1. Robb, Kathryn E. B., “Environmental Considerations in Project Financing,” Common Law and Practice Handbook Course Series (PLI Order No. A4–4433, 7–8 10 1993), 95Google Scholar; Siminoff, Bruce G., Victim: Caught in the Environmental Web (Lakewood, Colo., 1993).Google Scholar

2. Berger, Amy H., “The ECRA Mess,” New Jersey Success, 01 1990, 34Google Scholar. See also Farer, David B., “ECRA Verdict: The Successes and Failures of the Premiere Transaction-Triggered Environmental Law,” Pace Environmental Law Review 5 (1987): 113–147.Google Scholar

3. Battista, Gregory, “The Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act (ECRA): New Accountability for Industrial Landowners in New Jersey,” Seton Hall Legislative Journal 8 (1985): 331–370Google Scholar; Stevens, Mark A., “ECRA: Government and Industry Cope with an Evolving Regulatory Program,” Temple Environmental Law and Technology Journal 5 (1986): 17–35Google Scholar; Walsh, Charles J. and Bramson, Philip A., “ECRA: Triggering the Internalization of the Social Costs of Hazardous Wastes,” Columbia Business Law Review 3 (1990): 415–448.Google Scholar

4. Merino, Donald N. and Jurkat, Mayme P., Land Use Impacts of NJ ECRA in Urban Industrial Areas: Study on NJ Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act (Hoboken, N.J., 1989).Google Scholar

5. Farer, “ECRA Verdict,” 116–17.

6. Bartsch, Charles and Dorfman, Bridget, Brownfields “State of the States”: An End-of-Session Review of Initiatives and Program Impacts in the 50 States (Washington, D.C., 2000Google Scholar; D'Alonzo, Diana R., Hennessy, M. Kay, and Wakin, Alyssa B., “ECRA to ISRA: Is It More Than Just a Name Change?” Villanova Environmental Law Journal 7 (1996): 51–80Google Scholar; Davis, Todd S. and Margolis, Kevin D., Brownfields: A Comprehensive Guide to Redeveloping Contaminated Property (Chicago, 1997).Google Scholar

7. Barnett, Harold C., Toxic Debts and the Superfund Dilemma (Chapel Hill, 1994)Google Scholar; Kraft, Michael E., Environmental Policy and Politics, 2d ed. (New York, 2001), 81–101Google Scholar; Vig, Norman J. and Kraft, Michael E., eds., Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century (Washington, D.C., 2000).Google Scholar

8. Rabe, Barry G., “Power to the States: The Promise and Pitfalls of Decentralization,” in Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Vig, Norman J. and Kraft, Michael E. (Washington, D.C, 2000), 32–54.Google Scholar

9. Some prominent examples of this rhetoric include George H. W. Bush, “Remarks at the Annual Meeting of the Business Roundtable,” 5 June 1989, National Archives and Records Administration, George Bush Presidential Library and Museum, College Station, Texas; and Jon Hamilton, “Laboratories of Reform: States Experiment with Health Care Plans,” ABA Journal (July 1993). For an analysis of environmental policy specifically, see Perera, Frederica, “Green-Bashing: A Health Hazard,” New York Times, 29 07 1993, A23.Google Scholar

10. Barrett, Paul M., “New Jersey, After Federal Leadership Waned, Has Become Environmental Protection Pioneer,” Wall Street Journal, 5 07 1988, 1Google Scholar. In a 1979 evaluation of cancer mortality in the state, Michael Greenberg found that the urban-industrial corridor between New York and Philadelphia exceeded expected fatality rates in all forms of cancer by about 20 percent. See Brown, Michael H., Laying Waste: The Poisoning of America by Toxic Chemicals (New York, 1979), 132–137.Google Scholar

11. Lesniak, Raymond, “The Statutory Treatment of Wastes: A Legislator's Perspective,” Seton Hall Legislative Journal 7 (1983): 35Google Scholar; Rodburg, Michael L. et al. , eds., New Jersey Environmental Law Handbook, 5th ed. (Rockville, Md., 1999), 48–49Google Scholar; Goodman, F., “Spill Compensation and Control Tax,” Bar Journal [New Jersey] 84 (Summer 1978): 62Google Scholar; Goldshore, Lewis, “New Directions in Water Pollution Control,” New Jersey Law Journal 100 (1977): 797.Google Scholar

