2. Provide Owners with clear, unbiased, Engineering and Science-based Project Management on Civil and Environmental Projects

3.  Law Firms  Insurance Firms  Claims Management Firms  Fuel Companies  Superfund and RCRA Sites  Developers  Municipalities

4. Case Studies What Strong Project Management Can do for Me!

5. Case Study #1 The Vermont Project

6.  Large former industrial site  Petroleum and Chlorinated solvent contamination  No consultant had been retained

7.  Collect round of groundwater samples from existing wells  Collect soil samples from below the slab

8. Comparison of Original and Competitive Estimates for Identical Scope of Work from The Same Consultant

9. Original Proposal $2000 Competitive Proposal $202 89.9% Reduction While required by Federal OSHA regulations, only three or four pages need to be changed for each site.

10. Original Proposal $60 Competitive Proposal $58 3.3% Reduction While a 3.3% reduction does not seem like a significant rate, multiply the savings By the total hours estimated for the project Provides a project savings of more than $400.

11. Original Proposal $800 Competitive Proposal $578 27.8% Reduction The competitive estimate scope of work required a more extensive and expensive method of collecting groundwater samples. even so, it was almost $225 cheaper than the standard bailer method estimated in the original proposal.

12. Original Proposal $240 Competitive Proposal $0 100% Reduction The work plan preparation was included in the competitive estimate within the $202 charge of the HSP line item.

13. Original Proposal $3472 Competitive Proposal $951 72% Reduction Overall

14. Case Study #2 The New York Project

15.  11 Property Parcel  42 Underground Stroage Tanks (USTs)  Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)  Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)  Consultant has been retained by the Client

16.  10 Monitoring Wells  Multitude of soil samples  Analytical parameters including PCBs, metals, waste characterization including flammability $183,000 for the FIRST phase

17.  5 monitoring wells  10 soil borings  Volatile and semivolatile organic analysis only $68,000 for the ONLY phase

18.  Same scientific understanding of the site.  63% reduction in the cost of the initial investigation  50% or more reduction in long term monitoring costs.

19.  16,000 tons of contaminated soils identified by consultant.  Maximum concentration of 20 ppm of SVOC contamination within soils.  640 lbs of contamination in the soil.

20. Case Study #3 150 Gallon Drip

21.  While putting away summer lawn furniture, the copper line from a 275 gallon oil storage tank was broken.  The tank free flowed for a period of 15 minutes and trickled for a period of 30 additional minutes.

22.  The tank had been filled approximately October 8.  Release occurred on October 25

23.  The oil company transferred the oil from the old tank to a new tank.  The oil company measured a free head space in the new tank of 6 inches.  An oil tank is typically only filled approximately 90%.

24.  There is a three inch floor drain that penetrates the floor of the basement.  The staining indicates oil has entered the floor drain.  The Fire Department has estimated a loss of 150 gallons due to the leak.

25. How bad is the problem?

26.  How much oil was lost?  How would you investigate this site?  What remedial/monitoring measures would you allow your client to accept?

27.  You know the size and shape of the tank.  You know the approximate depth of the whistle.  You can estimate the burn rate from the date of the fill to the date of the release.

28.  The tank has a rounded top making depth estimate difficult.  You don’t know the real depth of the whistle, which could have a difference of up to two inches in length.

29. When we estimate the volume of oil released from the tank, using this method, we estimated the tank ACCUMULATED approximately 17 gallons of oil!

30. You also know the diameter of the line that discharged from the tank.

31.  You know the approximate depth of oil in the tank before the release.  You know the depth of oil relatively accurately in the new tank.  You know the diameter of the line that discharges from the tank.  You may have heard of Gravity!

32. Assuming that the sheared off oil line behaved as a simple pipe, an estimate of the flow rate, hence volume, of the release was made using the following equation: ____ Q = cA √2gh Where: Q =Flow in cfs c=Coefficient of Discharge A=Area of Discharge pipe g = Acceleration of Gravity h =head, height of column of fluid in tank

33. ____ Q = cA √2gh Using a worst case scenario, we assumed that c = 1 and h is constant at 44 inches. Therefore, the flow Q is calculated as 0.0052 cfs If we further assume that full flow was allowed for the estimated 15 minutes the home owner estimates elapsed from the moment of release to the point where the flow was completed stopped, a total of approximately 4.7 gallons escaped the tank onto the basement floor.

34. The Rest of the Story The home owner had captured approximately 3.7 gallons of oil in a bucket before they were able to stop the flow completely. Therefore, the estimated release volume was: APPROXIMATELY ONE GALLON

35.  TV the drain and found no accumulated oil  Excavated the discharge are of the floor drain and found no accumulated oil  Monitored the drinking water well at the Residence twice (6 months apart) and found no detectable contaminants.

36.  Client was an environmental lawyer.  More than 20 years of experience.  Published in law journals.  Superfund, RCRA and State hazardous waste site experence.