DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT STUDY
|
|
- Asher Gardner
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 North Central Texas Council of Governments DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT STUDY Prepared By Dewberry In association with Carter-Burgess May 2005 "This study was funded through a solid waste management grant provided by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) through the North Central Texas Council of Governments. This funding does not necessarily indicate endorsement of the study findings and recommendations."
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....iii NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT STUDY I. PROJECT APPROACH... 1 A. General... 1 B. Objectives... 1 II. CURRENT SITUATION... 3 A. Outreach Meeting... 3 B. Needs Assessment... 3 C. Existing Debris Management Plan Review and Recommendations... 5 D. Response to Questionnaires... 6 Organization and Coordination... 9 Resources and Training Technology III. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF A MAJOR DEBRIS-GENERATING EVENT ON THE REGION A. General B. Quantification of Debris-Generating Impacts on the NCTCOG Region C. Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction Site Availability D. Landfill Site Availability and Capabilities E. Landfill Agreements and Contracts F. Volume Reduction Methods Burning Grinding and Chipping Recycling G. Debris Removal and Disposal Contracting Procedures H. Load Ticket Disposition I. Debris Field Monitoring Responsibilities IV. RECOMMENDATIONS A. General B. Landfill Site Availability, Financial Impact from Disposal Costs, and Landfill Agreements and Contract Recommendations C. Debris Management Plan Development Recommendations Organization and Coordination Recommendations Resource Recommendations Training Recommendations Technology Recommendation D. GIS-Based Debris Tools and Recommendations E. Debris Management Plan Format May, 2005 Page i
3 V. NCTCOG TWO YEAR PLAN OUTLINE A. General B. Recommendations and Actions C. County or Municipal Contracting Options ACRONYMS AND DEBRIS MANAGEMENT TERMS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Typical TDSR Site Layout Figure 2. Example Load Ticket Figure 3. Typical Debris Management Center Organization LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Participating Counties and Municipalities... 4 Table 2. Debris Management Plan Recommendations...5 Table 3. Organization and Coordination Questions... 7 Table 4. Resources and Training Questions... 8 Table 5. Catalog of Debris-Generating Events Table 6. Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study Generated Debris Estimates Table 7. Current Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction Sites Table 8. Typical Composition of Storm Debris Table 9. Regional Landfills Table 10. Debris Management Plan Development Recommendations Table 11. Debris Management Plan Format Table 12. Two-Year Implementation Recommendations LIST OF TABS TAB A. Disaster Debris Management Study Inventory Questions TAB B. Detailed Regional Debris Prediction Tables TAB C. Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction (TDSR) Site Investigations TAB D. Debris Management Plan Development Guidance TAB E. Federal Aid Highways TAB F. Debris Management Workshops TAB G. Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) Cooperative Purchasing Program TAB H. Sample Scope of Work for Debris Removal and Disposal Operations, TDSR site Operations, Debris Clearance for Access from Right-of-Way and Public Property TAB I. Sample Scope of Services for Disaster Debris Monitoring TAB J. GIS Technology Report May, 2005 Page ii
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT STUDY OVERVIEW The study has been divided into five sections that focus on the Project Approach; Current Situation; the Potential Impacts of a Major Debris-Generating Event on the Region; Recommendations, and NCTCOG Two Year Plan Outline. The study used data provided by counties and municipalities to identify specific shortfalls in debris management planning and subsequent recommendations and actions that can be taken to reduce and/or eliminate the shortfalls at the local level and at the regional level by NCTCOG. A. Project Approach. This Disaster Debris Management Study identifies a basic framework and many underlying resources necessary to support the development and implementation of coordinated Debris Management Plans for counties and municipalities within the NCTCOG region. With minor organizational changes and development of a dedicated and focused coordinated debris management approach, existing disaster response plans readily can be expanded to cover debris management. Addressing the shortfalls identified herein will allow the development of an effective plan that allows the counties and municipalities within the NCTCOG region to rapidly respond to natural and man-made debris-generating events. B. Current Situation. This section of the study identifies the current state of debris management planning within the NCTCOG region. The Project Team reviewed a sampling of existing county and municipal Emergency Response Plans to determine if adequate emphasis was being placed on debris management planning. The Project Team also distributed a total of 71 detailed questionnaires by to obtain a sampling of debris management preparedness within the region. The results of these efforts revealed that there is a need for counties and municipalities to either review and update their current plans or develop new ones based on recommendations contained in this study. C. Potential Impact of a Major Debris Generating Event on the Region. This section of the study identifies the potential quantities of debris that a major debris-generating event (Tornado and Flooding) would have on the region. The calculations were developed using a modified Disaster Assistance Response and Recovery Technology (DARRT) application that is based on debris estimating models developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Those quantities were then used to evaluate the impact on existing Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction (TDSR) sites and landfill capabilities. The Project Team also identified a major shortage of identified TDSR sites throughout the region. These sites are required to reduce the impact on existing landfill sites since they are usually used to reduce debris volumes through burning, grinding, or recycling. D. Recommendations. This section of the report identifies specific recommendations designed to address landfill and debris management plan improvements based on specific shortfalls in local debris management planning efforts identified in the questionnaires. Specific recommended actions are provided in the accompanying Tabs to the study. E. NCTCOG Two Year Implementation Recommendations. The final section of the study identifies actions that can be taken by NCTCOG during the next two years. These include May, 2005 Page iii
5 developing a regional GIS Application, providing regional training opportunities, and assisting in the development of regional and/or county level Debris Removal and Disposal Contracts. The Project Team is available to assist NCTCOG and member counties and municipalities in reviewing or developing coordinated Debris Management Plans based on the study s recommendations. II. FINDINGS A. Background: The Project Team of Dewberry & Davis LLC (DEWBERRY) and Carter & Burgess, Inc. was contracted by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) to conduct a Disaster Debris Management Study in response to an increased awareness nationwide regarding disaster preparedness and local experiences following major regional tornadoes and flooding events. A detailed questionnaire was developed to obtain information on current plans that would become the basis for the Disaster Debris Management Study and subsequent recommendations. The purpose of the questionnaire was to determine if NCTCOG member counties and municipalities are prepared to respond to a major debris-generating event. B. Threat: The greatest natural disaster threats to the NCTCOG region are tornadoes and flooding. Consequently, debris prediction models were developed to provide a basis for calculating the quantity of debris that a simulated tornado or potential flooding of the Upper Trinity River would have on the region. Several tornado scenarios were developed based on similar tornadoes that impacted the Oklahoma City area. Their tracks were superimposed over the NCTCOG region using Geographic Information System technology developed by NCTCOG s Department of Research and Information Services. The Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study Analysis and Flood Risk Assessment was used as the basis for developing a debris prediction model for flooding along the Trinity River. The predicted debris quantities were used as the basis for evaluating the region s response capabilities and potential impact on existing temporary debris staging and reduction (TDSR) sites and permanent landfills. The worst case tornado scenario developed by NCTCOG would generate approximately 4,815,000 cubic yards of debris. The worst case flooding scenario would generate approximately 863,000 cubic yards of debris. C. Debris Management Questionnaire and Documentation: This project was divided into two phases. Phase 1: The Project Team conducted an extensive outreach campaign for this project. The purpose of this outreach campaign was 1) to increase awareness among local governments in the NCTCOG region, and 2) to encourage participation by local governments in the needs assessment portion of this project. May, 2005 Page iv
