Presented to: The American Institute of Architects (AIA) Presented by: Paul Wild, VP Environmental Services, Tolunay-Wong Engineers (TWE)

3. CE/EA/EIA
 Categorical Exclusion (CE): completed to demonstrate that an
area being considered for development does not warrant an EA or
full EIA.
 Environmental Assessment (EA): completed for an area being
considered for development that has limited environmental value
 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): required when a
Subject Site or area has significant environmental values
All assessments typically include:
-Land use
-Faulting
-Wetlands
-Endangered species
-Noise
-Socioeconomic Impacts
-Historical/Archaeological Resources

4. Faulting in the Houston Area

5. CE/EA/EIA
 Required by Regulatory Agencies
-Federal Highway Administration (FHA)
-TxDOT
-Federal Transportation Authority (FTA)
-Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
 Required to meet U.S. Council on Environmental
Quality requirements under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

6. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

7. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

8. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

9. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

10. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

11. Categorical Exclusion Ex.

12. Environmental Assessment Ex.

13. Environmental Assessment Ex.

14. Environmental Assessment Ex.

15. Environmental Assessment Ex.

16. Environmental Assessment Ex.

17. Permitting
What?
 Corps 404 Wetlands Permitting (Clean Water Act)
-Wetlands Delineation and Ordinary High Water Mark Drawings
-Soil Test Pit Data Sheets
-GPS coordinates in UTM to 1-meter resolution
 Corps Section 10 Bridge Permitting for Navigable Waters (Rivers and Harbors Act)
 USCG Section 9 Bridge Permitting for Navigable Waters (Rivers and Harbors Act)
 Section 9 & 10 Permitting Typically Include:
-Location Map
-Plan & Elevation View of Bridge
-Section 401 Water Quality Certification from TCEQ
-Coastal Zone Management Certification from GLO if in a mapped Coastal Area
-Approved Environmental Document (Categorical Exclusion, EA/FONSI, EIS)
Why?
-Ensure wetlands maintain their surface water purification and wildlife habitat
capabilities
-Ensure navigable waters maintain their proper flow dynamics and
accessibility to vessel traffic

18. Permitting Ex.

19. Permitting Ex.

20. Permitting Ex.

21. Permitting Ex.
HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT

22. Permitting Ex.
HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT

23. Permitting Ex.
HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT

24. Permitting Ex.

25. Permitting Ex.

26. Permitting Ex.

27. Permitting Ex.

28. Permitting Ex.

29. Permitting Ex.

30. Permitting Ex.

31. Permitting Ex.

32. Permitting Ex.

33. Permitting Ex.

34. Phase I & II ESAs
 Phase I ESA – an assessment, resulting in a report, which is prepared for
a real estate holding, typically involved in a transaction, which identifies
potential or existing environmental contamination liabilities. The
process, content and preparation of a Phase I assessment are governed
by American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice
for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Process (ASTM Designation: E1527-05)
 Phase II ESA – usually initiated as a result of a recommendation coming
out of a Phase I ESA if conditions are found to exist which indicate the
potential for environmental contamination to exist on a Subject Site.
Although content of a Phase II ESA is governed by the findings of the
Phase I ESA, Phase II ESAs are governed by (ASTM) Standard Practices
for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase II ESA Process (ASTM
Designation: E1903-97, Re-approved 2002)

35. Phase I & II ESAs
 Most often required by lending institutions (banks) to protect
their investment in a property transaction
 May be requested by a seller as a pro-active attempt to
satisfy the buyer and prove that the Subject Site has no
liabilities. Most buyers will however want their own agent to
do an assessment as well, at least as confirmation of what
the seller is telling them
 Most often requested by a buyer to satisfy their lending
institution and for their own peace of mind

36. Phase I ESA
• Records Review: most commonly subcontracted by the
Environmental Professional(s) responsible for conducing
the Phase I ESA, to an Environmental Data Base Firm who
maintains databases of government required
reporting, historical photos, historical maps, etc.
• Site Reconnaissance: by an Environmental Professional
• Interviews: with owners and occupiers, regulators
• Report Preparation: typically addresses both the
underlying land as well as physical improvements to the
Subject Site; however, techniques applied in a Phase I
ESA never include actual collection of physical samples
or chemical analyses of any kind.
• Excluded from the scope of Phase I ESAs are: asbestos-
containing materials (ACM), radon, lead based
paint, lead in drinking water, wetlands, cultural and
historic risks, industrial hygiene, health and
safety, ecological resources, endangered species, and
indoor air quality

37. Phase II ESA
• Intrusive investigation: to identify and determine the nature
and extent of potential contamination. It normally follows a
Phase I investigation where site conditions or history of
use and/or neighboring lands, or age of facility suggest
potential for impaired conditions
• Boreholes, Test Pits and/or Wells: to provide a representative
coverage of the area of concern. Groundwater monitoring
wells may also be installed to analyze water quality. Subsurface
conditions including soil stratigraphy, groundwater
evaluations, flow, direction, and gradient, as well as depth to
bedrock may be determined during such investigations. Based
on the results obtained during the subsurface investigation
programs as well as other available information, site sensitivity
assessment is conducted in order to identify legislation or
guideline requirements.

