The Court of Appeals, in Lighthouse Pointe Prop. Assocs. LLC v. New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation, 14 NY3d 161, 166, 897 N.Y.S.2d 693 [2010] Pointe at 177, held that the "statutory definition does not, on its face, mandate the presence of any particular level or degree of contamination" and "the word complicate' also undefined in the statute, in common English usage means to make complex, involved, or difficult' [citation to a dictionary]." "Accordingly, any real property qualifies as a brownfield site' for purposes of acceptance into the BCP so long as the presence or potential presence of a contaminant within its boundaries makes redevelopment or reuse more complex, involved, or difficult in some way." (Lighthouse Pointe at 177). In Lighthouse Pointe at 176, the Court of Appeals rejected DEC's contention that "once it determined that no cleanup was warranted, redevelopment or reuse of the properties was, by force of this circumstance alone, not complicated' within the meaning of the statutory definition." The Lighthouse Pointe Court held, at 177, that there is a low threshold of eligibility for an applicant to enter the BCP program and "the Legislature intended the definition of the term brownfield site' to be interpreted as broadly as its words suggest." The Court of Appeals, as noted above, held in Lighthouse Pointe, that DEC's narrow interpretation of the "complication of development" test for a subject property to be eligible for the inclusion in the BCP was overly restrictive and not supported by the language of the statute or the legislative intent. The Court rejected DEC's argument that it was the sole arbiter to determine whether or not a site should be included in the BCP and instructed, in Lighthouse Pointe, at 177, "that the Legislature intended the definition of the term brownfield site' to be interpreted as broadly as its words suggest." The Court's holding, reversed the Appellate Division's decision to the contrary (61 AD3d 88, 872 N.Y.S.2d 766 [4d Dept 2009]), which accorded deference to DEC, and reinstated the order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (2007 WL 5540594), which granted petitioner Lighthouse Pointe Property Associates, LLC's Article 78 petition for admission to the BCP. Lighthouse Pointe sends a clear message to DEC that it must perform its responsibility to administer the BCP transparently, using quantitative parameters (i.e., the SCOs) to guide decision-making related to the "complication of development" test, rather than relying exclusively on qualitative, site-by-site determinations. DEC used a combination of four arguments to deny the instant application: (1) the quantitative criteria of the generally accepted cleanliness levels (the SCOs) were not relevant at the application stage; (2) even if such quantitative criteria were relevant, they were not meaningful because the site samples did not significantly exceed them; (3) even if such quantitative criteria were relevant and meaningful, they could still be disregarded because contamination was located in historic fill material; (4), some vague qualitative factors such as "specific site conditions," "the project's design specifications," and "other methods for eliminating the threats, if any, posed by the presence of contamination"