6 The Project Team conducted an outreach meeting on December 6, 2004 at NCTCOG headquarters in Arlington, TX. The purpose of the meeting was to present information on disaster related-impacts and how proper disaster debris planning can minimize impacts at the local level by reducing response and recovery time and speeding up the disaster funding cycle. The project approach was discussed and meeting participants were briefed on the importance of completing the Debris Management Survey Questionnaire. During discussions following the presentation the committee recommended that the questionnaire be sent to additional municipalities to get a better sample for analysis purposes. This was done and a total of 71 questionnaires were ed with a requested response date of December 29, Phase 2: The Project Team received responses to the questionnaire from six counties and 22 municipalities. A through review of the responses and supporting documentation, including existing county and municipal plans and procedures, revealed that the region as a whole needs to place more emphasis on debris management planning. Specific recommendations are identified below. In addition to the review and analysis of debris management planning, the Project Team also evaluated the current GIS capabilities of NCTCOG and member counties and municipalities. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine the suitability of utilizing GIS-based debris prediction and planning models. III. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are based on provided documents, questionnaires, and interviews. The recommendations are designed to assist NCTCOG member counties and municipalities to either update or develop coordinated Debris Management Plans. See Table 10 for a detailed description of all recommendations. A. Organization and Coordination Recommendations: Municipalities should either update or develop coordinated Debris Management Plans. (67% have no plan.) Municipalities should designate a "Debris Manager" as the single point of contact. (56% have no designated debris manager or debris management staff.) Municipalities should develop Standard Operating Procedures for debris management operations. (81% have no Debris Operations Standard Operating Guides.) Municipalities should develop pre-event debris clearing, removal and disposal contracts. (96% have no pre-event contracts in place.) Municipalities should identify suitable TDSR sites. (63% have not identified suitable TDSR sites.) Municipalities should conduct baseline studies on each TDSR site. (89% have not conducted baseline studies.) May, 2005 Page v
7 Municipalities should identify and train debris contract monitors. (85% have not identified or trained monitors.) Municipalities should develop a listing of all Federal Aid Roads. 74% have not identified the Federal Aid Roads.) Municipalities should divide their area into definable debris management zones. (85% have not created debris management zones.) B. Resource Recommendations: Municipalities should develop pre-printed load tickets. (89% have not developed pre-printed load tickets.) Municipalities should develop pre-printed right of entry/hold harmless agreements. (81 % have not developed the agreements.) C. Training Recommendations: Municipalities should conduct training workshops for their debris management staff to include: FEMA Public Assistance Program Overview Workshop (8 hrs) Debris Management Plan Development Workshop (3 days) Debris Contract Monitoring Workshops (8 hrs) (70% have not received any of the recommended training) D. Technology Recommendations: NCTCOG or the municipalities should develop a GIS-based Debris Management Application capable of forecasting and estimating debris quantities and tracking debris removal activities similar to the application developed for the City of Houston and Fort Bend County, TX. (See TAB J for a detailed discussion of the GIS Needs Assessment and Technology Recommendations.) May, 2005 Page vi
8 NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS DISASTER DEBRIS MANAGEMENT STUDY I. PROJECT APPROACH A. General The team of Dewberry & Davis LLC (DEWBERRY) and Carter & Burgess, Inc. (Project Team) was contracted by the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) to conduct a Disaster Debris Management Study in response to an increased awareness nationwide regarding disaster preparedness and local experiences following recent tornadoes and flooding. The Disaster Debris Management Study is designed to obtain information to evaluate the current state of debris management planning by reviewing current debris management plans and written responses to a detailed questionnaire. The purpose of the document reviews and questionnaire is to determine if the counties and municipalities are prepared to respond to a major debrisgenerating event. B. Objectives The Project Team was requested to focus on identifying major disaster debris-generating removal and disposal issues. The following objectives were established to guide the Project Team in the assessment process: Assess the capability of the region to respond to a debris-generating event. Evaluate Geographic Information System (GIS) capabilities and recommend GIS solution for Debris Prediction and Debris Event Management. Provide recommendations for local and regional actions to improve capabilities and capacity. Achieve a consensus on recommendations with local, regional and, state stakeholders. To meet these objectives the Project Team will: Increase awareness among the NCTCOG members regarding the potential impacts of a major debris-generating event on the normal operation of the governments, and specifically of the impacts on the operation/capacity of the existing solid waste operations. Review existing and proposed GIS capabilities and potential debris prediction and debris event management models. Conduct an independent assessment of the abilities of NCTCOG members to prepare for, respond to, and recover from a major debris-generating event. Provide implementable debris management recommendations that will preserve landfill capacity through preparedness planning and sharing of resources. To accomplish these objectives, the Project Team divided the project into five tasks for ease of coordination and to follow a logical progression of work to allow NCTCOG and participating counties and municipalities reasonable time to assess interim deliverables and provide input toward the end product. The associated tasks are as follows: May, 2005 Page 1
9 Task 1. Kickoff Meeting Refine the: Scope Schedule Outreach Plan Data Needs Task 2. GIS Evaluation Step 1: Research Requirements Confirm and document the functional requirements Assess commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions against requirements Confirm existing hardware, software and data Assess existing hardware, software and data against COTS solution Step 2: Recommendations Develop recommendations and costs to implement Draft Implementation Plan to include: o Recommend architecture o Hardware, software and data requirements o Detailed implementation schedule Gain consensus on the plan Task 3. Evaluation of Local Government Capabilities Needs Assessment: Outreach and training Coordination/data collection/existing plans Debris prediction Disposal options Agreements/contracts Methods: Questionnaires Web/digital information exchange Sampling Teleconferences Field visits and meetings Task 4. Draft Recommendations Debris quantification Disposal options Assessment of preparedness Adequacy of plans GIS applications Training Phased implementation plan May, 2005 Page 2
10 Task 5. Summary Documents Draft and final study Regulatory coordination Briefings II. CURRENT SITUATION A. Outreach Meeting The Project Team conducted an extensive outreach campaign for this project. The purposes of this outreach campaign were 1) to increase awareness among local governments in the NCTCOG region, and 2) to encourage participation by local governments in the needs assessment portion of this project. The Project Team conducted an outreach meeting on December 6, 2004, at NCTCOG headquarters in Arlington, TX. The purpose of the meeting was to present information on disaster related-impacts and how proper disaster debris planning can minimize impacts at the local level by reducing response and recovery time, thus speeding up the disaster funding cycle. The Project Team also provided guidance on how to complete the detailed questionnaire. During the meeting several county attendees recommended that the Project Team expand the number of municipalities in the survey to obtain a larger number of responses. The municipalities have a greater responsibility for debris management planning and execution than do the counties. This recommendation was taken into consideration and the Project Team expanded the municipality listing from 21 municipalities to 55 municipalities plus the 16 counties. The questionnaire was ed to Emergency Management Coordinators and Directors of Public Works and Solid Waste Management. (A copy of the questionnaire is included in TAB A.) Completion of the questionnaires was set for December 29, Evaluation of the responses began on January 3, B. Needs Assessment The first step taken by the Project Team was to review a sampling of existing county and municipal Emergency Response Plans, specifically Annex K (Public Works & Engineering). The second step taken by the Project Team was to review all of the submitted questionnaires to determine the current state of debris management plans, procedures, mutual aid agreements, and contracts or contracting mechanisms. Counties and municipalities that provided responses to the questionnaire are shown in Table 1 below. May, 2005 Page 3
11 Table 1: Participating Counties and Municipalities County/Municipality Annex K Questionnaire Questionnaire County/Municipality Annex K Completed Completed Collin County YES Hunt County Allen YES Greenville McKinney YES YES Johnson County YES Celina Cleburne YES Frisco YES YES Kaufman County YES YES Melissa Terrell Murphy Navarro County YES Plano YES YES Corsicana Princeton Palo Pinto County Prosper Parker County Dallas County Weatherford Dallas YES YES Rockwall County Addison YES Rockwall YES Carrollton YES Somervell County Coppell YES Glen Rose Desoto Tarrant County Garland YES Fort Worth YES YES Highland Park YES Arlington YES YES Irving YES Azie Mesquite Benbrook Richardson Burleson Rowlett YES Crowley Sunnyvale YES Everman University Park Grand Prairie YES Denton County YES Grapevine Denton YES YES Keller Flower Mound Mansfield Highland Village North Richland Hills YES Lewisville YES River Oaks Ellis County Southlake YES Waxahachie Watauga Erath County White Settlement Stephenville Wise County Hood County YES Decatur Granbury Fairview Note: Information provided by participating counties and municipalities. Blank boxes indicate that data was not available or not provided to the Project Team. May, 2005 Page 4