12. Schwadel, Francine, “New Jersey's Pollution Rules: Tough and May Get Tougher,” Wall Street Journal, 20 08 1985, 1.Google Scholar

13. Goldshore, Lewis, “Hazardous Waste Facility Siting,” New Jersey Law Journal 108 (1981): 453.Google Scholar

14. Hartnett, Georgia Howell, “The Worker and Community Right to Know Act,” New Jersey Law Journal 113 (1984): 231Google Scholar; Goldshore, Lewis and Wolf, Marsha, “Two New Hazardous Waste Initiatives: ECRA and Right to Know,” New Jersey Lawyer 107 (Spring 1984): 48Google Scholar; Barrett, “After Federal Leadership.”

15. Lash, Jonathan, Gillman, Katherine, and Sheridan, David, A Season of Spoils: The Reagan Administration's Attack on the Environment (New York, 1984), 14–53; BarrettGoogle Scholar, “After Federal Leadership.”

16. Joseph Fallon, former chief of the Bureau of Environmental Evaluation and Cleanup Responsibility Assessment, NJDEP, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Trenton, New Jersey, 1 August 2001; Edward A. Hogan, principal of Porzio, Bromberg and Newman and chair of the firm's Environmental Law and Litigation Practice Group, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Morristown, New Jersey, 8 August 2001; Anthony J. McMahon, former program chief of ECRA, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Trenton, New Jersey, 2 August 2001. While environmental groups such as the New Jersey Public Interest Research Group (NJPIRG), the New Jersey Environmental Lobby, and the Sierra Club actively supported tougher regulation of toxic waste sites, they did not play a significant role in crafting or passing the state's Superfund law. David D. Sigman, senior counsel for Exxon Mobil Chemical Company, Houston, phone interview by Jared Day, 21 May 2002; Edward Lloyd, director of the Columbia Environmental Law Clinic, Columbia Law School, New York, phone interview by Jared N. Day, 28 May 2002.

17. McMahon interview, 2001.

18. Brockinton, Langdon, “New Jersey May Lead in State Toxic Laws,” Chemical Week, 2 10 1985, 15.Google Scholar

19. McMahon interview, 2001.

20. Battista, “New Accountability,” 335–36. See also Sigman interview, 2002.

21. Gill, David, “Expediting the ECRA Cleanup Process,” Business Journal of New Jersey (11 1989): A19.Google Scholar

22. Berger, “ECRA Mess,” 34. Throughout his administration, Kean strongly defended the law against attacks by business interests. See, for example, Magyar, Mark J., “Business Loses Toxic Cleanup Fight,” The (Bergen, N.J.) Record, 30 06 1987, A01.Google Scholar

23. Battista, “New Accountability,” 334–40.

24. Picco, Steven and Mack, Kenneth H., “Legislature Prepares to Revise Cleanup Statute,” New Jersey Law Journal (2 11 1992): 4Google Scholar. See also Battista, , “New Accountability,” 1985, 338–340.Google Scholar

25. “Dioxin Is Only New Jersey's Latest Environmental Headache,” New York Times, 19 June 1983, sec. 4, p. 6; “Kean Says Tests Show No Dioxin Peril for Neighbors of Clifton Plant,” New York Times, 25 June 1983, 26; “Jersey Eases Its Restrictions on Market Near a Dioxin Site,” New York Times, 20 August 1983, 24; McGill, Douglas C., “Tests for Dioxin at 8 Jersey Sites to Take 1 Month,” New York Times, 20 06 1983, B1Google Scholar; Sullivan, Joseph F., “More Dioxin Discovered Near Old Newark Plant,” New York Times, 29 07 1983, B2.Google Scholar

26. Sigman interview, 2002.

27. “Emergency Adoptions,” New Jersey Register, 17 January 1984, 151–58; Hogan interview, 2001; Rodburg, et al., New Jersey Environmental Law Handbook, 91–92.

