Your consultant is your best friend when the Phase I you just ordered came up with no recommendations. How tested is that relationship when there is a recommendation to perform further testing? Yes, sometimes the recommendation to test is a no-brainer. Perhaps when an underground storage tank is discovered at a site for which there is no data to determine if the tank has leaked into the ground. Other times the recommendation to test might not initially make sense to the report user(s) and these recommendations usually produce a deluge of phone calls from lawyers, property owners, borrowers and lenders that demand the consultant defend the recommendation. It is not as conspiring as one individual recently suggested that “consultants just recommend testing because that is where they make their money.” Sure there are cases where frivolous recommendations are made. We see them when we perform peer reviews of Phase I reports. They are easy to pick out. Recommending testing be performed at a site because there is a gas station several blocks from away is one example. Admittedly, such work practices can tarnish the image of an environmental consultant but most in the business do things the right way; those that do not are not around long. Building trust and confidence in clients over the long haul is a much better business practice and most regular users of environmental due diligence reports have come to know who is to be trusted and who is to run from.
To learn more, click here to read an article by one of August Mack's technical experts.
August Mack specializes in environmental, health and safety compliance; environmental due diligence; environmental site remediation; and sustainable business strategies to the industrial, legal, financial, health care and government sectors throughout North America. August Mack has offices in Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio and Pennsylvania. For more information on August Mack's environmental, health and safety services, visit www.augustmack.com or call 800.579.0770.
Comments for Data Gaps and the Phase II Recommendation Dilemma