PCA vs. Phase I ESA

A PCA and a Phase I look at one property for different reasons. A PCA under ASTM E2018-24 looks for material physical deficiencies in the primary improvements and reports them to the user, with opinions of cost for suggested remedies (E2018-24, 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.1.4). A Phase I under ASTM E1527-21 looks for recognized environmental conditions: hazardous substances or petroleum products at the property because of a release to the environment, likely there because of an actual or likely release, or present in circumstances posing a material threat of a future environmental release; a de minimis condition is not one (E1527-21, 1.1.1). Neither does the other's work.

What each standard is for

E2018-24 is a guide. It gives a framework for a walk-through survey, document reviews and interviews, and a written property condition report, or PCR (E2018-24, 1.1, 1.1.2 to 1.1.4). It is for voluntary use, its baseline carries a moderate level of uncertainty, and it prescribes neither the scope nor a course of action (E2018-24, 4.1). The consultant is responsible for the work, a field observer conducts the walk-through survey, and a PCR reviewer oversees the field observer and reviews the PCR; the guide does not intend any of it to be the practice of architecture or engineering (E2018-24, 3.2.14, 3.2.25, 3.2.38, 7.7).

E1527-21 is a practice. It sets out good commercial and customary practice for assessing the environmental condition of a commercial real estate parcel, covering petroleum products and the contaminants within CERCLA's scope (E1527-21, 1.1). It is meant to let a user meet the all appropriate inquiries element of the landowner liability protections, though its use is not limited to that purpose (E1527-21, 1.1, 4.1). An environmental professional must conduct it or supervise it (E1527-21, 4.3, 7.5.1).

What each leaves out

E2018-24 leaves out environmental assessment. Its excluded activities include any environmental opinion, on matters such as hazardous building materials, hazardous wastes, toxic materials, wetlands, mold and indoor air quality (E2018-24, 12.1.20). Its out-of-scope considerations name environmental matters including asbestos, hazardous substances and releases of hazardous materials (E2018-24, 12.3.2.3). It lists E1527 among other standards whose satisfaction is excluded unless the user and consultant agree otherwise (E2018-24, 12.3.3, 12.3.3.6). A PCA does not warrant compliance with environmental regulations (E2018-24, 12.2.2).

E1527-21 has no section that asks for an opinion on building condition or on repair costs. Where it looks at buildings, it does so to find recognized environmental conditions: how many buildings there are, how many stories each has and their approximate age, how they are heated and cooled and with what fuel, and corrosion or stains other than water stains on interior surfaces (E1527-21, 9.1, 9.4.7, 9.4.19, 9.4.20). It includes no testing or sampling of any material (E1527-21, 7.4). Its non-scope considerations include asbestos-containing building materials and lead-based paint unrelated to releases, mold, naturally occurring radon, PCB-containing building materials and regulatory compliance (E1527-21, 13.1.5).

In both, out-of-scope work is the user's to choose and to agree with the consultant or environmental professional, and none is needed to conform (E2018-24, 1.3, 12.3.2; E1527-21, 1.4, 13.1.2). Neither standard requires the other.

Where the two meet

Each standard says its process lowers uncertainty without removing it, stops short of exhaustive because more time and cost can outweigh what the extra information is worth, and changes in depth from one property to the next (E2018-24, 4.3.1, 4.3.3, 4.3.5; E1527-21, 4.5.1 to 4.5.3). Neither expects more than one site visit (E2018-24, 9.2; E1527-21, 9.2.7). Each lets the consultant rely on information from others, within limits (E2018-24, 8.2, 8.3; E1527-21, 7.5.2.1).

Some records overlap. The PCA consultant should ask for the base building's certificate of occupancy and any material building or fire code violations that are outstanding and on record (E2018-24, 8.4.1). The Phase I counts building department records among its historical sources, and its environmental professional must make a reasonable attempt to interview staff at one or more listed state or local agencies, the local fire department among them (E1527-21, 8.3.4.5, 11.5.1, 11.5.1.1). The record clocks differ: E2018-24 counts records as timely within ten business days of the request (E2018-24, 8.4.4), and E1527-21 allows 20 calendar days (E1527-21, 8.1.5).

Some words differ. In E2018-24, a condition is de minimis when the consultant alone judges that occupants face no imminent risk of injury from it and that routine maintenance can fix it or its repair will cost less than the agreed reporting threshold (E2018-24, 3.2.16). In E1527-21, a de minimis condition relates to a release, generally poses no threat to health or the environment, and generally would not draw an enforcement action (E1527-21, 3.2.20). E2018-24 also uses appropriate inquiry for the consultant's good-faith request for information within the time available to deliver the PCR (E2018-24, 3.2.2), which is not the federal all appropriate inquiries.

Their shelf lives differ. E2018-24 names no period after which a PCR expires. It says a user should rely on a PCR only for the point in time of its observations and research, and a PCR that draws on a prior one still calls for a new walk-through survey, new interviews, and the building and fire departments' records of material violations, asked for again and reviewed (E2018-24, 4.2.1, 4.5.2). E1527-21 presumes a conforming assessment viable when it was conducted within 180 days before acquisition, or before the intended transaction where there is no acquisition, and allows information up to a year old if five named components were done or updated within 180 days; both rest on the user's own tasks and on not using prior information that is known to be wrong or plainly wrong (E1527-21, 4.6.1, 4.6.2, 4.8).

The AAI rule applies to the Phase I only

40 CFR part 312 sets the standards for all appropriate inquiries for people seeking the innocent landowner defense, the bona fide prospective purchaser protection or the contiguous property owner protection, and for users of certain federal site assessment grants (40 CFR 312.1). Its objective is about releases: the inquiries are "intended to result in the identification of conditions indicative of releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject property" (40 CFR 312.20). It names E1527-21 among industry standards that "may be used to comply with the requirements set forth in §§ 312.23 through 312.31" (40 CFR 312.11). It names no property condition standard, and E2018-24 does not mention the rule or CERCLA.

This page is general reference. It does not assess any property. ASTM E2018-24 and ASTM E1527-21 are the standards and are not reproduced here.