28. Battista, “New Accountability,” 338–39. On industry's views of the standards, see Sigman interview, 2002.

29. “New Jersey Chemicals Face More Regulation,” Chemical Week, 21 December 1983, 14; “Pinpointing Liability: States Move to Tighten Toxic Cleanup Programs,” Engineering News-Record, 19 July 1984.

30. McMahon interview, 2001; Marwan Sadat, former NJDEP director of the Division of Waste Management, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Trenton, New Jersey, 1 August 2001.

31. Sigman interview, 2002.

32. Barrett, “After Federal Leadership.” On business skepticism, see Sigman interview, 2002.

33. “Status of ISRA Cases by Complexity Level, June 30, 2000,” NJDEP, 2001.

34. Sadat interview, 2001.

35. Stephen Maybury, acting bureau chief of the Bureau of Environmental Evaluation and Cleanup Responsibility Assessment, NJDEP, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Trenton, New Jersey, 2 August 2001.

36. Merino and Jurkat, Land Use Impacts, 6–9; David Gill, “The ECRA Threat,” Business Journal of New Jersey (February 1989): 68; Berger, “ECRA Mess,” 34.

37. Miller, Alan C., “Backlog in DEP Toxic-Site Reviews,” The (Bergen, N.J.) Record, 10 01 1986), A01Google Scholar. For more detail on NJDEP delays in the processing time, see Merino, Donald N. and Antonucci, Michael D., “Evaluation of the Administrative Efficiency of Environmental Laws: A Statistical Analysis of the New Jersey ECRA Processing Times,” Journal of Hazardous Materials 33 (1993): 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38. Douglass, Joseph R., “A Practical Look at ECRA,” NJ Industrial News, 07 1988.Google Scholar

39. Merino and Jurkat, Land Use Impacts, 24–25.

40. Lloyd interview, 2002.

41. Kanige, Jeffrey, “Much-Maligned ECRA Could Face Overhaul,” New Jersey Law Journal (6 04 1992): 1.Google Scholar

42. Schwadel, “New Jersey Pollution Rules.”

43. Kosowatz, John J., “Man of the Year: Marwan M. Sadat, Moving Decisively to Control and Contain Toxic Wastes in New Jersey,” Engineering News-Record, 13 02 1986, 44.Google Scholar

44. Ibid.

45. Miller, “Backlog,” A01. For more on ECRA's understaffing, see Ashkinoze, Alan S., “Coping with ECRA's Growth: Large Caseloads, Staffing at Issue,” New Jersey Law Journal 121 (13) (1988): 46.Google Scholar

46. Kosowatz, “Man of the Year,” 44.

47. Ibid.

48. Gill, David, “Divided They Stand: Tough Environmental Regulations Will Continue to Divide State Enforcement Officials and the Business Community,” Business Journal of New Jersey (1 01 1990): 21.Google Scholar

49. Kosowatz, “Man of the Year,” 44.

50. “Notes,” Engineering News-Record, 6 February 1986, 14.

51. “Status of ISRA Cases by Complexity Level, June 30, 2000,” Bureau of Environmental Evaluation and Cleanup Responsibility Assessment, NJDEP, 2001.

52. Gill, “The ECRA Threat,” 68.

53. Magyar, “Business Loses,” A01.

54. Merino and Jurkat, Land Use Impacts, ii, 24–25.

55. For a good overview of ECRA's impact on the development and adoption of ECRA-like programs in other states, see I. Leo Motiuk et al., “Environmental Transfer Law Update: New Jersey and the Nation, Part 1,” Toxics Law Reporter, 16 September 1992, 487–93; and “Environmental Transfer Law Update: New Jersey and the Nation, Part 2,” Toxics Law Reporter, 23 September 1992, 517–28.

56. “The Backlog; The Transfer Act,” Hartford Courant, 26 December 1994, A8.