12 C. Existing Debris Management Plan Review and Recommendations Table 2 below is a summary of the Project Team s findings based on a review of existing county and municipal Debris Management Plans provided with the questionnaires. Sixty-seven percent of the respondents indicated that they did not have a Debris Management Plan. Table 2: Debris Management Plan Recommendations County / Municipality Minor Update Recommended Major Update Recommended Identify Responsible Departments and Personnel Define Responsibilities Update Local, State and Federal References Provide Guidance for all Debris Management Operations Designate a "Debris Manager" by Name or Position Denton Y Y Y Y Plano Y Y Y Y Y Y Frisco Y Y Y Y Y Y Fort Worth Y Y Y Y Y Y Dallas Y Y McKinney Y Y Y Y Y Y Arlington Y Y Y Y Y Y Kaufman County Y Y Y Y Y Y City of Denton: Annex W to City of Denton Emergency Management Plan. This plan needs minor up-dating to include guidance on Debris Management Center Operations and specific responsibilities of various city departments involved with debris operations. City of Plano: Debris Management Plan needs to be updated to identify specific responsibilities of city departments. Current plan is more of a guideline on what should be done instead of a coordinating document specifying who should do what. City of Frisco: Debris Management Plan needs to be updated to identify specific responsibilities of city departments. Current plan is more of a guideline on what should be done instead of a coordinating document specifying who should do what. City of Fort Worth: Debris Management Plan needs to be updated to identify specific responsibilities of city departments. Current plan is more of a guideline on what should be done instead of a coordinating document specifying who should do what. City of Dallas: Debris Management Plan is currently being updated. Need to include updated FEMA guidance and monitoring procedures. Insure that the plan is a coordinating document specifying who should do what. May, 2005 Page 5
13 City of McKinney: Debris Management Plan needs to be updated to identify specific responsibilities of city departments. Current plan is more of a guideline on what should be done instead of a coordinating document specifying who should do what. City of Arlington: The document provided is a response plan for landfill operations. City needs to develop a Debris Management Plan that identifies specific responsibilities on who should do what. Kaufman County: Debris Management Plan needs to be updated to identify specific responsibilities of county departments. Current plan is more of a guideline on what should be done instead of a coordinating document specifying who should do what. The Project Team strongly recommends that all counties and municipalities review their existing Debris Management Plans and update them to include the following provisions: Identify responsible department/personnel and define their responsibilities and tasks for: o Clearing debris from rights-of-way in an emergency. o Preparing and maintaining a resource list that identifies source locations and availability of contractor equipment that could be used to support debris clearing, removal, and disposal operations. Reference current federal, state, and local authorities that establish the legal basis for planning and carrying out emergency responsibilities. Include a purpose or mission statement that describes the reason for the plan. Provide a situational statement that describes potential hazardous considerations. Include planning assumptions. Include a concept of operations that describe how emergency operational activities will be carried out. Describe the organization and identify responsibilities for each agency. Develop an organizational chart and notification procedures. Designate a representative to be the Debris Manager for the county/municipality. Develop a direction and control section to provide specific guidance on command and coordination of all debris management operations. Detailed Debris Management Plan development guidance is contained in Table 10 and a sample Debris Management Plan Format is in Table 11. D. Response to Questionnaires The information gathered through the questionnaires has been compiled into a needs assessment that evaluates the adequacy of the NCTCOG Region s debris management planning efforts and its ability to respond to, collect, stage, reduce, and dispose of storm-generated debris. Tables 3 and 4 provide a summary of the Project Team s findings based on a compilation of the information extracted from the debris management inventory questionnaires (TAB A) that were returned by each county and municipality. May, 2005 Page 6
14 County City Have you had a major debris generating event in the past? Do you have a designated Debris Do you have a Debris Management Plan? Manager? Do you have a Debris Management Center? Have key personnel been identified? Do you have a Public Information Officer? Do you have Standard Operating Procedures for debris operations? Do you have debris removal contracts with local contractors? Do you have debris removal contracts with regional contractors? Do you plan to use garbage haulers to remove debris? Do you have temporary debris staging sites identified? Do you have municipal or privately owned landfills? Have you conducted baseline studies at the TDSR sites? Do you hve mutual aid agreements? Do you have a county response plan? Have you identified debris contract Question # Collin N N Y Y Y Y N N N N Y Y N N Y N Y N Allen Y N N N N N N N N Y N Y N Y Y N N N McKinney N Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Y Y Y N Y Y N N N Celina * * Frisco Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N N Melissa * * Murphy * * Plano N Y N N N Y N N N Y Y Y N N Y N Y N Princeton * * Prosper * * Dallas * * Dallas Y Y Y Y * * Y N N N N Y * Y Y Y * Y Addison N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Carrollton N N Y N Y Y N N N Y N N N N Y N N N Coppell N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Desoto * * Garland N N N N N Y N N N * N Y N N Y N N N Highland Park N N Y Y N N N N N Y N N N N Y N N N Irving N Y Y Y Y N N N N N N Y Y Y N N N N Mesquite * * Richardson * * Rowlett N Y Y Y Y Y N N N N Y N N Y N N N N Sunnyvale N N N Y Y Y N Y N N N N N N N N N N University Park Denton N N Y N N Y N N N N Y Y N Y Y N N Y Denton N Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N Y N N Y N Y N Flower Mound * * Frisco * * Highland Village * * Lewisville N N N Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y N Y * N N N Ellis * * Waxahachie * * Erath * * Stephenville * * Hood Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y N N N Grandbury * * Hunt * * Greenville * * Johnson Y N N Y Y N N N N N N Y N N Y N N N Cleburne * * Kaufman N Y Y Y N N Y N N N Y N N N Y N Y Y Terrell * * Navarro N N N N N N N N N * N Y * N Corsicana * * Palo Pinto * * Mineral Wells * * Parker * * Weatherford * * Rockwall * * Rockwall N N N Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y N N Y N N N Somervell * * Glen Rose * * Tarrant * * Fort Worth Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N N N N Arlington Y N N Y N Y N N N Y N Y N N Y Y N N Azie * * Benbrook * * Burleson * * Crowley * * Everman * * Grand Prairie N N N N Y Y N N N Y N Y N N * N N N Grapevine * * Keller * * Mansfield * * North Richland Hills N N N N Y Y N N N Y N N N N N N Y N River Oaks * * Southlake N N N Y N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Watauga * * White Settlement * * Wise * * Decatur * * Fairview * * # YES % YES 26% 33% 44% 59% 52% 59% 19% 11% 4% 44% 37% 63% 4% 33% 59% 11% 19% 11% # NO % NO 74% 67% 56% 41% 44% 37% 81% 89% 96% 48% 63% 37% 89% 67% 30% 85% 74% 85% NO RESPONSE % NR 4% 4% 7% 7% 7% 4% 7% 4% TOTAL RESPONSES * No Response to Questionnaire Table 3: Organization and Coordination Questions monitors? Do you have a list or map of Federal Aid Roads? Do you have the area divided into debris management zones? May, 2005 Page 7
15 County Municipality RESOURCE QUESTIONS Provided information on equipment. Do you have preprinted debris load tickets? Question # Collin Y N N Y Allen Y N N Y McKinney Y Y Y Y Celina Frisco Y N N Y Melissa Murphy Plano Y N Y Y Princeton Prosper Dallas Dallas Y * N Y Addison Y N N Y Carrollton Y N N Y Coppell N N N N Desoto Garland Y N N Y Highland Park N N N Y Irving N N N Y Mesquite Richardson Rowlett Y N Y Y Sunnyvale N N N N University Park Denton Y N N Y Denton Y N N Y Flower Mound Frisco Highland Village Lewisville Y N Y Y Ellis Waxahachie Erath Stephenville Hood Y N N N Grandbury Hunt Greenville Johnson N N N N Cleburne Kaufman Y N N N Terrell Navarro * N N Y Corsicana Palo Pinto Mineral Wells Parker Weatherford Rockwall Rockwall Y N N Y Somervell Glen Rose Tarrant Fort Worth Y N Y Y Arlington Y Y N N Azie Benbrook Burleson Crowley Everman Grand Prairie Y* N N Y Grapevine Keller Mansfield North Richland Hills River Oaks Southlake N N N Y Watauga White Settlement Wise Decatur Fairview # YES % YES 74% 7% 19% 78% # NO % NO 22% 89% 81% 22% NO RESPONSE 1 1 % NR 4% 4% TOTAL RESPONSES * No Response to Questionnaire Table 4: R Do you have preprinted right of entry hold harmless agre ements? Do you have an organization chart? TECHNOLOGY QUESTIONS Do you have GIS capabilities? TRAINING QUESTIONS Have you received training on Debris Contract Monitoring? Have you received training on FEMA Documentation? Y N N N Y N N Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Y N N Y N N N N Y N N Y Y N N Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N N Y N N N Y N N N Y N N N Y Y N N Y N N N Y Y N N Y Y N N Y Y N N Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Y % 26% 26% 89% % 70% 70% 7% % 4% 4% 4% esouce and Training Questions Would you or your staff participate in the training workshops? May, 2005 Page 8