38. Phase II ESA
• Laboratory characterization of soil, groundwater, air and
materials is completed in addition to assessment of the
physical properties of subsurface environments and
contaminants. Chemical constituents are analyzed and
compared to applicable Environmental Regulations and
Standards. If exceedances are found, zones of contaminated
soils or groundwater are delineated and quantified.
• Possible effects on human health and safety and the natural
environment are researched as well as potential migration
pathways, possibility of off-site impacts and chemical
stability.
• Recommendations of alternative remediation technologies
as well as timing and costs can be included.

39. Phase II Ex.
CITY OF HOUSTON

40. Phase II Ex.
CITY OF HOUSTON

41. Phase II Ex.
CITY OF HOUSTON

42. Operational Issues
• Tank Removal and other Remediation Activities: based on the findings of
Phase II ESAs.
• Stormwater Management: Usually based on a Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP or SWP3) which is required under the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) its Texas counterpart, TPDES.
• Waste Management: No specific plan required routinely, however many
regulations exist, particularly around hazardous waste
handling, storage, transport and disposal, and of course, in retroactively
cleaning up sites contaminated with hazardous wastes under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The USEPA has a lot of
guidance on managing wastes on its website.
• Auditing: The USEPA encourages self- policing and has incentives for self
discovery, disclosure, correction and prevention of violations.

43. Waste Management Ex.

44. Waste Management Ex.

45. Waste Management Ex.

46. Waste Management Ex.

47. Waste Management Ex.

49. Confidential Client

50. Columns in a high-end condominium complex were heaving
due to soils expansion caused by water absorption. Cracking
of walls and floors was occurring from the first to third floors.
The water source was not known but was suspected to be one
of four things:
1) aboveground pool with known cracks allowing leakage
2) below-ground sanitary sewer line from the complex
3) on-site storm water detention basin
4) nearby bayou suspected of causing saturated soils from
high water events

51.  Drill 12 borings to 20 ft to evaluate soil geotechnical
properties
 Install piezometers to establish groundwater levels near
potential water sources
 Evaluate groundwater chemistry to identify probable
water sources

60. HCPID needed geotechnical and environmental services for a
roadway expansion project that included lane
additions, bridge widening, and drainage improvements.
Drainage improvements consisted of conversion of roadside
ditches to culverts.

61.  Lane expansion and detention pond geotechnical studies
 Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments
 Historical/Cultural Survey, including archaeological pedestrian and
excavation surveys
 Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
 Wetlands and Water Bodies Delineation and Corps 404 Permitting
 Geophysical Surveys
 Waste Management and Health and Safety Plans
 Third-Party Contractor Quality Assurance Monitoring for construction
materials and hazmat handling

63. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

65. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT

66. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE
DEPARTMENT

68. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

69. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

70. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

71. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

72. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

73. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

75. HARRIS COUNTY PUBLIC
INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT

77. HISD needed Phase I and II ESAs to
evaluate the presence of hazardous
materials before initiating a school upgrade
and expansion project.

79. HOUSTON INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT

80. HOUSTON INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT

81. HOUSTON INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT

82. HISD

83. Metropolitan Transit
Authority
METRO

84. METRO was entering into negotiations with a seller
for a key tract to be used for the Intermodal Terminal
as part of its light rail expansion program and
needed expert witness testimony related to the
negative impacts on valuation caused by hazardous
materials on the tract. The presence of the hazmat
limited development options for foundations, i.e.
slab on grade versus structural foundations.

85.  Phase I ESA
 Phase II ESA
 Supplemental Phase II ESA
 Geotechnical Study
 Expert Witness Litigation Support
 Investigation Derived Waste Management

86. METRO

87. METRO

95. City of League City

96. The City of League City needed to stabilize the
slopes of Robinson Bayou and also wanted to
construct a hike and bike trail along the high bank
of the bayou. Geotechnical and environmental
studies were required to support the project
design and environmental permitting tasks.

97.  Geotechnical Study
 Historical/Cultural Resources Survey
 Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
 Wetlands and Water Bodies Delineation
 Hydrogeomorphic Modeling and Wetlands Functional Assessment
 Stream Functional Assessment
 USFWS and TPWD Section 7 Consultation
 Wetlands Mitigation Plan
 Bid Specifications Review
 Corps 404 Permitting

108. CITY OF
LEAGUE CITY

109. CITY OF
LEAGUE CITY

110. CITY OF
LEAGUE CITY

111. CITY OF
LEAGUE CITY

118. Project Summary
The City of Orange wanted to develop a boardwalk along a stretch of
the Sabine River that has an oxbow meander loop that is no longer the
principal flow centerline for the river. Geotechnical and environmental
studies were required to support the project design and environmental
permitting tasks.
Scope of Work
 Geotechnical Study
 River Flow Velocity Study

126. CITY OF ORANGE

127. CITY OF ORANGE