57. These laws include the California Health and Safety Code, the Missouri Solid Waste Law, the Iowa Environmental Quality Act, and Pennsylvania's Solid Waste Management Act and Hazardous Sites Act. See Motiuk et al., “Environmental Transfer, Pt. 1,” 489–90. While New Jersey's ECRA program provided a crucial template for other states to follow, it is important to keep in mind that these later programs had important distinctive features to their property-transfer triggers. New Jersey's ECRA required both disclosure of environmental conditions and a government-approved cleanup or other consent before industrial businesses could be sold or the underlying real estate transferred. In contrast, Connecticut, Illinois, and Indiana all required pre-transfer disclosure to purchasers and other transferees about environmental contamination at subject properties and subsequent public-notice filings with state environmental agencies. Indiana and Illinois also required filing of disclosure documents. In addition, compared to ECRA, California imposed more limited disclosure requirements on sellers and tenants of nonresidential property with known contamination. See Berz, David R., Spracker, Stanley M., and Strochak, Adam P., Environmental Law in Real Estate and Business Transactions, chap. 12 (New York, 2002).Google Scholar

58. Farer, “ECRA Verdict,” 116–17; Robb, “Environmental Considerations,” 13, 94.

59. Motiuk et al., “Environmental Transfer, Pt. 1,” 490–91.

60. Gill, “Divided They Stand,” 21.

61. Sadat interview, 2001.

62. Merino and Jurkat, Land Use Impacts, 17.

63. Siminoff, Victim, 49.

64. Sigman interview, 2002.

65. Merino and Jurkat, Land Use Impacts, 16–17; Dinan, Terry and Johnson, F. Reed, “Effects of Hazardous Waste Risks on Property Transfers: Legal Liability vs. Direct Regulation,” Natural Resources Journal 30 (Summer 1990): 521, 534–36.Google Scholar

66. Siminoff, Victim.

67. For a vigorous defense of ECRA by one of its administrators, see Miller, Lance R., “ECRA: A Manager's View of the Cleanup Statute,” New Jersey Law Journal (30 03 1989): 54, 82–83.Google Scholar

68. “Fairmont Plant Made Bombs During the War,” Observer-Tribune (Chester, N.J.), 27 July 1989; Gill, “The ECRA Threat,” 1989; idem, “Divided They Stand,” 21. See also Sigman interview, 2002.

69. Berger, “ECRA Mess,” 34.

70. See, for example, “Showdown Nearing on Rules for Cleanup of Industrial Sites,” The (Newark) Star Ledger, 11 December 1988; Carter, Kathy B., “Cleanup Laws Put Many Landowners in a Bind,” The (Newark) Star Ledger, 8 04 1990Google Scholar; Douglass, Joseph R., “A Practical look at ECRA,” NJ Industrial News (07 1988)Google Scholar; Velariano, Lourdes Lee, “Cleanup Rules Are Called Threat to Credit Ratings,” Wall Street Journal, 26 06 1991Google Scholar; Rewiski, Renee, “Environmentalists Chasing Industry Out of New Jersey,” Northern New Jersey Business Journal (27 11 1989)Google Scholar; O'Keefe, Patrick J., “Evidence Builds Up Against State Curbs,” Sunday Star Ledger (Newark, N.J.), 3 03 1991.Google Scholar

71. “A Cleanup Law That Ran Amok,” The (Bergen, N.J.) Record, 10 May 1991, B06; “Avon Calling,” New Jersey Law Journal (4 October 1990): 8; Yaskin, Judith, “Re: ECRA Regulations,” New Jersey Law Journal (3 01 1991): 8.Google Scholar

72. Motiuk et al., “Environmental Transfer Laws, Pt. 1,” 487–90. On Connecticut, see “Transfer Act Revisions Introduced in State Senate,” Connecticut Environmental Compliance Update (May 1995); Carole Bass, “City Officials Trying to Bring New Life to an Abandoned Old Factory Complain that Connecticut's Environmental and Economic Policies Work Against Them,” Connecticut Law Tribune, 5 April 1993, A3; “Cleanup Backlog: The Transfer Act,” Hartford Courant, 26 December 1994, A8. On Illinois, see, for example, Julie Bennett, “Property Law Seeks Environmental Info,” Crain's Chicago Business, 1 May 1989, 14; idem, “Environmental Woes Add Risk, Cost to Deals,” Crain's Chicago Business, 25 March 1991, 11; Johnine J. Brown, “Property Transfer Act Is Controversial and Irritating,” Illinois Legal Times, March 1993, 5.

