Applied Environmental Forensics Technical Considerations For Legal, Insurance, and Real Estate Decisions Environmental Federation of Oklahoma 26th Annual Meeting October 2017 Contact: Tom Fort, MS, PG tfort@apexcos.com • 610-722-9050
Agenda – Environmental Forensics ▪ Common Applications ▪ Techniques ▪ Presenting Results ▪ Details on Several Methods ▪ Case Histories o Petroleum, Creosote, or Coal Tar? o Solvents o Stray Methane in Buildings ▪ Basic Tips for Technical/Legal Interaction
About Me – Tom Fort ▪ Principal Forensic Scientist – Apex Companies, LLC ▪ Developed & applied techniques for >30 years o Former COO of Boutique Forensics Firm - IST , Inc. o Former Corporate Environmental Director – Sunoco/Chevron (20 yrs) ▪ Hydrogeologist & geological engineer ▪ Thousands of remediation sites/Hundreds of claims ▪ Managed corporate remediation and 3 rd party claim reserves ▪ Risk manager and principal spill responder ▪ Environmental insurance claims expert ▪ Remedial cost estimator ▪ Expert witness
Apex Quick Facts • Privately-held company with nearly three decades of customer satisfaction • 700+ employees in 60+ offices nationwide • Full suite of professional and field environmental services serving over 2,000 clients across the US each year
Forensics and Environmental Forensics Forensics: Using science to establish facts ▪ Who? What? When? Where? How? ▪ “A technical investigation that produces hard evidence useful in crafting a theory or in supporting or refuting a position” Environmental Forensics ▪ Highly site-specific ▪ Multidisciplinary approach ▪ Data sources ▪ Lines of evidence
Typical Applications ▪ Contaminated industrial and commercial properties ▪ Cleanups, refinancing, or real estate transactions ▪ Post-closing responsibility for discovered contamination ▪ Applying buyer/seller indemnities ▪ Source ID / Cost allocation ▪ Insurance claims ▪ 3 rd party claims (e.g. trespass, toxic tort, value diminution) ▪ Contribution claims – other Responsible Parties
Common Questions ▪ Source of the release? ▪ When did the release happen? ▪ How did the release happen? ▪ Single release or more than one? ▪ Contribution from neighbors? Prior owners? Tenants? ▪ Cost of cleanup? ▪ Will insurance pay? ▪ If I have to sue for damages, what do I have to prove? ▪ How to prepare in case I am sued?
Direct Business Applications Contaminated property cleanups ▪ ID Responsible Parties (RP)/RPs ▪ Allocate remediation cost or 3 rd party damages Insurance or 3 rd Party Funding – Environmental policies ▪ Covered or not covered? • Release source and timing • Sudden and accidental vs. intentional or operational • Consistency with policy terms • Policy exclusions (possible pre-policy, other excluded conditions) Litigation – as plaintiff or defendant (burden of proof) ▪ Apply technical reasoning to legal case strategy Real estate transactions - Other
Methods for Useful Conclusions ▪ Setting o A dispute usually exists (Symptom = Failure to Act) o Virtually guaranteed findings will be challenged o Vigorous defense of conclusions required • Worthless unless defended ▪ Methods o Purposeful approach o Attention to detail o Zero reliance on speculation o High quality data – collected with case objectives in mind o Prove your point AND disprove alternative explanations o Convincing and understandable presentation o Robust conclusions crafted with challenge in mind
Useful Tactic - Translate Conclusions Into Dollars Cost = Where “Data Impact the Deal” Always: find ways to express technical answers in dollars. Remember: You may need to close data gaps and retain a testifying expert to defend claimed costs. Approach: Closely target any new data collection, build a defensible technical basis for cost or allocation, and prepare for rigorous challenge. The most useful forensics practitioner is not just a scientist, but also a remedial cost estimator and potential testifying expert to defend the results.