16 The following are responses provided by respondents to the questions pertaining to Debris Management Organization and Coordination. The Project Team used the resulting percentages to identify shortfalls and to develop recommendations. Organization and Coordination 1. Have you had a major debris-generating event in the past 4 years? 26% YES 74% NO Examples: Rainstorm (2004), Windstorm (2004), Tornado (2000, 2002) Ice Storm (2001). 2. Do you have a coordinated Debris Management Plan? 33% YES 67% NO Examples: Annex 2 to Appendix K, Annex W to Emergency Management Plan, Annex J to Emergency Operations Plan. 3. Do you have a single person designated as the Debris Manager? 44% YES 56% NO Examples: Public Works Executive Director, Director of Parks and Recreation, Right-of- Way Superintendent. 4. Do you have a location that would function as a Debris Management Center? 59% YES 41% NO Examples: Emergency Operations Center, Town Hall Court House, Service Center, Substation. 5. Have specific key personnel been identified at each department with a support or primary debris mission? 54% YES 42% NO 4% NO RESPONSE 6. Do you have a Public Information Officer as part of the Debris Management organization? 52% YES 44% NO 4% NO RESPONSE Examples: Communications and Marketing Department, Community Relations, Marketing Services Manager. 7. Do you have current Standard Operating Procedures that define debris clearance, removal, and disposal actions to include personnel and equipment? 19% YES 81% NO 8. Do you have current standby contracts with local contractors to perform debris clearing, removal and disposal missions? 11% YES 89% NO Examples: Waste Management Residential Collections. 9. Do you have current standby contracts with regional or national contractors to perform debris removal and disposal missions? 4% YES 96% NO 10. Do you plan to use your current garbage haulers to remove and dispose of debris? 44% YES 48% NO 7% NO RESPONSE Examples: Trinity Waste Services. 11. Do you have temporary debris staging and reduction (TDSR) sites identified? 37% YES 63% NO 12. Do you have municipal or privately owned landfills? 63% YES 37% NO May, 2005 Page 9
17 13. Have you conducted baseline studies on the proposed TDSR sites? 4% YES 89% NO- 7% NO RESPONSE 14. Do you have mutual aid agreements with other municipalities or counties with respect to debris clearing, removal and disposal operations? 33% YES 67% NO Examples: Regional Disaster Assistance Agreement (RDAA.) 15. Do you have a County response plan? 59% YES 30% NO 7% NO RESPONSE Examples: Collin County EMP 16. Have you identified roving, loading site and disposal site contract monitors? 11% YES 85% NO 4% NO RESPONSE 17. Do you have a list or map that identifies Federal Aid Roads? 19% YES 74% NO-7% NO RESPONSE 18. Do you have the County/City divided into identifiable debris management zones? 11% YES 85% NO 4% NO RESPONSE Resources and Training 1. What equipment do you have for debris clearance, removal and disposal operations? 74% YES 22% NO 4% NO RESPONSE See the RDAA Resource Inventory for details of all equipment available within the region. The following is only a sampling of equipment available for debris operations. Equipment Quantity Equipment Quantity Front Loaders CY Dump Truck 1 Back Hoes 44 Grapple Trucks 1 Gradall 6 Other Dump Trucks 50 Bull Dozer 1 Chipper 1 6 CY Dump Truck 14 Bucket Truck 13 8 CY Dump Truck 4 Motor Graders 2 10 CY Dump Truck 0 Excavators 5 12 CY Dump Truck 14 Street Sweeper 2 14 CY Dump Truck 11 Chain Saws Do you have preprinted debris load tickets? 7% YES 89% NO 4% NO RESPONSE 3. Do you have preprinted Right of Entry/Hold Harmless Agreements? 19% YES 81% NO 4. Do you have an organization chart? 78% YES 22% NO 5. Have you or your staff received training on Debris Contract Monitoring? 26% YES 70% NO- 4% NO RESPONSE May, 2005 Page 10
18 6. Have you or your staff attended a FEMA Documentation Workshop? 27% YES 69% NO - 4% NO RESPONSE 7. Would you or your staff participate in these workshops if offered in the near future? 89% YES 7% NO 4% NO RESPONSE Technology 1. Do you have Geographic Information System (GIS) capabilities? 69% YES 27% NO 4% NO RESPONSE (See TAB J for a detailed discussion of GIS capabilities and technology recommendations) III. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF A MAJOR DEBRIS GENERATING EVENT ON THE REGION A. General Each county and municipality should have an Emergency Response Plan that is designed to be applicable to any public emergency, disaster, catastrophe, or emergency situation where the health, safety, or welfare of persons within the NCTCOG Region is threatened by actual or imminent conditions. The identification of planning debris management recommendations are based upon consideration of the events and debris types shown in Table 5 below. Table 5: Catalog of Debris-Generating Events Event Hazard Primary Debris Types Debris Location Hurricane Tornado Floods Urban Fire Winter storms Cat mph Cat mph Flooding Rotating winds Inundation High water velocity Fire/Explosion Ice and snow loads Trees Construction materials Personal property Sediment Vehicles Trees Construction materials Personal property Vehicles Sediment Wreckage Personal belongings Hazardous materials Construction materials Vehicles Construction materials Vehicles Personal property Ash and charred waste Hazardous materials Woody debris Tree limbs and branches Primarily along shoreline, but natural and manmade debris can be distributed far inland A long narrow path up to ½ mile wide and from 100 yards to several miles long Throughout impacted area Throughout impacted area Throughout impacted area May, 2005 Page 11
19 Table 5: Catalog of Debris-Generating Events Event Hazard Primary Debris Types Debris Location Technological Hazards Chemical exposure Radiation exposure Biological hazard exposure Exposed materials Personnel protection and response equipment Containers and packaging Throughout impacted area, and spread by meteorological conditions B. Quantification of Debris-Generating Impacts on the NCTCOG Region Tornadoes and flooding pose the greatest threats to the NCTCOG region. Tornadoes: NCTCOG developed several tornado scenarios based on actual wind speeds recorded from tornadoes that impacted the Oklahoma City area. The tornado tracks were superimposed over the NCTCOG region for modeling purposes. The worst case scenario produced an estimated 4,814,000 cubic yards of debris. Approximately 15,500 single family homes and 11,737 apartments would be impacted under this scenario. Debris would consist of: o Large trees snapped or uprooted and small shrubs and trees would be blown down o All signs would be destroyed o Extensive damage would occur to roofing materials, windows and doors o Complete failure of roofs o Total destruction to mobile homes o Substantial structural damage to both residential and commercial structures Flooding: The Project Team used the results of the Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study: Analysis and Flood Risk Assessments to develop worse case debris quantities based on the Corps of Engineers Standard Project Flood estimates of structures that would be impacted by a flood on the Upper Trinity River. The worst case scenario produced an estimated 863,605 cubic yards of debris as shown in Table 6 below. Debris would consist of: o Household items o Carpet o Furniture o Flooring o Sheet Rock o Clothing May, 2005 Page 12
20 Table 6: Upper Trinity River Feasibility Study Generated Debris Estimates Location Arlington Carrollton Coppell Irving Grand Prairie Dallas Dallas County Fort Worth Lewisville Total Cubic Yards 12,750 CY 50,880 CY 1,200 CY 232,460 CY 32,255 CY 388,145 CY 12,630 CY 139,655 CY 6,380 CY 863,605 CY TAB B contains the tornado debris prediction tables developed for the region and flood debris prediction tables developed for the Upper Trinity River. The tables are based on a modified Disaster Assistance Response and Recovery Technology (DARRT) GIS Application. It has an accuracy of + or 30%. C. Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction Site Availability The Project Team recommends that the counties and municipalities review the Debris Estimating Tables included in TAB B to determine if they have identified TDSR sites large enough to handle the estimated quantity of debris predicted. A typical TDSR site layout is shown in Figure 1 below. Identification of TDSR sites prior to an event will expedite recovery operations and protect the health and safety of the local population. All potential TDSR sites should be identified in the coordinated Debris Management Plan to include such information as site accessibility, baseline data information, sketches of possible site layouts, and location maps. Table 7 identifies examples of current temporary debris staging and reduction sites identified by respondents to the questionnaire. The Project Team investigated all sites that were 10 acres or larger. (See TAB C for results of TDSR site investigations.) Sites less than 10 acres may be used as citizen drop-off locations. Sites under 10 acres are too small for efficient debris reduction operations. May, 2005 Page 13
21 Table 7: Current Temporary Debris Staging and Reduction Sites Municipality Name Location Acres Remarks (See TAB C) Plano Archgate Park, Preston Meadow 40 Suitable TDSR Site Oakpoint Park, Spring Creek and Juipter 20 Not Suitable Enfield Park, 700 Legacy 10 Not Suitable Russell Creek Park, 3500 McDermott Rd 10 Suitable TDSR Site Frisco Shawnee Trail Sports Complex 6501 Hillcrest Rd 17.7 Not Suitable Warren Sports Complex Rodgers Rd 10 Suitable TDSR Site Old Orchard 2200 Old Orchard Rd 6 Citizen Drop Off Only Frisco Commons 8000 McKinney Rd 63 Not Suitable Fairway Green 1710 Buena Park Dr. 8.7 Citizen Drop Off Only Starwood 6651 Starwood Dr 2 Citizen Drop Off Only Fort Worth Gateway Park 4501 E. First St UKN Suitable TDSR Site Rolling Hills Park 2525 Joe B. Rushing Rd UKN Suitable TDSR Site Site 3 Ross Ave and NW 35 th t UKN Citizen Drop Off Only Southeast Service Center 5000 MLK Fwy UKN Citizen Drop Off Only Collin County Copeville UKN 2 Citizen Drop Off Only Princeton UKN 1 Citizen Drop Off Only Weston UKN 2 Citizen Drop Off Only McKinney Gabe Nesbitt Community Park 7001 El Dorado Pkw 157 Suitable TDSR Site Al Ruchhaupt Soccer Complex Northbrook Dr 40 Suitable TDSR Site Erwin Park 4300 Country Road Suitable TDSR Site Denton County Denton County R&B Facility 2805 Masch Branch Rd Citizen Drop Off Only Rockwell Site 1 Airport Road 64 Not Suitable Site 2 FM 552 at Hays Rd 12 Suitable TDSR Site Site 3 N of 276 and W of Suitable TDSR Site Rowlett Rowlett Community Park 8500 Stain Andrews Lane 138 Suitable TDSR Site Herfiurth Park 5300 Main St. 27 Citizen Drop Off Only Katy Railroad Park University Drive 16 Not Suitable May, 2005 Page 14
