ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS AND RELATED IMPACTS 331
normalized to a probability of fatality per year basis for the
general population. Utilizing the above information, a risk
assessment can then compare the risks associated with func-
tioning daily as opposed to the risk associated with living in
proximity to a proposed development with a perceived and
quantified risk.
The purpose of the above comparisons is to provide
decision-makers with a quantitative means to evaluate the
risks associated with a proposal with its potential for impact
on the quality of life of individuals who would be living in
close proximity to the site. Although any application will
provide some increased risk to the general public (which
will normally create a negative response), the relative risk
compared to the daily risk to which one is normally sub-
jected provides reviewers with an added tool upon which
to render an informed decision. Lastly, it is not the role of
a risk assessment preparer to try to convince the public to
accept a particular project! Rather, the burden is to provide
sufficient quantitative information for decision makers
to render an informed decision on a difficult application
which will generally be viewed with anxiety by neighboring
residents.FORENSIC ENGINEERING REPORTING AND
ASSOCIATED STRATEGIESIn certain situations, environmental engineers normally
engaged in environmental and/or risk assessment reporting
may be approached to conduct forensic engineering studies.
Forensic engineers are generally involved in providing
technical support and, perhaps, expert testimony for attor-
neys representing plaintiffs or defendants in civil claims
wherein a plaintiff has been killed or injured allegedly due,
in part, to one or more defendants. Attorneys representing
plaintiffs or their estate in cases of the death of the plain-
tiff generally accept cases on the basis of contingency (i.e.,
they collect a fee for service only either through a settlement
out of court or by winning the court case), whereas defen-
dants are represented by attorneys they retained directly or
attorneys representing insurance companies who insure the
defendant (which is typical for small businesses and/or cor-
porations).
Environmental engineers operating in the forensics area
for a plaintiff will generally be asked to prepare a report
which supports the claims of an attorney representing a
plaintiff versus one or more defendants. Engineers repre-
senting a defendant will be asked to review the plaintiff’s
expert(s) reports and to prepare a report which can either
totally or partially discount claims by the opposing expert(s)
against the defendant.
Forensic engineering studies are unique compared to
environmental or risk assessments in that claims are often
introduced after the occurrence of the incident which pre-
cipitated the case. As such, forensic engineers normally
must digest a volume of paperwork regarding the incident
itself, as well as reports and interrogatories that may havebeen responded to by parties with knowledge of the incident,
or other professionals (i.e., physicians, psychologists, etc.)
who have been asked to present their expert opinions on the
case. Forensic engineers additionally will normally perform
site visits, speak to parties of interest, and perform techni-
cal analyses (where appropriate) in support of preparation of
their expert report.
Environmental and risk impact report preparers will
invariably be required to also provide expert testimony
before municipal, state or federal hearing Officers to defend
their document and related findings as a part of a process
to secure approvals to construct and operate a structure(s).
In forensic engineering investigations, at least in the United
States, it has been the author’s experience (as well as others
in the discipline with whom he has consulted) that only
about 10% of the cases ever go to trial. The remaining 90%
of the cases are settled out of court. The reasons for this may
be explained by some or all of the following.
The plaintiff’s attorney is paid only on contingency and
will often try to avoid the risk of a lengthy trial by accepting a
settlement out of court. In major cases, defendants are usually
defended by insurers who would prefer to make a settlement
payout as a “nuisance” value rather than pay attorneys to pre-
pare and be involved in a lengthy court case.
Because technical experts are generally required to
“reconstruct” events which occurred years before they were
retained and because many of the parties of interest in the
case cannot be contacted due to death, illness, change of
address, etc., the resultant expert reports are more subject to
scrutiny and question than when one is reporting on current
situations. As such, attorneys for both plaintiffs and defen-
dants may be more concerned about the abilities of their
experts to defend their positions under intense cross exami-
nations by opposing lawyers. Civil cases are generally heard
and decisions rendered by a jury, and both sides consider this
to be a difficult body “to read” and select on the jury, par-
ticularly, when cases involve issues and arguments which are
highly technical in nature. As a result, the technical reports
prepared by the respective forensic engineers representing
the plaintiff and defendant are often the key determinant
in the amount of settlement award that will ultimately be
agreed upon by both sides.
Environmental engineers who wish to pursue employment
in the field of forensic engineering can best accomplish this
by informing injury litigators and/or insurance companies of
their interest.REFERENCESCanter, L., Environmental Impact Assessment. 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill
Publishers. 1996.
Delbecq et al., Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal
Group and Delphi Processes. Scott Foresman and Company. 1975.
Dresnack, R., Environmental Assessments and Related Impacts. Advances in
Environmental Science and Engineering, 2 , Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers. 1979.
Dresnack, R., Environmental Impact. Advances in Environmental Science
and Engineering, 4. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers. 1981.C005_007_r03.indd 331C005_007_r03.indd 331 11/18/2005 10:23:31 AM11/18/2005 10:23:31 AM