Environmental review: A comprehensive review of existing classification systems of brownfield sites

Environmental Practice

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 285-300

  Dasgupta, Shovini ^b   Tam, Edwin Kwan Lap ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

^b AMEC FOSTER WHEELER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BROWNFIELD SITE; CLASSIFICATION; DECISION MAKING; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; RANKING;

EID: 76849105928     PISSN: 14660466     EISSN: 14660474     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1466046609990287     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. aboutRemediation (AR). 2005. Brownfields Redevelopment Toolbox. Ontario Centre for Environmental Technology Advancement (OCETA), Mississauga, Canada. Available at http://www.aboutremediation.com/toolbox/ step2-propertyvalue.asp (accessed August 2006).
2. Alker, S., P. Barrett, D. Clayton, G. Jones, V. Joy, and P. Roberts. 2000. Delivering Regeneration: A Brownfield Renaissance Reporting the Findings of the National Brownfield Sites Project. National Brownfield Sites Project. Urban Mines Limited, Halifax, UK. 132 pp.
3. Amekudzi, A., and I. Fomunung. 2004. Integrating Brownfields Redevelopment with Transportation Planning. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 130(4):204-212.
4. Boyd, J., and M. Macauley 1994. The Impact of Environmental Liability on Industrial Real Estate Development. Resources for the Future 114:19-23.
5. Butler, B., and J. Petts. 2000. Land Contamination Risk Assessment Tools: An Evaluation of Some of the Commonly Used Methods. R&D Project P5-026 Technical Report TR P260. Geodelft Environmental and Loughborough University, Leicestershire, UK, 96 pp.
6. CABERNET. 2005. Nottingham, UK. Available at http://www.cabernet. org.uk/index.asp?c=1312 (accessed November 14, 2009).
7. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1992. National Classification System for Contaminated Sites. Report CCME EPC-CS39E, March. CCME, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, 54 pp. Available at http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/pn-1005-e.pdf.
8. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1998. Protocol for the Derivation of Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Report CCME EPC-98E, March. CCME, Winnipeg, Canada, 10 pp. Available at http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/ wqg-aql-protocol.pdf (accessed November 14, 2009).
9. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2008. National Classification System for Contaminated Sites Guidance Document PN 1403 ISBN 978. CCME, Winnipeg, Canada, 80 pp. Available at http:// www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/pn- 1403-ncscs-guidance-e.pdf (accessed November 14, 2009).
10. Chen, Y., K.W Hipel, M.D. Kilgour, and Y. Zhu. 2009. A Strategic Classification Support System for Brownfield Redevelopment. Environmental Modelling & Software 24(5):647-654.
11. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). 2000. Achieving a Better Quality of Life: A Strategy for Sustainable Development in the United Kingdom. Government Annual Report. DETR, Wetherby, UK. Available at http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/ 20080530153425/http://www. sustainable-development.gov.uk/publications/ uk-strategy99/index.htm (accessed November 14, 2009).
12. Environment Canada (EC). 2005. A Method for Ranking Contaminated Marine and Aquatic Sites on Canadian Federal Properties. Report by the Contaminated Site Management Working Group (CSMWG). EC, Ottawa, Canada. Available at http://www2.ec.gc.ca/etad/csmwg/pub/marine-aquatic/ en/toc-e.htm (accessed November 14, 2009).
13. Environmental Commissioner of Ontario (ECO). 2005. 2004/2005 Annual Report: Planning Our Landscape. ECO, Toronto, Canada, 224 pp. Available at http://www.eco.on.ca/eng/index.php/pubs/eco-publications/2004-05-annual-report/ 200405-ar-toc.php.
14. Hybrid Geophysical Technology for the Evaluation of Insidious Contaminated Areas (HYGEIA). 2002. WP 3.1: Analysis of Brownfield Typologies. European Commission Community Research, Madrid, 16 pp.
15. Long, E.R., and D.D. MacDonald. 1997. Effects Range Low and Median, Threshold and Probable Effects Levels. In Interactive Short Course "Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines in the Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sediments." Eighth Annual Meeting of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). SETAC, San Francisco.
16. Maldonado, M. 1996. Brownfields bloom. Civil Engineering 66(5):36-40.
17. Martin, J.C., and D.G. Toll. 2006. The Development of a Knowledge-Based System for the Preliminary Investigation of Contaminated Land. Computers and Geotechnics 33(2):97-103.
18. National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE). 1997a. Removing Barriers: Redeveloping Contaminated Lands for Housing. Ottawa. NRTEE, Ottawa, Canada, 156 pp.
19. National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE). 1997b. Improving Site Specific Data on the Environmental Condition of Land. NRTEE, Ottawa, Canada, 162 pp.
20. National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE). 1998. State of the Debate: Greening Canada's Brownfield Sites. NRTEE, Ottawa, Canada. 52 pp.
21. National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE). 2003. Cleaning Up the Past, Building the Future: A National Brownfield Redevelopment Strategy for Canada. NRTEE, Ottawa, Canada, 93 pp. Available at http://www.nrtee-trnee.com/eng/publications/brownfield-redevelopment- strategy/NRTEE-Brownfield-Redevelopment-Strategy.pdf (accessed November 14, 2009).
22. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (NZ MFE). 1999. Contaminated Site Information Management Strategy. Report U99/74. NZ MFE, Wellington, New Zealand, 46 pp.
23. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (NZ MFE). 2004. Risk Screening System: Contaminated Land Management Guideline No. 3. NZ MFE, New Zealand, 41 pp. Available at http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ hazardous/contaminated-land-mgmt-guidelines-no3/contaminated-land-mgmt- guidelines-no3.pdf (accessed November 14, 2009).
24. O'Reilly, M., and R. Brink. 2006. Initial Risk-Based Screening of Potential Brownfield Development Sites. Soil and Sediment Contamination 15(5):463-470.
25. Roberts, P., V. Joy, and S. Alker. 1998. Towards a Brownfield Sites Taxonomy: Issues in the Definition and Classification of Problems and Potentials. Paper presented at the Remediation of Brownfield Sites for Housing Conference, Aston University, Birmingham, UK. Available at http://www. emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filename=/published/ emeraldfulltextarticle/pdf/1120170504-ref.html.
26. Swickard, T.J. 2008. Regulatory Incentives to Promote Private Sector Brownfield Remediation and Reuse. Soil and Sediment Contamination 17(2):121-136.
27. Tam, E.K., and PH. Byer. 2002. Remediation of Contaminated Lands: A Decision Methodology for Site Owners. Journal of Environmental Management 64(4):387-400.
28. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1990. The Revised Hazard Ranking System: Background Information. Publication 9320.7-03FS. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, US EPA, Washington, DC.
29. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2008. Understanding the Superfund Alternative Approach. EPA-330R08001. Office of Site Remediation and Enforcement, US EPA, Washington, DC. Available at http://epa.gov/oecaerth/resources/publications/cleanup/superfund/ factsheet/saa-fact.pdf
30. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 2009. Brownfields and Land Revitalization. Glossary of terms, available at http:// www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/overview/glossary.htm (accessed November 14, 2009).