73. “Fairmont Plant Made Bombs During the War,” Observer-Tribune (Chester, N.J.), 27 July 1989.

74. Musilek, Joe, “Toxic Shock,” Corporate Report Minnesota (04 1988), 23.Google Scholar

75. Gerald Stahnke, project manager, Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Unit, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul, phone interview by Jared N. Day, 19 December 2000.

76. Minnesota Environmental Initiative, Conference IV: The Future of Environmental Issues in Buying, Selling and Developing Property in Minnesota (10 April 1992), 25–26; Kenneth Haberman, environmental consultant and president of Landmark Environmental Consulting (former Site Response Supervisor, VIC Program), phone interview by Jared Day, 22 January 2001; Stahnke interview, 2000.

77. “State Brownfields Marketplace: Minnesota,” EI [Environmental Information] Digest: Remediation 3 (1997): 26; Humphrey, Hubert III, “State's Pollution Reforms Can Inspire National Effort,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, 30 10 1993, 19A.Google Scholar

78. Schwadel, “New Jersey Pollution Rules.”

79. Barrett, “After Federal Leadership.”

80. Schwadel, “New Jersey Pollution Rules.”

81. Moore, Janet, “ECRA: Environmental Boom or Economic Bust,” Easton [Pennsylvania] Sunday Express, 6 01 1991Google Scholar; “Environmental Cleanup Law Unfair to Small Business,” The Daily Record (Morris County, N.J.), 19 April 1988. On New Jersey's recession, see Donald Warshaw, “Reports Underestimate Loss of Blue Collar Jobs,” The (Newark) Star Ledger, 6 January 1991; Donald Warshaw, “Jersey Loses Jobs for the 28th Month,” The (Newark) Star Ledger, 31 July 1991.

82. “Governor Asks Easing of Toxic Cleanup Law; Says Business Should Be Unshackled,” The(Bergen) Record, 4 June 1992, A19; Kanige, Jeffery, “Builders Getting Sympathy, Help from Trenton; Economy Providing Impetus for Republican Efforts to Loosen Environmental Regulations,” New Jersey Law Journal (20 04 1992): 5Google Scholar; Harrar, Sari, “NJ Aims to Make Toxic-Cleanup Law More User Friendly,” The (Bergen) Record, 27 01 1993, A03Google Scholar; McGeehan, Patrick, “Florio Raps Regulations Run Amok,” The (Bergen) Record, 6 05 1993, E01.Google Scholar

83. Henry McNamara, State Senator (R-Bergen) and chair of the State Senate Environment Committee, interviewed by Lisa Johnson, Trenton, 2 August 2001; Tom Johnson, “Land Cleanup Law Targeted for Overhaul,” Sunday Star Ledger (Newark), 12 July 1992, 1, 35; Goldshore and Wolf, “Two Hazardous Waste Initiatives,” 14–15; Lloyd interview, 2002.

84. Cammarere, Rocco, “New Environmental Law,” New Jersey Lawyer (21 06 1993): 1–3Google Scholar; James Florio, “Remarks Prepared for Delivery by Governor Jim Florio, Industrial Site Recovery Act” (16 June 1993), Collection of Henry P. McNamara, 1993; McNamara interview, 2001.

85. [Critics concede benefits of ECRA]; Dinan and Johnson, “Effects of Hazardous Waste,” 521, 535–36.

86. Lloyd interview, 2002. See also Yaskin, Judith, “Re: ECRA Regulations,” New Jersey Law Journal (3 01 1991): 8.Google Scholar

87. McMahon interview, 2001.

88. Kettl, Donald, Environmental Governance: A Report on the Next Generation of Environmental Policy (Washington, D.C., 2002), 8.Google Scholar