Joseph Burley, Freelance Enviro-Tech
Available for independent contract work in the Great Lakes region
Comments
Did the shed have a vent? I saw something like this once caused from something vented from an adjacent building. Don't remember what the process or chemical was though.
One of the participants claimed the host was evil. I'm closing this contest at 666 views but don't read too much into that!
Here are the remaining answers:
6. A river with an island nature preserve is within a brownfield authority jurisdiction. Funds are used to remove old boat hulks from the shore. There may have been hazardous substances associated with the boats (oil, mercury paint etc) but they are things that don't need to be specifically addressed when you can remove something intact as a piece of equipment. Obviously the shore of an island with a nature preserve can't be considered a brownfield if you can't develop on it.
7. The other answer that I would have accepted was GPR done for pavement evaluation.
8. Floor tile abatement went flawlessly. The problem was that they installed some brand new replacement tile from an imported source that had asbestos in it!
*****************************
Congrats to TNowicki for a first place finish with 18 pts! In addition, congrats to the others who placed: Jeff L 13, JBrusca 7, Manno 5 and PWolzyn 4. In recognition of their problem solving skills, they have earned an invite into the prestigious Mid-Level Enviro Pros Forum on Linked In. (if you don't get an invite because your email is hidden, send me one).
Thanks to all who participated! Stay tuned for the second round of Enviro-Riddles, which may prove to be just as evil challenging to our profession's top notch pros.
- Then I defer to the default template language of my clients for that situation (I only do work for other environmental consultants as a sub). Since it happens so infrequently I don't pay too much attention to the weaslifulness of their CYA wordsmithing. So that's how I weasel out of answering your question.
I use historical plat maps and general local history sources to make basic historical characterizations about early land usage and avoid the data gap term as much as possible. I might end up using it in no more than 5-10% of my projects because there is a moderate amount of reasonably ascertainable historical info available in my market. A lot of times I see other consultants who cite a data gap as a way of cutting corners on historical research. One big pet peeve: citing lack of city directory coverage as a data gap because it isn't in their vendor abstract when 20-30 years of earlier coverage is available from local libraries.
I research the general agricultural history (soil survey etc) of the area to determine if the absence of good plat map coverage represents a risk that you could be missing an old orchard or similar concern.
- getting warmer...
- first half of your statement is warm
- incorrect but 1 pt for plausible
8. Incorrect answer albeit things that sometimes happen. I wouldn't grant a full clearance if any of those things happened.
- 6 and 8; good try--1 pt each for plausibility
Riddles 6, half of 7 and 8 remain unsolved. T Nowicki is holding a big lead. I will give this set of riddles a few more days before I close and post Set #2, which I expect may be just as painful enjoyably challenging.
The environmental aspect is an important part of "getting deals done." Brokers will tend to think of the environmental aspect as a hindrance that is either unnecessary or something that slows things down. The ugly reality is that since brokers are commission-based, they are adverse to properly reducing property value due to environmental risk for the benefit of their buyer client. Until the system is changed, they will never boast about how much they saved their clients in negotiating a reduced fee. Therefore, only brokers representing sellers only can legitimately boast at the size of their deals. Brokers representing buyers boast about how they stuck it to their clients.
Needless to say, brokers thrive using people skills and connections rather than technical skill. The former usually proves more valuable than the latter in most businesses.
Behind the scenes cutting-edge work will never get widespread recognition unless you get published on it or speak to your peers at a conference about it.
2 pts. Probably as close as anyone will get?
Consultant knows its going to be close and feels pressured by client to get a non-haz result. Three samples are submitted to the lab--one is the sample, one is a QC duplicate and one is a matrix spike of some sort. One passes and the other two fail--the consultant specifies which result was the original sample after a verbal from the lab on the results. This was back in the day (23 years ago) before there were rigorous and well-defined sampling and analyses procedures and DQOs. Hopefully this couldn't/wouldn't happen today. They didn't ask me if I thought this was ethical or proper--I just did the sampling.
4. Sounds like you are hinting at matrix interference? Over my head but sounds good, 1 pt. Correct answer is less technical.
7. correct--there are GPR training courses with buried targets--5 pts, another answer remains.
8. 3 pts for additional clever and plausible answers--correct answer I think is worse.
Contestants have been battling furiously today.
Current score:
T Nowicki- 18
Jeff L-11
J Brusca-7
Manno-5
P Wolozyn- 4
Tom S-2
***************
Riddles 1, 2, 3 and 5 have been solved. 7 is half solved. Still plenty of opportunity for others to jump in. Three correct answers from a newcomer would vault them into 2nd place.
1. nailed it--5 pts.
5. plausible I suppose? 1 pt.
7. 1 pt for thinking outside the box on the drums--had you described the USTs as underwater scuba tanks I would have given you another 2 pts for a creatively wrong answer!