22 Figure 1 Typical TDSR Site Layout The TDSR site is normally used to reduce vegetative debris by either burning or grinding. This will reduce the quantity of material going into a landfill. It can also be used to segregate construction and demolition material that can be recycled. An environmental baseline study should be conducted before actual operations begin. D. Landfill Site Availability and Capabilities The Project Team evaluated the impacts that a worst-case tornado or flood scenario would pose to counties and municipalities in the NCTCOG region from a disposal perspective. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the capabilities and availability/suitability of existing landfills in the NCTCOG region to accept material for disposal from a significant debris-generating event such as a tornado or flood. The typical composition of storm debris is detailed in Table 8. The percentages were developed by the USACE and are useful in determining impact on existing landfill space and volume reduction requirements, i.e. number of grinders, pit burners, metal bailing machines, etc. May, 2005 Page 15
23 Table 8: Typical Composition of Storm Debris Material Percentage Mulched/Composted 30.0% Burnable 29.4% Soil 3.5% Metals 10.5% Landfill 26.6% Total 100% Table 9 on the following page lists the available landfills identified by the respondents to the questionnaire. The Project Team would like to note that some local municipalities, especially those in rural areas, will likely incur higher disposal costs due to the transportation distances between these municipalities and the closest landfill. For these municipalities located in rural areas, there is a specific need for them to prepare for the impacts that could occur if an event strikes their community. These municipalities will need to determine the most effective and efficient approach to transfer material from their community to landfills that may be 50 to 100 miles away. These municipalities will also need to ensure that they have disposal contracts and reserve funds in place to prepare for such an event. May, 2005 Page 16
24 Table 9: Regional Landfills Landfill Name Location Type of Landfill Communities Serviced Denton MSW Landfill 1527 South Mayhill Rd Denton, TX TYPE I Denton Denton County Arlington Landfill 800 Mosier Valley Rd Arlington, TX TYPE I Arlington IESI C&D Landfill 4144 Dick Price Rd Fort worth, TX TYPE IV Fort Worth Southeast Landfill 699 Dick Price Rd Kennedale, TX TYPE I Fort Worth Westside Landfill West Camp Bowie Fort Worth, TX TYPE I Fort Worth Turkey Creek Landfill 9100 South I-35W Alvarado, TX TYPE I Fort Worth North Texas Municipal Water District 7934 North Hwy 121 Melissa, TX TYPE I Collin County Frisco Plano McKinney McKinney Landfill 500 Old Mill Rd McKinney, TX TYPE IV McKinney Hunter Ferrell Landfill 220 West Hunter-Ferrell Road Irving, TX TYPE I Irving McCommas Bluff Landfill 5100 Youngblood Dallas, TX TYPE I Dallas Charles Hinton Landfill 3175 Elm Grove Rd Rowlett, TX TYPE I Garland Grand Prairie Municipal Landfill Lewisville Landfill 1102 Macarthur Rd Grand Prairie, TX 1600 South Railroad St. Lewisville, TX TYPE I TYPE IV Grand Prairie Lewisville Source: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Searchable database for Municipal Solid Waste Applications, Facilities and Correspondence: May, 2005 Page 17
25 E. Landfill Agreements and Contracts The Project Team questioned local municipalities regarding their use of landfill agreements and contracts. Several municipalities and counties stated that they have disposal contracts in place for the disposal of their solid waste. These contracts also will allow for the disposal of material from a storm event at the standard rate for other solid waste. Also, these municipalities do not have any restrictions regarding a minimum or maximum amount of material that they could dispose of over a certain period of time. Based on the Project Team s experience, these municipalities should be relatively-well positioned to manage the disposal needs that would arise from a significant debris-generating event. There are, however, multiple local governments in the NCTCOG region that do not have any type of disposal contract in place. Several municipalities and counties stated that they do not have contracts in place for several reasons. For example, several counties do not have disposal contracts because they do not provide any on-going solid waste collection services. Several municipalities have contracted with a private collection company for their solid waste collection services, and do not believe that there is a need for a separate disposal contract. While it depends on the language of each contract, the Project Team has found that these collection contracts may allow for disposal options, but this option may come at a higher price. Other contracts may not include any provisions for disposal. Based on the Project Team s experience, it would be in the best interest of all local municipalities to procure pre-positioned disposal contracts in order to plan for debris that would be generated from a potential storm event in the future. As long as local governments are not subject to any minimum or maximum disposal amounts for a certain period of time, a local government would only incur expenses when and if it disposes of material due to an actual storm event. F. Volume Reduction Methods In order to reduce the amount of storm debris being landfilled, there will be a need for local municipalities to employ various volume reduction methods. The following represents various strategies that local municipalities could implement concerning volume reduction methods. Burning There are several burning methods available to reduce debris volume including uncontrolled open burning, controlled open burning, trench burning and air curtain destructors. The Debris Manager should consider each burning method before selection and implementation as part of the overall volume reduction strategy. In all cases, consult TNRCC (TCEQ) publication RG-49 (Revised) November 2000, Outdoor Burning in Texas. This publication is available on the internet at Uncontrolled Open Burning: Uncontrolled open burning is the least desirable method of volume reduction because it lacks environmental control. However, in the haste to make progress, TCEQ may issue waivers to allow this method of reduction early in a disaster. Controlled Open Burning: Controlled open burning is a cost-effective method for reducing clean woody debris in rural areas. This option must be terminated if mixed debris (treated May, 2005 Page 18
26 lumber, poles, nails, bolts, tin, aluminum sheeting, etc.) enters the waste flow. Clean woody tree debris presents little environmental damage, and the resulting ash can be used as a soil additive by the local agricultural community. Department of Agriculture and County extension agents should be consulted to determine if and how the resulting ash can be recycled as a soil additive. Trench Burning: Trench burning offers an effective means to expedite the volume reduction process by substantially reducing the environmental concerns caused by open burning. Specifications and statements of work should be developed to expedite the proper use of the systems, because experience has shown that many contractors and subcontractors are not fully knowledgeable of the system operating parameters. Air Curtain Destructors: Pre-manufactured air curtain destructors are an alternative to trench burning. The units can be erected on site in a minimal amount of time. Some are portable and others must be built in-place. The units are especially suited for locations with high water tables, sandy soil, or where materials are not available to build aboveground pits. The engineered features designed into the units allow for a reduction rate of approximately 95 % with a minimum of air pollution. The air curtain traps smoke and small particles and recirculates them to enhance combustion that reaches over 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit. Manufacturers claim that combustion rates of about 25 tons per hour are achievable while still meeting emission standards. Grinding and Chipping Tornadoes and ice storms may present the opportunity to employ large-scale grinding and chipping operations as part of the overall debris volume reduction strategy. Tornadoes and ice storms cause extensive tree damage and tree blow-down. This two-fold loss, combined with local climatic conditions, may present an excellent opportunity to reduce clean woody debris into suitable mulch that can be recycled or used for other agricultural purposes. Grinding and chipping woody debris is a viable reduction method and is more environmentally friendly. In some locations the mulch will be a desirable product because of shallow topsoil conditions. In other locations it may become a landfill product. Grinding and chipping woody debris reduces the large amounts of tree blow-down. Chipping operations are suitable in urban areas where streets are narrow or in groves of trees where it is cheaper to reduce the woody vegetation to mulch than moving it to a central grinding site and then returning it to the affected area. This reduces the costs associated with double handling. There are numerous makes and models of grinders and chippers on the market. When contracting, the most important item to specify is the size of the mulch. If the grinding operation is strictly for volume reduction, size is not important. However, mulch to be used for agricultural purposes must be of a certain size and be virtually free of paper, plastic, dirt, etc. May, 2005 Page 19
EOP / ESF - 03 ANNEX / APPENDIX 3-1 / TAB B EVENTS AND ASSUMPTIONS TAB B EVENTS AND ASSUMPTIONS
TAB B B-1 FEBRUARY 2014 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK B-2 FEBRUARY 2014 I. INTRODUCTION A. The purpose of this section is to present various debris forecasting and estimating techniques including various
More informationTrans-Texas Corridor-35 Update
