Interesting that this happened in 2020: >June/July 2020 >**New Ohio Law Reduces Cost and Time for Environmental Cleanups** >https://www.tuckerellis.com/alerts/new-ohio-law-reduces-cost-and-time-for-environmental-cleanups/ >https://archive.ph/bC3jY >> >**New Ohio Law Reduces Cost and Time for Environmental Cleanups** >https://www.ohioenvironmentallawblog.com/2020/07/brownfields-transactions/new-ohio-law-reduces-cost-and-time-for-environmental-cleanups/ >https://archive.ph/1Wm9n > >September 16, 2020 >**New Ohio Law Protects Purchasers of Contaminated Property** >https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/new-ohio-law-protects-purchasers-of-88908/ >https://archive.ph/KvQ1W > >"*Purchasing contaminated property in Ohio became a little less risky this week. Purchasers can now obtain protection under both federal and state law from costly remediation orders imposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA). The intent of the new law is to further encourage the development of contaminated and potentially contaminated properties in Ohio.* > >"*Effective September 15, 2020, Ohio House Bill 168 provides additional protections from environmental liability for purchasers of real estate in Ohio. The new law incorporates into state law the existing protection available under federal law from liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), often also referred to as “Superfund.” Originally enacted in 1980, the 2002 amendments to CERCLA created new landowner liability protections including protection for “bona fide prospective purchasers” (BFPPs). These defenses are critical as CERCLA imposes strict, joint, and several liability on property owners and operators for releases of hazardous substances. This means liability for remediation costs can be substantial, even for parties who did not cause the contamination.*" I may be misunderstanding what it is saying, but it seems to be a way around the restrictions of cleaning up contaminated land and the cost of doing the cleaning up, while shifting the responsibility to clean up the land away from those who contaminated it and state funds are also allocated to pay for most or all of the decontamination so taxpayers end up footing the bill (*and (((someone))) becomes the new owner of a lot of land that was formerly owned primarily by White Ohioans and citizens of the surrounding states). So: - company contaminates land - company must pay to clean up the land due to EPA regulations - "owner" of land must pay part of the cost to clean up the land despite not being the one who contaminated it - "owner" of the land cannot pay "their part" of the fees, so the government seizes the land - the land can then be sold by the government to anyone, even the company that contaminated the land (or its parent company or someone else) - the new buyer of the land is free of a lot of the liability and restrictions for cleaning up the land, even if the new owner is the same company that did the contaminating, while also then qualifying for having the government (the taxpayers) of the state that the land is in footing most of the cost to clean it up --- Edit for related: >**EPA to take control of Ohio derailment response** >washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/02/21/epa-ohio-train-derailment-cleanup/ >https://archive.ph/Khqrf > >**EPA Wields Superfund Law’s Big Stick in Ohio Train Wreck Cleanup** >https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/epa-wields-superfund-laws-big-stick-in-ohio-train-wreck-cleanup >https://archive.ph/w69BN

They’re targeting the Amish.

I would say that Norfolk Southern will be paying for the clean up. Land owners may have to take them to court, but they are responsible.

Is this legit? I don’t care to watch a video. Seems like there could be more to this story.