Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm News
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: January 3, 2017
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comA new Appellate Division decision, Drytech, Inc. v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, Docket No. A-5619-14T4 (App. Div. December 29, 2016) has held that there is no grandfathering of No Further Action (NFA) Letters previously issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and that there can be no waiver of the requirement that a remediating party retain a New Jersey Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) and investigate areas of concern (AOCs) at a contaminated site. In the case, the Plaintiff, Drytech, sought a declaration from the New Jersey Superior Court that it did not have to comply with remediation obligations under the Site Remediation Reform Act (“SRRA”) when it triggered ISRA at its site in 2013. Plaintiff’s argument was that it had previously complied with ISRA in connection with three NFA Letters NJDEP had issued for the site and Plaintiff asked NJDEP to waive the requirement that it retain an LSRP to investigate the AOCs at the site and issue a Response Action Outcome (RAO) in light of the previously issued NFA Letters. The Court held that SRRA did not contain any provision which permitted NJDEP to waive a remediating party’s obligation to retain an LSRP following an ISRA triggering event and that NJDEP’s issuance of prior NFAs did not excuse Plaintiff’s obligation to hire an LSRP, as required by SRRA, and SRAA’s requirement that the LSRP exercise professional judgment to determine the remedial action plan for the site.
While this is an unpublished decision, this Appellate Division ruling lays to rest any lingering idea that prior NFA approvals at a site are “grandfathered” and confirms (i) the obligation of a remediating party to hire an LSRP, and (ii) the LSRP’s exercise of independent professional judgment to determine the remedial action plan for a site.
We would be pleased to answer any questions relating to this decision and its effect upon your remediation obligations or cases. If you have any questions contact, John Scagnelli.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Ronald S. Bienstock and William C. Sullivan, Jr. of Scarinci Hollenbeck Recognized as 2025 Leaders in Law by NJBIZ Little Falls, NJ – March 6, 2025 – One of New Jersey’s leading business journals, NJBIZ, has recognized Ronald S. Bienstock, Partner and Chair of the Intellectual Property Group, and William C. Sullivan, Jr., Partner and […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Scarinci Hollenbeck Named in U.S. News & World Report’s 2025 Best Companies to Work For Law Firms Little Falls, NJ – March 4, 2025 − U.S. News & World Report, the global authority in rankings and consumer advice, has named Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC one of the best law firms to work for in its […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
ROI-NJ Continues to Feature Donald Scarinci and Donald M. Pepe on Annual Influencers in Law List Little Falls, NJ – February 26, 2025 – Partner and Chair of Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC’s Commercial Real Estate Department Donald M. Pepe and Founding & Managing Partner Donald Scarinci have once again been named to ROI-NJ’s Influencers: Law […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Tax, Trusts and Estates Partner Marc J. Comer and Three Senior Associates Join Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC Little Falls, NJ – February 20, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce the addition of one new Partner. The firm also welcomes three Senior Associate attorneys. The expansion strengthens the firm’s capabilities across several practice […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Pioneering Networking Opportunities: James M. Meaney, Jesse M. Dimitro, and Christopher D. Warren Lead Initiative to Enhance Business Collaboration and Growth New York, NY – February 13, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to announce that James M. Meaney, Jesse M. Dimitro, and Christopher D. Warren have taken the initiative to establish a […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
John M. Scagnelli Featured as Panelist on “The Impact that the Proposed Resilient Environments and Landscapes (NJ PACT) Regulations will have on Redevelopment” Little Falls, NJ – January 29, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to announce that Partner John M. Scagnelli, a member of the firm’s Environmental Law section, was recently featured […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
A new Appellate Division decision, Drytech, Inc. v. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, Docket No. A-5619-14T4 (App. Div. December 29, 2016) has held that there is no grandfathering of No Further Action (NFA) Letters previously issued by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and that there can be no waiver of the requirement that a remediating party retain a New Jersey Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) and investigate areas of concern (AOCs) at a contaminated site. In the case, the Plaintiff, Drytech, sought a declaration from the New Jersey Superior Court that it did not have to comply with remediation obligations under the Site Remediation Reform Act (“SRRA”) when it triggered ISRA at its site in 2013. Plaintiff’s argument was that it had previously complied with ISRA in connection with three NFA Letters NJDEP had issued for the site and Plaintiff asked NJDEP to waive the requirement that it retain an LSRP to investigate the AOCs at the site and issue a Response Action Outcome (RAO) in light of the previously issued NFA Letters. The Court held that SRRA did not contain any provision which permitted NJDEP to waive a remediating party’s obligation to retain an LSRP following an ISRA triggering event and that NJDEP’s issuance of prior NFAs did not excuse Plaintiff’s obligation to hire an LSRP, as required by SRRA, and SRAA’s requirement that the LSRP exercise professional judgment to determine the remedial action plan for the site.
While this is an unpublished decision, this Appellate Division ruling lays to rest any lingering idea that prior NFA approvals at a site are “grandfathered” and confirms (i) the obligation of a remediating party to hire an LSRP, and (ii) the LSRP’s exercise of independent professional judgment to determine the remedial action plan for a site.
We would be pleased to answer any questions relating to this decision and its effect upon your remediation obligations or cases. If you have any questions contact, John Scagnelli.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!