Trans-Texas Corridor-35 Update TTC-35 Regional Briefing July 13, 2006 North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department Trans-Texas Corridor-35 Is there a need? 6 Lanes 12 Lanes 20 Lanes
More informationTRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR-35 REGIONAL/STATE UPDATE
TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR-35 REGIONAL/STATE UPDATE River of Trade Corridor Coalition Quarterly Meeting October 28, 2005 Greg J. Royster, P.E. Principal Transportation Engineer North Central Texas Council of
More informationPinellas County. Disaster Debris Management Plan
2006 Pinellas County Disaster Debris Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION I - GENERAL... 1 A. Purpose... 1 B. Scope... 1 C. Enforcement... 1 SECTION II _ DEBRIS MANAGEMENT CENTER ORGANIZATION
More informationDIGITAL ADVERTISING 2017
DIGITAL ADVERTISING 17 Local Targeted Powerful Strategic The Star-Telegram s DFW Online Network dominates! Our online network serves more unique visitors in a typical month and serves an audience that
More informationI-35 Corridor Segment Committee Bagby Ave. Waco, Texas. March 9, :00 AM to Noon
I-35 Corridor Segment Committee 2 7479 Bagby Ave. Waco, Texas March 9, 2010 9:00 AM to Noon Welcome Bruce Byron Facilitator Presentations Presentation on the Texas State Rail Plan Presentation on Regional
More informationTECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. DRAFT Existing Freight Operations along Cotton Belt Corridor between DFW Airport and Plano, TX
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: DART/URS Cotton Belt Project Staff From: URS/Stantec Date: October 11, 2010 (revised 12/30/13) RE: DRAFT Existing Freight Operations along Cotton Belt Corridor between DFW Airport
More informationPublic Notice. Applicant: Lennar Homes Project No.: SWF Date: October 29, Name: Mr. Darvin Messer Phone Number:
Public Notice Applicant: Lennar Homes Project No.: SWF-2013-00265 Date: October 29, 2013 The purpose of this public notice is to inform you of a proposal for work in which you might be interested. It is
More informationManaging Disaster Debris: Overview of Regulatory Requirements, Agency Roles, and Selected Challenges
: Overview of Regulatory Requirements, Agency Roles, and Selected Challenges Linda Luther Analyst in Environmental Policy January 13, 2011 Congressional Research Service CRS Report for Congress Prepared
More informationManaging Disaster Debris: Overview of Regulatory Requirements, Agency Roles, and Selected Challenges
: Overview of Regulatory Requirements, Agency Roles, and Selected Challenges Linda Luther Analyst in Environmental Policy March 17, 2010 Congressional Research Service CRS Report for Congress Prepared
More information2011 INITIALLY PREPARED REGION C WATER PLAN MARCH 2010
Executive Summary 211 INITIALLY PREPARED REGION C WATER PLAN MARCH 21 This report presents the Initially Prepared 211 Region C Water Plan developed in the third round of the Senate Bill One regional water
More informationChris Bosco, P.E., PTOE
Chris Bosco, P.E., PTOE (817) 735-7359 m (817) 881-9132 Chris.Bosco@freese.com Chris Bosco is the Design Manager of the $100-million Parker County Transportation Bond Program. As a Project Manager, Chris
More informationProtecting your Vital Records from Natural and Man-Made Disasters
Are your Vital Records Protected from Natural and Man-Made Disasters? Protecting your Vital Records from Natural and Man-Made Disasters By Cadence Group s Records and Information Management Practice Group
More informationMitigation Plan Mission, Goals and Action Items
Section 4: Mitigation Plan Mission, Goals and Action Items Introduction... 2 Mission... 2 Mitigation Plan Goals... 2 Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items... 3 Coordinating Organization... 4 Partner
More informationBarnett Shale Natural Gas Production and Air Quality
Barnett Shale Natural Gas Production and Air Quality By Ed Ireland, Ph.D. A study on air emissions from Barnett Shale natural gas production activities was recently released by an engineering professor,
More informationTEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
COG Number: 16 TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY VOLUME I: REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN adopted under provisions of Texas Health & Safety Code Ann. Chapter 363 (Vernon) Name of Council
More information1840 HIGH PRAIRIE DALLAS (GRAND PRAIRIE), TEXAS OFFERING SUMMARY
DALLAS (GRAND PRAIRIE), TEXAS OFFERING SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HFF is pleased to exclusively offer the opportunity to acquire 1840 High Prairie (the Property ), a two building, 33,600 square-foot truck
More informationPublic Notice. Applicant: City of Dallas Project No.: SWF Date: April 18, Name: Chandler Peter Phone Number:
Public Notice Applicant: City of Dallas Project No.: SWF- 2014-00151 Date: April 18, 2014 The purpose of this public notice is to inform you of a proposal for work in which you might be interested. It
More information16.0 OPEN BURNING Open Burning Prohibited
16.0 OPEN BURNING 16.1 Open Burning Prohibited After the effective date of these regulations, no person shall cause, suffer, allow, or permit open burning of any kind except as specifically permitted in
More informationAppendix C. BMPS, Measurable Goals, and Implementation Schedule
Appendix C BMPS, Measurable Goals, and Implementation MCM 1 Public Education, Outreach and Involvement Public Education and Outreach Residents BMP 1.1 Utility Bill Insert Continue implementation of existing
More informationSelecting a Temporary Debris Management Site for Effective Debris Removal
214 10 th International Conference of the International Institute for Infrastructure Resilience and Reconstruction (I3R2) 20 22 May 2014 Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA Selecting a Temporary
More informationNORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT EAST FORK RAW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT EAST FORK RAW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT Denise Hickey Agenda NTMWD Background Water Planning East Fork Raw Water Supply Project Overview Benefits Nature Center NTMWD BACKGROUND
More informationLessons [being] learnt 2016 Flood in Cedar Rapids. Sandy Pumphrey Project Engineer II Flood Mitigation
Lessons [being] learnt 2016 Flood in Cedar Rapids Sandy Pumphrey Project Engineer II Flood Mitigation 319 286 5363 s.pumphrey@cedar-rapids.org Agenda 2008 Flood Event 2016 Flood Event [Long Term] Flood
More informationFacts on Open Burning Under Missouri Regulations
Facts on Open Burning Under Missouri Regulations Air Pollution Control Program fact sheet 5/2003 Open burning is the burning of any materials in which air contaminants resulting from combustion are emitted
More informationEight-Hour Ozone SIP Development Issues in DFW Air Quality Planning Section
Eight-Hour Ozone SIP Development Issues in DFW Air Quality Planning Section 9 Pages March 18, 2005 Erik Gribbin Air Quality Planning and Implementation Division Texas Nonattainment Areas AQP&I Division
More informationHouston-Galveston Area Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Initial Planning Workshop
Houston-Galveston Area Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan Initial Planning Workshop Overview Project Approach Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Capability Assessment Policy Development and Project
More informationUnit A: Introduction to Forestry. Lesson 3: Recognizing the Importance of Forests
Unit A: Introduction to Forestry Lesson 3: Recognizing the Importance of Forests 1 Terms Forest Forest canopy Piling Pulpwood Timberland Total forest land Urban forestry Veneer Reserved forest land 2 What
More informationPA 201 Impact Test Procedures (written by the Miami-Dade Building Code Compliance Office)
Ask FLASH FLASH Researches your Safety Questions: What should I look for when shopping for window and door protection? It s important to know what to look for before you start shopping. The Florida Alliance
More informationINTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION, USACE STYLE
INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION, USACE STYLE Author Kenneth M. Grumski MHF Logistical Solutions 129 McCarrell Lane Zelienople, Pennsylvania 16063 Co-author Peter W. Coutts The IT Group 175 East Park Drive, Building
More informationEMERGENCY OPERATIONS Educational Series
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS 2017 Educational Series TXDOT DISASTER AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND RECOVERY OVERVIEW The importance of safe and reliable transportation solutions is heightened during
More informationTCEQ Outdoor Burning Rules
TCEQ Outdoor Burning Rules 30 TAC Chapter 111 30 TAC Chapter 106 Subchapter B Subchapter V 111.201-111.221 Permit-by-Rule 106.496 TCEQ Houston Regional Office: Peter Bolds Faye Liu Sr. Environmental Investigator
More informationDam Failure Hazard Profile
Appendix F Dam Failure Hazard Profile F-1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK F-2 4.3.12. Dam Failure 4.3.12.1. Location and Extent Dam failures most often occur during or after a massive rainfall, flooding,
More informationOccupancy, rents level off; new construction deliveries will lead new leasing activity in 2018
MARKETVIEW Dallas / Fort Worth Retail, Q1 2018 Occupancy, rents level off; new construction deliveries will lead new leasing activity in 2018 Occupancy 94.9% Under Construction 4,871,914 SF Completions
More informationNatural Hazards Mitigation Plan Kankakee County, Illinois Executive Summary
1. Introduction Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Kankakee County, Illinois Executive Summary Kankakee County s first Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan was adopted by the Kankakee County Board on October 11,
More informationUNIT 4: INCIDENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
INCIDENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this unit is to acquaint you with the resource categories that you may encounter at an incident. This unit will introduce the concept of incident
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS 4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS...
TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS... 4.17-1 4.17.0 Introduction... 4.17-1 4.17.1 Methodology... 4.17-2 4.17.2 Existing Conditions... 4.17-2 4.17.3 Impacts... 4.17-4 4.17.4 Applicant-Proposed
More informationRegional Initiatives on Land Use and Transportation
Regional Initiatives on Land Use and Transportation Alicia Hopkins, AICP, Senior Transportation Planner North Central Texas Council of Governments SEE Development Excellence Day November 2005 North Central
More informationABSTRACT WOODY RESIDUES AND SOLID WASTE WOOD AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERY IN THE UNITED STATES, David B. McKEEVER * 1, Robert H.
MANAGEMENT OF RECOVERED WOOD RECYCLING, BIOENERGY AND OTHER OPTIONS, Christos Gallis, (editor) - Thessaloniki, 22-24 April 2004 WOODY RESIDUES AND SOLID WASTE WOOD AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERY IN THE UNITED
More informationCITY OF ARLINGTON LANDFILL MWS PERMIT NO. 358B TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS
CITY OF ARLINGTON LANDFILL MWS PERMIT NO. 358B TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS PERMIT AMENDMENT APPLICATION VOLUME II OF VI PART III SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PART III, ATTACHMENT 1 FACILITY DESIGN PART III, ATTACHMENT
More informationTable 11: Active C&D Debris Facilities in Florida (November 1998) DISTRICT C&D Disposal Land Clearing Debris Disposal
Landfill Disposal Overview In 1980, Florida had approximately 500 open dumps. During this time period, it was a common practice to either burn or use one of these open dumps in order to alleviate the solid
More informationBarnett Shale Update Ed Ireland, Ph. D. Executive Director, BSEEC
Barnett Shale Update 2015 Ed Ireland, Ph. D. Executive Director, BSEEC bseec.org @BSEEC Hydraulic Fracturing 101 Gas Well Process Basically six steps involved: 1. Seismic exploration 2. Site preparation
More informationCity of Dallas Zero Waste Plan: Multi-family/Commercial Update
City of Dallas Zero Waste Plan: Multi-family/Commercial Update Quality of Life, Arts & Culture Committee January 22, 2017 Danielle McClelland Zero Waste Program Manager Sanitation Services Presentation
More informationCHAPTER 9 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 9 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter summarizes the results of feasibility level investigations undertaken to identify solutions to the water and related land resource problems
More informationNORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION AND DROUGHT CONTINGENCY AND WATER EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN MARCH 2008.
NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT THIS DOCUMENT WAS ORIGINALLY SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED BY: AUTHORIZED BY: STEPHANIE W. GRIFFIN, P.E. TEXAS NO.: 88504 ON DATE: MARCH 31, 2008 THIS ELECTRONIC FILE IS
More informationRIVERSIDE OXBOW FORT WORTH, TEXAS CHAPTER 3 IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES
RIVERSIDE OXBOW FORT WORTH, TEXAS CHAPTER 3 IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES Regular study team meetings were held with the Tarrant Regional Water District, the USFWS, Streams and Valleys,
More informationDART LRT Rail Operating Facility Phase I Site Selection Study
DART LRT Rail Operating Facility Phase I Site Selection Study DRAFT Executive Summary May 2002 DART General Planning Consultant ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose of Report The purpose of this Northwest Rail
More informationDepartment of Natural Resources Forest Resource Management
WOOD BIOMASS RESOURCES IN MICHIGAN ANTHONY WEATHERSPOON Michigan Department of Natural Resources Forest Mineral and Fire Management May 22, 2008 Department of Natural Resources Forest Resource Management
More informationProject Alignment Appendix A
Project Alignment Appendix A Fargo Moorhead Metropolitan Area Flood Risk Management Project EA Document This page is intentionally left blank Project Alignment Appendix A Table of Contents 1 BACKGROUND...
More informationUnit E: Basic Principles of Soil Science. Lesson 7: Understanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices
Unit E: Basic Principles of Soil Science Lesson 7: Understanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices 1 Important Terms Accelerated erosion Conservation tillage Cover crops Diversion ditches Geologic
More informationTWIN PLATTE NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT
TWIN PLATTE NATURAL RESOURCES DISTRICT Twin Platte NRD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Twin Platte NRD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2016 1 INTRODUCTION This HMP
More informationConstruction / Demolition (C&D) Recycling Program
Construction / Demolition (C&D) Recycling Program The State of California requires that all cities in the State divert at least 65% of its waste materials from landfills (AB 939). The City of Stockton
More informationRecommended Resources: The following resources may be useful in teaching this lesson:
Unit E: Basic Principles of Soil Science Lesson 7: Understanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices Student Learning Objectives: Instruction in this lesson should result in students achieving the following
More informationAGENCY: Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers; and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY GALVESTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. O. BOX 1229 GALVESTON, TEXAS 77553-1229 April 11, 2017 AGENCY: Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers; and Texas Commission on Environmental
More informationMemorandum of Understanding
Memorandum of Understanding Between the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) And the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service -- IA # 00-MU-1130144-158 I. PURPOSE The purpose
More information6.20 UTILITIES SOLID WASTE
6.20 UTILITIES SOLID WASTE 6.20.1 OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY Solid waste generated by the proposed project would be disposed primarily at the Toland Road Landfill. Prior to disposal, recyclable materials would
More informationFINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Volume 1. NBC Universal Evolution Plan ENV EIR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO Council District 4
Division of Land / Environmental Review City Hall 200 N. Spring Street, Room 750 Los Angeles, CA 90012 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Volume 1 ENV-2007-0254-EIR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2007071036 Council
More informationPLANNING ELEMENTS NC LOCAL GOVERNMENT 10 YEAR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN Check appropriate element PLANNING YEARS 2012 through 2022
Residential continuing to use education process through literature. Also, landfill staff refers to available resources, such as NC DEAO. Several municipalities offer tips in their quarterly newsletters
More informationDECONSTRUCTION OPPORTUNITIES FOR SALVAGE, REUSE & RECYCLING. Northeast Recycling Council Inc. Spring Conference EPA Region III, March 2006.
DECONSTRUCTION OPPORTUNITIES FOR SALVAGE, REUSE & RECYCLING Northeast Recycling Council Inc. Spring Conference EPA Region III, March 2006 Tom Napier Construction Engineering Research Laboratory Champaign,
More informationAR Daniel Construction Services, Inc. History and Representative Projects
AR Daniel Construction Services, Inc. History and Representative Projects AR Daniel Construction Services, Inc. was incorporated in March of 2005. Art Daniel brings his thirty years of underground construction
More informationTitle 30 Texas Administrative Code Section 111 Subchapter B Outdoor Burning Sec General Prohibition No person may cause, suffer, allow, or
Title 30 Texas Administrative Code Section 111 Subchapter B Outdoor Burning Sec. 111.201. General Prohibition No person may cause, suffer, allow, or permit any outdoor burning within the State of Texas,
More informationCONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION PACKAGE
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION PACKAGE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA 22112 El Paseo Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 (949) 635-1800 x 6506 Revised July 2017 Construction and Demolition
More information2016/2017 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT CALL FOR PROJECTS PROJECT SUMMARY SLIDE
APPLICANT: City of Denton Solid Waste & Recycling GRANT ADMINISTRATOR: Nicholas Vincent KEY PARTNERS: 2016/2017 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT CALL FOR PROJECTS PROJECT SUMMARY SLIDE PROJECT TITLE: Purchase Slow
More informationNTMWD WATER AND WASTEWATER PROJECTS, COST FORECASTS
Regional Service Through Unity Meeting our Region s Needs Today and Tomorrow NTMWD WATER AND WASTEWATER PROJECTS, COST FORECASTS Tom Kula, Executive Director June 27, 2017 Forney City Council OUR CLICK
More informationREQUEST FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE Residential
This form should be completed if you are applying to have new electric facilities installed on your property for the purpose of providing electric service to a permanent or seasonal residential dwelling,
More information8.1 Regulatory Requirements
8.0 MCM #5 - Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations The Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping minimum control measure consists of BMPs that focus on training and on the prevention
More informationMINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD
Next Publication: August 20, 2012 Vol. 36, No. 16 Submittal Deadline: August 13, 2012 Submit to EQB.Monitor@state.mn.us Subscribe to receive the EQB Monitor. If you would like to receive the Monitor regularly,
More informationCHAPTER 105 SOLID WASTE CONTROL
CHAPTER 105 SOLID WASTE CONTROL 105.01 Purpose 105.07 Littering Prohibited 105.02 Definitions 105.08 Open Dumping Prohibited 105.03 Sanitary Disposal Required 105.09 Toxic and Hazardous Waste 105.04 Health
More informationProvider: Water District #1 of Johnson County (www.waterone.org) Quasi-municipal agency operating independently of city and county governments
Utilities (2007) Purpose A key factor in determining the development potential an area is the capacity and accessibility utilities to service that area. The City Overland Park is not a full-service city
More informationAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 249 Washington, D.C.
