Environmental Consultant Survey Offers Up Surprising Results

By GreenBiz Staff, GreenBiz
Published March 20, 2003

SOUTHPORT, -- A decade ago, Phase I environmental site assessments were exclusively driven by a need for property owners to satisfy the innocent landowner defense under the federal CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) law. Today, industry insiders report that nearly half of their Phase I business (44%) is driven by a desire to avoid business environmental risk.

Over 300 environmental professionals at 283 companies responded to the questionnaire, which was developed by Environmental Data Resources, Inc., a national provider of environmental risk management information. Respondents -- mainly project managers, environmental consultants, and engineers -- work at companies ranging in size from less than one million in annual revenue to greater than $50 million; the companies conduct anywhere from fewer than 50 environmental site assessments (ESAs) per year to over 2,000. Assessments driven by business environmental risk take into account all environmental conditions that can materially impact property values; as a result they often include such components as evaluations of asbestos and lead-based paint.

The growing number of business risk-driven ESAs is just one of the surprising findings revealed in the recent industry survey.

Perhaps driven in part by widespread media attention and substantial legal settlements, 92% of respondents said there is a greater demand for mold assessments than there was a year ago. Only 57%, however, felt their firm was qualified to conduct a mold assessment.

Other findings shed light on the historical research conducted by consultants. For example, ASTM Standard E 1527-00, Section 7.3.2.1, requires that "the review of the standard eight historical sources at less than approximately five year intervals is not required by the practice." What constitutes a reasonable research interval is left up to the consultant’s professional judgment. The survey revealed that, on average, most consultants check historical sources at five- to ten-year intervals, and most frequently review fire insurance maps, aerial photos, local street directories, and historical topographic maps, in that order.

The survey also answered questions about the actual report preparation process. Eighty percent of respondents said they directly include all supporting documentation in the Phase I report so that the report can stand on its own. Nearly half said that, on average, they complete an ESA in 10-15 days; 60% are interested in automating the report preparation process and improving turnaround time. Forty percent of respondents said they typically spend six to eight hours writing the report and saw this area as the greatest opportunity for improving efficiency.

The survey also revealed that nearly one in seven Phase Is lead to some form of further investigation, indicating that Phase I work can often lead to follow-up work for an environmental consultant.

Anthony Buonicore, CEO of EDR and former chairman of ASTM’s E 50.02.06 Task Group, said, "When the ASTM committee sat down to refine the Phase I standard, we had a pretty good idea about industry practices, but there were some gray areas. EDR’s survey finally answers questions many of us had such as the most common historical research interval for various sources, the popularity of various historical sources, what non-scope considerations are typically added to the basic Phase I, etc. The survey also documented what we had long suspected: that a significant number of Phase Is conducted today are business environmental risk-driven. This survey will provide Phase I environmental consultants with valuable benchmarks to better evaluate their performance against that of their peers."

Post new comment