🔬 Research
Phase I ESA Records Review Summarizer: ASTM E1527-21 Database Hits, Historical Sources by Decade, Adjoining Property Findings, RECs vs CRECs vs HRECs, and Data Gaps
Summarize the records review portion of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: environmental database hits filtered by distance and gradient, historical use by decade from fire insurance maps, aerials, and directories, adjoining property concerns, draft REC classifications for the environmental professional, and every data gap.
0Reviews
Prompt
Act as an environmental due diligence analyst who supports environmental professionals on Phase I Environmental Site Assessments under ASTM E1527-21, organizes records review findings so the EP can make the calls, and flags every data gap instead of filling it. Inputs: - Subject property: address, acreage, current use, parcel ID, and the user's purpose for the assessment: [SubjectProperty] - Environmental database report findings: listings for the subject and surrounding sites with database name, distance, direction, gradient, and status: [DatabaseFindings] - Historical sources reviewed with dates: fire insurance maps, aerial photographs, city directories, topographic maps, building permits: [HistoricalSources] - Groundwater flow direction and how it was estimated: [GroundwaterGradient] - Regulatory file reviews, interviews, and user provided information (title search, environmental liens, AULs): [AgencyAndUserInfo] - Output format: [Format] Generate: 1. A historical use timeline by decade from HistoricalSources back to the first developed use, citing each source and date, and noting decades with no source. 2. A database findings table from DatabaseFindings: site, database, distance, direction, up or down gradient, status, and whether it warrants further discussion. 3. Adjoining property notes: current and historical uses of each adjoining parcel that could affect the subject, such as dry cleaners, gas stations, or auto repair. 4. Draft classifications for the EP: each possible recognized environmental condition labeled draft REC, CREC, HREC, or de minimis, with the reason and the record that supports it. 5. A vapor and migration note: up gradient listings with releases close enough to raise vapor encroachment questions [EP judgment]. 6. Data gaps: missing decades, unavailable agency files, unanswered interview questions, and whether each gap looks significant. 7. Items the user must still provide, from AgencyAndUserInfo, such as lien and AUL search results. 8. A short summary paragraph the EP can edit for the findings section. Constraints: - Classifications are drafts for the environmental professional, who makes the final determination. - Use only the records given; never invent database listings, dates, or distances. - Report style, factual and neutral. No em dashes.
Instructions
Replace every [bracket] with your details before running. Works on ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini.
Generated Output
This image was generated using the prompt above.
Examples
Example Input
SubjectProperty: 1420 Industrial Pkwy, Dayton OH, 2.3 acres, current light warehouse, parcel R72-0044-0012, purpose: lender required Phase I for refinance DatabaseFindings: subject: RCRA small quantity generator 1991 to 2004, no violations listed; 0.05 mi east (up gradient): former Speedy Clean dry cleaner, state VAP site, status: no further action with deed restriction on groundwater use; 0.2 mi south (down gradient): LUST case, closed 2009; 0.4 mi north (cross gradient): UST registered, no release HistoricalSources: Sanborn maps 1918, 1950; aerials 1938, 1957, 1972, 1988, 2004, 2019; city directories 1960 to 2015 at 5 year steps; topo 1965 GroundwaterGradient: inferred toward the south from topography and a 2010 report at the LUST site AgencyAndUserInfo: state EPA file for the dry cleaner obtained; local fire department records request not answered after 20 days; user title search not provided; owner interview says machine shop operated in the building 1965 to 1990 Format: timeline, database table, adjoining, draft classifications, vapor note, data gaps, user items, summary
Example Output
1) HISTORICAL USE TIMELINE | Decade | Use | Source | | 1910s | Vacant land | Sanborn 1918 | | 1930s | Vacant, agricultural pattern | Aerial 1938 | | 1940s | No source reviewed | Data gap | | 1950s | Building footprint present, use not labeled | Sanborn 1950, aerial 1957 | | 1960s | Machine shop (directory 1965 to 1990) | City directories, owner interview | | 1970s to 1980s | Machine shop | Directories, aerials 1972 and 1988 | | 1990s to 2000s | Warehouse; RCRA SQG 1991 to 2004 | Directories, database report | | 2010s | Light warehouse | Directories to 2015, aerial 2019 | 2) DATABASE FINDINGS | Site | Database | Distance and direction | Gradient | Status | Discuss further | | Subject | RCRA SQG | On site | n/a | 1991 to 2004, no violations listed | Yes, with machine shop history | | Former Speedy Clean | State VAP | 0.05 mi E | Up gradient | NFA with groundwater use restriction | Yes | | LUST case | LUST | 0.2 mi S | Down gradient | Closed 2009 | No, down gradient and closed | | Registered UST | UST | 0.4 mi N | Cross gradient | No release | No | 3) ADJOINING PROPERTY NOTES - East adjoining area: former dry cleaner 0.05 mi up gradient; residual solvent impacts are controlled by a deed restriction rather than removed. - No other adjoining parcels show industrial use in the reviewed sources [confirm with site reconnaissance]. 4) DRAFT CLASSIFICATIONS FOR THE EP - Draft REC: machine shop operations 1965 to 1990 on the subject property, with likely use of cutting oils and degreasers and no records of how they were stored or disposed. Supported by directories and owner interview. - Draft CREC candidate: former dry cleaner up gradient with NFA and a groundwater use restriction; the EP should consider whether the controlled release affects the subject [EP judgment]. - Not a REC: LUST case to the south, closed and down gradient. - RCRA SQG status on the subject: no violations listed; discuss with the machine shop history rather than as a separate REC [EP judgment]. 5) VAPOR AND MIGRATION NOTE The dry cleaner site is up gradient and very close. A vapor encroachment screen is worth considering [EP judgment]. 6) DATA GAPS | Gap | Significance | | No historical source for the 1940s | Likely low; building appears by 1950 | | Fire department records request unanswered after 20 days | Possibly significant; may show UST or chemical storage | | No directory coverage after 2015 | Low; aerial 2019 shows same building | 7) ITEMS THE USER MUST PROVIDE - Title search and environmental lien search results - Any knowledge of AULs on the subject - Reason for any significantly lower purchase or appraisal value, if applicable 8) SUMMARY PARAGRAPH (DRAFT) Records indicate the subject operated as a machine shop from approximately 1965 to 1990 and as a warehouse with RCRA small quantity generator status from 1991 to 2004. An up gradient former dry cleaner 0.05 mile east has regulatory closure with a groundwater use restriction. A down gradient LUST case is closed. Data gaps include the 1940s and an unanswered fire department records request. Final REC determinations rest with the environmental professional.