Petroleum Chemistry – Three Controls 1) Crude oil genesis Crudes are vastly different mixtures with unique ▪ attributes, some of which are conserved through refining 2) Refining processes Refining processes used at different facilities for different ▪ periods leave recognizable signatures on fuel products 3) Environmental weathering The environment alters petroleum in predictable ways ▪ allowing trend recognition and comparisons Preferential loss of light ends and easily biodegraded ▪ alkanes
Chemistry Approach and Types of Comparison For Unknowns – Follow a Tiered Analytical Approach ▪ Direct comparison – field sample with a tank sample ▪ Quantitative comparison – field samples from the same site to each other ▪ Reference comparison – field sample to a lab standard reference ▪ Fuel type ID – Fuel ID (e.g. diesel, gasoline) with history of products handled or stored ▪ Changing tank contents over time
Gas Chromatograph Basics DIFFERENT TYPES OF ANALYTE C DETECTORS ARE USED A B SAMPLE ANALYTE (FID / MS / ECD / OTHER) INJECTOR DETECTOR SAMPLE A n aly s is : s a07 37,17 ,1 " hy droc a rb ons ,c han l_0 8.s a0 737,17 ,1,1;" P rojec t: h y droc arbons In s tru m ent: c han l_ 08 C G 05 C oa l Tar D is tillate M ethod : m a0 814 R es pons e(m V ) 7 50 7 00 A 6 50 6 00 B 5 50 5 00 4 50 4 00 C 3 50 CARRIER GAS 3 00 2 50 2 00 ANDROS TA NE 1 50 OTP 1 00 5 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3 5 4 0 4 5 50 55 T im e (m inute s ) A c qu is itio n Tim e : 0 2 Oc t 19 97 at 10:5 2.49 LIGHT, VOLATILE COMPOUNDS DATA ELUTE FIRST (A), FOLLOWED SYSTEM BY HEAVIER COMPOUNDS (B/C) GC CARRIER OVEN/ TEMPERATURE IS GRADUALLY GAS CAPILLARY COLUMN SLOWS DOWN HEAVIER COLUMN RAMPED UP HYDROCARBON MOLECULES, ALLOWING LIGHTER ONES TO HIT THE ANALYTE DETECTOR FIRST
Different Crudes. Different GC/FID Signatures Nigerian Crude Alaska North Slope Crude After: Wang and Stout, 2007
Different Products. Different Signatures Arthur D. Little Inc., EM&A Laboratory Injection: [SHC1996] 1 0412961,30,1 1000 mV 800 600 Gasoline 400 200 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 mins 80 A cquired on 14-A pr-96 at 12:55:47 Reported on 18-A pr-97 at 17:34:34 Arthur D. Little Inc., EM&A Laboratory Injection: [SHC1996] 4 0422964,10,1 1000 mV 800 Diesel Fuel 600 400 200 UCM 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 mins 80 A cquired on 23-A pr-96 at 00:58:38 Reported on 17-A pr-97 at 10:26:19 Arthur D. Little Inc., EM&A Laboratory Injection: [SHC1996] 1 0412961,3,1 250 mV 200 Lube Oil 150 100 UCM 50 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 mins 80 A cquired on 12-A pr-96 at 20:36:42 Reported on 18-A pr-97 at 15:35:02 n-C44 n-C8 n-C20 n-C30 Retention Time Minutes
Weathering Changes Fingerprint with Time 0 2 1 0 9 8 1 0 . D \ F I D 1 A nC17 Spilled Oil IS IS IS nC34 0 2 1 0 9 8 3 1 . D \ F I D 1 A IS IS IS nC17 nC34 Weathered Oil ? UCM Over-reliance on GC-FID can be problematic
Sulfur and Dyes in Distillate Fuels ▪ Distillates include heating oil, kerosene, & diesel fuel o Heating Oil #2 is similar to Diesel #2 except for sulfur restrictions, cetane no., and dye mandate. o Jet Fuel (Jet A), kerosene, and Diesel #1 are also similar. ▪ Sulfur content has been regulated over time and provides useful criteria to date distillate releases. o 1920s #2 Heating Oil (Diesel) (1.5% Sulfur) o 1980s Diesel Fuel (0.18% Sulfur) o ~1998 Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (0.04% Sulfur) o 2006 Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel (0.0015% or 15ppm) ▪ Dyes added to heating oil and aviation fuels over time (tax and safety reasons) can be useful.
Gasoline Lead Content – Age Dating Average Lead Content of the US Gasoline Supply Over Time Although the average lead concentration in gasoline has L e a d C o n c g r a m s p e r g a changed with time, wide regional variations are documented 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1993 DATE Note: Gasoline evaporation over time in the environment concentrates lead in the remaining fuel, and must be considered in age determinations.
Gasoline Additives – Age Dating Gasoline additives provide a means to date gasoline Chronology of Selected Gasoline Additives > n-Propylbenzene = n-Propylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbons with 10+ carbon atoms T oluene/benzene rat io > 2.5 - 4 Methyl tert-butyl ether (MtBE), eastern United Stat es MtBE, western United States ETHANOL Manganese (MMT ) Mixed Alkyl Leads T etraethyl lead only Ethylene dibromide and ethylene dichloride Lead >1.1 g/gal <1.1 g/gal < 0.1 g/gal 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Y ear Lead Phase Down Note: Numerous other oxygenates have been used in gasoline (not shown), principally associated with 1990 Clean Air Act compliance.
Diagnostic Ratios – A Basic Example Normal Alkane / Isoprenoid Ratio Weathering Indicator Pristane and Phytane are Isoprenoid Hydrocarbons that elute adjacent to the C 17 and C 18 normal alkanes. Isoprenoids are branched chain unsaturated hydrocarbons n-C 17 /Pristane Isoprenoids are resistant to weathering; normal alkanes degrade more quickly. As normal alkanes degrade over time, Isoprenoids become more dominant in the petroleum mixture. Time, Water Contact or Microbial Degradation Note: This relationship is not recommended for precise age dating of releases without careful, site-specific calibration.
Recommend
More recommend
