization Name: FAA Comment Number: 0334 Excerpt Number: 8 Excerpt Text: 4) FAA believes that it is unreasonable for EPA to accept certifications by states and tribes to meet the definition of an EP, but not to accept the certifications of private organizations in the environmental business. Stating that EPA lacks the resources to review the requirements for private organizations' certifications is not an acceptable reason for excluding private organization certified individuals from the definition of an EP.

Response: In the final rule, EPA is not recognizing private, non governmental organizations whose certification requirements meet the environmental professional qualifications included in the final rule. The final rule does not reference any private party professional certification standards. Such an approach is not necessary because the definition of an environmental professional in the final rule provides a clear set of qualifications, based upon educational and experience levels. Individual private certification organizations can simply compare their organization's certification requirements with the qualifications including in the final rule and determine whether or not their certification programs are equivalent or more stringent than the definition in the final rule.

Based upon the input received from the public commenters, EPA determined that the definition of environmental professional included in today's final rule establishes a balance between the merits of setting a high standard of excellence for the conduct of all appropriate inquiries through the establishment of stringent qualifications for environmental professionals and the need to ensure that experienced and highly competent individuals currently conducting all appropriate inquiries are not displaced.

Commenter Organization Name: Auditing Roundtable, BEAC Comment Number: 0363 Excerpt Number: 1 Excerpt Text: The proposed auditor qualifications should not single out a particular professional license for recognition without creating a mechanism for recognizing all potential professional licensures potentially providing adequate qualifications, such as a highly reputable accreditation body.

The three organizations applaud EPA's recognition of the importance of establishing threshold qualifications for auditors as a means of ensuring a high level of professional ability and the overall quality of the work product. All three organizations have been 153 dedicated to promoting the increased " professionalization" of auditors and have established rigorous professional certification programs specifically in the field of auditing and site assessment.

EPA's proposal explicitly recognizes the " Professional Engineer" or " Professional Geologist" license or registration in satisfaction of one of the educational requirements. However, both licenses cover extremely diverse educational training, which can be primarily focused on areas completely unrelated to the disciplines that are essential to an understanding of the issues involved in site assessment There is no practical basis upon which to recognize these two particular licensing programs over others that are more specifically focused on the skill sets required for site assessment and auditing.

The organizations joining in these comments recognize that EPA is justifiably reluctant to embark on a path of having to evaluate the myriad of state and private licensure programs against the professional criteria specified in the rule. However, EPA can define certain foundation criteria in the proposed regulation and recognize one or more accreditation bodies to differentiate between programs which impose rigorous educational, training, examination and experience requirements as a condition of licensure and ones which are fly by night diploma or license mills.

The Council of Engineering & Scientific Specialty Boards (" CESB") is an example of such an accreditation organization. It is the recognized accreditation body for engineering and scientific certification programs. It is an independent, voluntary membership body for organizations that recognize, through specialty certifications, the expertise of individuals practicing in engineering and related fields. It was formed in the early 1990' s as the result of a National Conference on Engineering Specialty Certification, and one of its missions is to inform employers, specifiers, public officials, the public and engineering and related practitioners about technical credentialing. It has accredited professional engineering programs such as the American Academy of Environmental Engineers, the Council on Certification of Health, Environmental and Safety Technologists, the Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals ( Certified Environmental Professional), American Board of Industrial Hygiene ( Certified Industrial Hygienist) and the Board of Environmental Health & Safety Auditor Certifications ( Certified Professional Environmental Auditor) to name just a few. Its member boards, associate and affiliate organizations represent a full spectrum of engineering, scientific or engineering related organizations, which have developed professional certifications. Its web site contains detailed information on the extensive requirements that certification programs must meet in order to be accredited by the CESB. For more information please visit the website: www. cesb. org.

The accreditation process enables the legitimacy of private certification organizations to be recognized and approved, widening the pool of auditors capable of leading the audits. Although the licensing for a professional engineer is rigorous, it should in no way be construed as providing the necessary skills and knowledge appropriate to identifying and quantifying environmental site concerns. Indeed, without additional training, many professional engineers would lack an understanding of the true site conditions necessary 154 for an appropriate assessment of the environmental liabilities. The PE license becomes no more valuable to the process of assessing the environmental conditions of a property than any other degree when appropriate training and knowledge are lacking. This is a further reason to require accreditation specific to the site assessment skill set rather than a blanket statutory recognition of any one type of educational degree.

EPA's preamble states that " any individual with a certification from a private certification organization where the organization's certification qualifications include the same or more stringent education and experience requirements as those included in the federal regulation will meet the definition of a an environmental professional for purposes of this regulation." [ 69 Fed. Reg. 52555] However, requiring confirmation by a widely recognized scientific accreditation body helps ensure to the public that an independent body has confirmed the self declaration of qualification.