Compost Program Texas Department of Transportation How has this team performed exemplary service, which has furthered the transportation activities of the department and had a positive impact on transportation
More informationRequest for Proposals for Post-Storm Debris Clean-Up and Infrastructure Reconstruction Services
Emergency Response Specialists www.omnipinnacle.com 130 W. Howze Beach Rd. Slidell, LA 70458 1-866-780-5182 Fax: 985-643-4334 Rob@omnipinnacle.com Rob Damaré Request for Proposals for Post-Storm Debris
More informationAppendix W: Solid and Hazardous Waste
Solid waste, as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 261.2, is any discarded material that is typically found in the solid waste stream, including municipal solid waste, construction and demolition
More informationSustainable Alternatives to Building Demolition
Sustainable Alternatives to Building Demolition 2005 States Solid Waste Conference Phoenix, AZ It s Not Just Garbage Anymore Tom Napier Construction Engineering Research Laboratory Champaign, IL WHAT CAUSES
More informationNAVAJO NATION EPA OPEN BURNING REGULATIONS
NAVAJO NATION EPA OPEN BURNING REGULATIONS Navajo Nation EPA Regulations Title 4 Environment Chapter 11 Air Pollution Prevention and Control Subchapter 2 Air Quality Control Programs Part Open Burning
More informationTechnical Advisory Panel
Air Victoria Community and Technical Advisory Panel Meeting November 4, 2009 Marie Lester Environmental Programs Coordinator 2009 Victoria Ozone Season Levels Year 1 st high 2 nd high 3 rd high 4 th high
More informationTompkins County Solid Waste Management Plan Executive Summary
Tompkins County Solid Waste Management Plan Executive Summary Tompkins County has prepared a comprehensive, twenty-year Solid Waste Management Plan to comply with the requirements of the Solid Waste Management
More informationGASIFICATION THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY SOLUTION SYNGAS WASTE STEAM CONSUMER PRODUCTS TRANSPORTATION FUELS HYDROGEN FOR OIL REFINING FERTILIZERS CHEMICALS
GASIFICATION THE WASTE-TO-ENERGY SOLUTION WASTE SYNGAS STEAM CONSUMER PRODUCTS HYDROGEN FOR OIL REFINING TRANSPORTATION FUELS CHEMICALS FERTILIZERS POWER SUBSTITUTE NATURAL GAS W W W. G A S I F I C A T
More informationRecognizing the Importance of Forests
Lesson B1 3 Recognizing the Importance of Forests Unit B. Plant Wildlife Management Problem Area 1. Introduction to Forestry Lesson 3. Recognizing the Importance of Forests New Mexico Content Standard:
More informationSOLID WASTE PROMOTION AND EDUCATION UPDATE
5 2007 SOLID WASTE PROMOTION AND EDUCATION UPDATE The Solid Waste Management Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendation contained in the following report, August 21, 2007, from the Director,
More informationVOTERS GUIDE BE A TEXAS VOTER
About This Voters Guide This printed Voters Guide lists the propositions that will be on the ballot for the November 7 City of Dallas Bond Election and provides a description and arguments for and against
More informationPermit Requirements: Building Codes: The City of Clanton has adopted the following codes which are enforced by the Building Department:
Permit Requirements: Any owner, authorized agent, or contractor who desires to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish, or change the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect, install,
More informationCotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail
Cotton Belt Corridor Regional Rail Safety and Security Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum December 2013 Prepared by URS Corporation Prepared for Dallas Area Rapid Transit General Planning Consultant
More informationANNUAL REPORT WASTEWATER SERVICES WATER SERVICES SOLID WASTE SERVICES MORE THAN WATER
2016-2017 ANNUAL REPORT WATER SERVICES WASTEWATER SERVICES SOLID WASTE SERVICES MORE THAN WATER ANNUAL REPORT 2017 WATER IS ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE, BUT IT TAKES MUCH MORE THAN WATER TO KEEP IT FLOWING TO NEARLY
More informationAir Quality in the Eastern Sierra
Air Quality in the Eastern Sierra A presentation to The High Sierra Energy Foundation (HSEF) Public Working Group Session October 4, 2006 by Ted Schade, Air Pollution Control Officer Great Basin Unified
More informationAnnex 11 STATE LOGISTICS RESPONSE CENTER (SLRC)
Annex 11 STATE LOGISTICS RESPONSE CENTER (SLRC) Activation Protocols Page 1 ANNEX 11 - STATE LOGISTICS RESPONSE CENTER ACTIVATION PROTCOLS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction. 2 II. Mission and Purpose..
More information3.2 Quality Requirements Disclaimer Section 4.0 Data Reduction, Data Validation, and Data Reporting Data reduction procedures...
Final Report 2014 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE Prepared by the Environment and Development Department with funding from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality North Central Texas Council
More informationDisaster Preparedness. Solutions for Response & Resiliency
Disaster Preparedness Solutions for Response & Resiliency Partner with Solution Providers Equipment rental Technology solutions Critical supplies & materials Debris removal Communications equipment Contingent
More informationThe Future Of Trash Management In San Mateo County
Issue Background Findings Conclusions Recommendations Responses Attachments The Future Of Trash Management In San Mateo County Issue Is there a need for proactive planning and technology re-assessment
More informationWATER QUALITY WORKSHOP
OAK HILL PARKWAY WATER QUALITY WORKSHOP August 25, 2015 6 8 PM Oak Hill United Methodist Church Fellowship Hall AGENDA I. Welcome Lynda Rife, Facilitator II. III. Green Mobility Challenge Melissa Hurst,
More informationMultnomah County CWPP See
A-3. Community at Risk: Portland Fire & Rescue The City of Portland and the area covered by the Portland have been identified as a Community at Risk (CAR) by the Oregon Department of Forestry. Portland
More informationMICHIGAN WOOD WASTE A CIRCULAR ECONOMY OPPORTUNITY!
MICHIGAN WOOD WASTE A CIRCULAR ECONOMY OPPORTUNITY! Michigan Forest Bioeconomy Conference February 1-2, 2017 Norman Christopher MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) Food Waste Household and Commercial Waste Packaging
More informationIH 820 Corridor Improvement Study Randol Mill Road To North SH 121 Interchange. Public Meeting. Thursday April 4, 2013
IH 820 Corridor Improvement Study Randol Mill Road To North SH 121 Interchange Public Meeting Thursday April 4, 2013 1 Project Contacts: TxDOT-Fort Worth District John R. Tillinghast, P.E. IH 820 Project
More informationRefuse Collections Division Solid Waste Services Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.
Refuse Collections Division Solid Waste Services Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results. Mission Provide solid waste collection and disposal service to rate-paying customers within our defined
More informationNOTICE OF PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Date: September 19, 2017 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT To: Agencies and Interested Parties Lead Agency: Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6201 S Street, MS B203 Sacramento,
More informationINTRODUCTION. 1 Proposed Plan for the Former Lee Field Naval Air Station Landfill Area 2 Site
1 Proposed Plan for the Former Lee Field Naval Air Station Landfill Area 2 Site U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District Formerly Used Defense Site Program PROPOSED PLAN for the LANDFILL AREA
More informationUnderstanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices
Lesson C6 8 Understanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices Unit C. Plant and Soil Science Problem Area 6. Basic Principles of Soil Science Lesson 8. Understanding Soil Erosion and Management Practices
More informationI. INTRODUCTION. Solid waste has been classified into the following categories:
I. INTRODUCTION Proper solid waste and hazardous waste management are essential for adequate protection of the County s natural resources and the public health, safety, and welfare. The potential environmental
More informationNEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION REGION 1 50 CIRCLE ROAD STONY BROOK, NY 11790
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION REGION 1 50 CIRCLE ROAD STONY BROOK, NY 11790 Summary of Responses to Comments on Draft Material Removal Work Plan For Roberto Clemente Town Park,
More informationStarting Construction: Your Storm Water Permit
Starting Construction: Your Storm Water Permit Asma Vahora Compliance Assistance Specialist Small Business and Local Government Assistance San Antonio- Region 13 210-403-4039 Asma.Vahora@tceq.texas.gov
More information