Guest walkthrough · No signup
See Sanborn draft a Phase I ESA, end to end.
Walk through the full workflow on a synthetic case — records review classifications, drafted sections, AI reviewer verdict, and the items the agent kicks back to the EP. No login. No upload. No data collected from this page.
Privacy on this page
- · No analytics, no tracking pixels, no third-party scripts are loaded by this page.
- · No form fields, no cookies, no fingerprints — you are anonymous to us.
- · The subject property, findings, facility names, IDs and addresses below are fully synthetic. Nothing here was derived from any real property, real EDR report, or real client engagement.
The case
Brownfield redevelopment due-diligence (synthetic)
A 1.8-acre parcel in a Northern NJ industrial corridor with vacant 20th-century industrial structures, currently being evaluated by a redeveloper. Standard ASTM E1527-21 Phase I scope. The drafter ingested a synthetic 412-page EDR radius report; the AI reviewer audited the resulting draft.
Subject property
Block 144, Lot 7 — Industrial corridor, Northern NJ (synthetic)
Parcel size
1.8 acres
Property history
Vacant since ~2005; prior 20th-century industrial use
Investigation date
Current
ⓘ Synthetic case · for illustration only.
§4 Records Review
The agent classifies every database hit per the standard.
Each row below was classified by the drafter from the synthetic EDR. Distance, gradient, regulatory status, and ASTM-defined classification (REC / CREC / HREC / de minimis) — with a written rationale per row.
| Ref | Facility | Distance | Gradient | Class. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-1 | [Former plating operation] (synthetic) Pre-1980 use; no closure record on file Documented pre-1980 plating use on the subject parcel with no available closure record. Per E1527-21 §3.2.78, a release is presumed under conditions indicative of plating operations of that era absent evidence to the contrary. | On-property | on-property | REC |
| F-2 | [Former filling station, demolished ~2009] (synthetic) UST removal closure issued 2010 (synthetic agency ID) Past release with regulatory closure satisfactory to the state agency, no engineering or institutional controls required at closure. Meets E1527-21 HREC criteria. Upgradient direction noted; closure record reviewed. | 120 ft | upgradient | HREC |
| F-3 | [Active dry cleaner — neighboring parcel] (synthetic) Active facility; no reported releases Active dry-cleaning operation within ASTM search radius. No reported releases, but proximity + media of concern (chlorinated solvents migrate) supports a presumed REC absent positive evidence of containment integrity. Migration is in scope under E1527-21. | 85 ft | side-gradient | REC |
| F-4 | [Industrial warehouse] (synthetic) Listed RCRA Small Quantity Generator (synthetic ID) Listed status alone does not constitute a release. Downgradient direction relative to subject property; no documented release. Recorded for completeness; not classified as REC. | 340 ft | downgradient | non-REC |
| F-5 | [Three orphan listings — unresolved coordinates] (synthetic) EDR orphan listings Three orphan listings enumerated against the EDR's stated count of 3. Each researched against state online records; no relevant release information identified. Documented per E1527-21 orphan-handling guidance. | Within 1/4 mi (unresolved) | side-gradient | non-REC |
Every facility name, ID, and date above is illustrative. No correspondence to any real entity is intended.
§1 Executive Summary (excerpt)
Drafted from the records review. Plain language for the deal team.
§1 — Executive Summary
This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted on the subject property described as Block 144, Lot 7 (synthetic), in accordance with ASTM Standard Practice E1527-21. The investigation identified two Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) and one Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) as defined under the standard.
The first REC pertains to documented pre-1980 plating operations on the subject parcel. No closure record was identified in the records reviewed. Per E1527-21, plating operations of that era are presumed to have generated releases of metals (hexavalent chromium, nickel, copper) absent evidence to the contrary; this presumption was not rebutted by the records, the site reconnaissance, or the user/owner-provided information.
The second REC pertains to an active dry-cleaning facility on the side-gradient parcel approximately 85 feet from the subject property. Migration of chlorinated solvents from such facilities is in scope under E1527-21; absent positive evidence of containment integrity, the facility is presumed to represent a REC to the subject property.
The HREC pertains to a former filling station approximately 120 feet upgradient of the subject property, which received regulatory closure in 2010 following a UST removal. The closure was satisfactory to the regulatory agency without ongoing engineering or institutional controls and meets E1527-21 HREC criteria.
Detailed findings, rationale, and supporting evidence appear in §4 (Records Review) and §7 (Findings, Opinions, and Conclusions).
AI reviewer verdict
A second AI reads the draft the way a senior reviewer would.
Verdict
ASK-HUMANChecks run
- ✓ REC count agreement (§1 / §4 / §7)
- ✓ Orphan enumeration vs. EDR count
- ✓ Gradient sanity per off-site finding
- ✓ ASTM-version consistency
Reviewer narrative
Reviewer accepted REC determinations for F-1 (on-property pre-1980 plating) and F-3 (side-gradient active dry cleaner). HREC for F-2 verified against the closure-letter cite in §6.1. Orphan enumeration matches the EDR's stated count (3 of 3). One item flagged for the EP: F-3's classification turns on whether the dry cleaner's containment is verifiable from publicly available records — the drafter cited a 2019 facility inspection summary but the inspection was for fire-code compliance, not chemical containment. Reviewer recommends the EP confirm or, alternatively, document the inference as a limitation in §8.
When the verdict is ask-human or deny, the draft does not reach the EP unattended — Sanborn surfaces the reviewer's narrative inline so the EP can resolve, and the drafter re-runs against any specific denial points.
What still needs the EP
Sanborn doesn’t sign the report. You do.
EP-only — never delegated to the agent
- · §5 Site reconnaissance — physical site walk
- · §6 Owner / occupant interview
- · The §7 REC / CREC / HREC determination
- · The signature and the professional liability behind it
Surfaced for the EP’s judgment
- · Ambiguous classifications (the reviewer’s ask-human flags)
- · Findings dependent on records the EP didn’t see
- · State-program nuance the drafter doesn’t know
- · Anything the site visit changed after the draft
When you’re ready
Run Sanborn on your own EDR.
Your data lives in a per-user workspace. Sanborn doesn’t share, sell, or train models on your firm’s reports. Sign in, drop your EDR, see the draft in ~15 minutes.
The walkthrough above is for illustration. Sanborn drafts Phase I ESA reports per ASTM E1527-21 as a reference tool. A licensed Environmental Professional makes the final REC determination and signs the deliverable.