Spring 2011

- 1 -

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS

www.ne-aipg.org

Northeast Section

NEWSLETTER

SPRING 2011

- 2 -

- 3 -

- 4 -

NEWSLETTER EDITOR PUBLISHER & ADVERTISING MANAGER

Bill Prehoda Dick Young United Water New York Consulting Geologist 360 West Nyack Rd 179 Intervale Road West Nyack, NY 10994 Parsippany, NJ 07054 845-620-3306 (Office) 973-335-2569 (Office) 845-620-3318 (Fax) 973-335-9799 (Fax) [email protected] [email protected] The Newsletter of the Northeast Section of the American Institute of Professional Geolo-gists is published four times annually and is mailed directly to Section Members under a Bulk Rate Permit as Dated Material at Parsippany, New Jersey. Design and Layout by Bill Prehoda and Dick Young. Any printed/paper issues of The Newsletter are printed in Par-sippany, New Jersey by Staples. Preparation and distribution of any printed/paper is-sues are accomplished by the Young family. Many thanks are extended to all who helped in compiling this issue.

TABLE OF CONTENTS: Executive Committee Directory .......................................................... 5 Executive Committee Meeting Schedule ............................................ 7 2011 Index of Advertisers ................................................................ 8-9 Presidential Ramblings ..................................................................... 10 News of Members ............................................................................. 19 ‘Til Depth Do Us Part ........................................................................ 33 Environmental Vapor Barrier Mitigation ............................................ 49 News From the Northeast ................................................................. 51 Publishing and Distributing the Paper Newsletter ............................ 60 Piggyback Mailing Information .......................................................... 71 NEAIPG Publication Schedule ......................................................... 78 Angelo Tagliacozzo Scholarship Fund Update ................................ 79 25 Years Ago in the NEAIPG Newsletter ......................................... 82 Angelo Tagliacozzo Scholarship Fund—List of Contributors ........... 84

AIPG NORTHEAST SECTION NEWSLETTER

SPRING 2011 EDITION NO. 123

PUBLISHED BY THE NORTHEAST SECTION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL GEOLOGISTS

- 5 -

2011 NEAIPG EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PRESIDENT Mike Greenman, CPG-10442 890 Grant Place North Bellmore, NY 11710 [email protected] PRESIDENT- ELECT Jeff Frederick, CPG-10989 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 17-17 Route 208 North Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 Office: (201) 398-4318 Email: [email protected] SECRETARY William (Tom) West, CPG-08935 Haley & Aldrich of New York 200 Town Centre Drive, Suite 2 Rochester, NY 14263-4264 Office: (585) 359-9000 Fax: (585) 359-4650 E-mail: [email protected] TREASURER Robert P. Blauvelt, CPG-06508 GEI Consultants 1 Greenwood Ave, Suite 210 Montclair, NJ 07042 Direct Dial: 973-873-7127 Cell: 973-803-0167 Fax: 973-509-9625 [email protected] MEMBERS Dennis McGrath, CPG-08578 The Louis Berger Group, Inc. 565 Taxter Road, Suite 510 Elmsford, NY 10523 Office: 914-798-3716 Fax: 914-592-1734 E-mail: [email protected]

Bill Prehoda, CPG-09289 United Water New York 360 West Nyack Rd West Nyack, NY 10994 Office: (845) 620-3306 Fax: (845) 620-3318 E-mail: [email protected]

Dorothy Richter, CPG-07033 Hager-Richter Geoscience, Inc. 8 Industrial Way Salem, NH 03079 Office: 603-893-9944 Fax: 603-893-8313 E-mail: [email protected]

Laurie Scheuing, CPG-09898 46 Homestead Road Saratoga Springs, NY 12866-5808 Office: 518-695-9445 E-mail: [email protected]

George Tyers, CPG-10274 Roux Associates, Inc. 209 Shafter St. Islandia, NY 11749 Office: (631) 232-2600 Fax: (631)-232-9898 E-mail: [email protected]

Craig Werle, CPG-07412 Roux Associates, Inc. 209 Shafter St. Islandia, NY 11749 Office: (631) 232-2600 Fax: (631)-232-9898 E-mail: [email protected] PAST- PRESIDENT Robert A. Stewart, CPG-08332 Arcadis/LFR, Inc, 87 Church Street East Hartford, CT 06108 Office: (860)290-9300 Fax: (860) 290-9009 E-mail: [email protected] SCREENING BOARD CHAIRMAN Charles A. Rich, CPG-04433 CA Rich Consultants, Inc. 17 Dupont Street Plainview, NY 11803-1602 Office: (516) 576-8844 Fax: (516) 576-0093 E-mail: [email protected] NEWSLETTER EDITOR Bill Prehoda, CPG-09289 United Water New York 360 West Nyack Rd West Nyack, NY 10994 Office: (845) 620-3306 Fax: (845) 620-3318 E-mail: [email protected] DIRECTORY OF MEMBERS EDITOR Curtis A. Kraemer, CPG-06019 Shaw Group 111 Van Cedarfield Road Colchester, CT 06415 Office: 860-537-2935 Fax: 860-537-3019 E-mail: [email protected] PUBLISHER & ADVERTISING MANAGER Richard H. Young, CPG-03356 Consulting Geologist 179 Intervale Road Parsippany, NJ 07054 Office: 973-335-2569 // Home 973-335-2289 Fax: 973-335-9799 E-mail: [email protected] WEBMASTER Mike Greenman, CPG-10442 890 Grant Place North Bellmore, NY 11710 E-mail [email protected]

(Executive Committee continued on page 7)

- 6 -

- 7 -

2011 NORTHEAST SECTION SUBCOMMITTEES Advertising Sales: Dick Young Advisory Board Delegate: Open Financial Planning and Treasury: Bob Blauvelt, Curt Kraemer, Dick Young Legislative Liaison and Registration: Tom West (NY), Russell Slayback (CT), Sam Gowan, Tim Stone, Dorothy Richter (NH), Laurie Scheuing (NY) Membership: Open Nominating: Bob Blauvelt Public Affairs: Dennis McGrath Scholarship: Sam Gowan, Dean Herrick, Len Rexrode, Craig Werle, Arnie Schiffman, Tom West, Dennis McGrath Section Directory: Curt Kraemer, Dick Young Section Meetings: Open Section Newsletter: Bill Prehoda, Editor; Dick Young, Publisher Screening Board: Charles Rich (Chairman), Don Bruehl, Carol Graff, William Penn, Daniel Toder, Andrews Tolman

2011 Executive Committee Meeting Schedule: January 10 March 7 May 11 - Spring Meeting July 11 Sept. 6 Oct. 12 - Fall Meeting (TBD) Dec. 5

Meetings are typically held from 4:00 to 6:00 pm at the offices of Louis

Berger Group, Elmsford, New York or via teleconference Meetings are open to all members—hope to see you there!

(Executive Committee continued from page5)

- 8 -

2011 INDEX OF ADVERTISERS

Alpha Analytical ......................................................................... 69 Aquifer Drilling & Testing, Inc ...................... Inside Front Cover...2 Arcadis ...................................................................................... 29 Atlantic Screen & Mfg. Inc ......................................................... 54 Boart Longyear .......................................................................... 64 Boyd Artesian Well Co., Inc ...................................................... 52 Brinkerhoff Environmental Services, Inc .................................. 32 CSG Environmental Consultants .............................................. 36 Church, Stephen B., Co ............................................................ 73 Clearwater Drilling, Inc. ............................................................. 38 Clough, Harbour & Associates .................................................. 75 Complete Environmental Testing, Inc. ...................................... 67 ConeTec, Inc ............................................................................. 45 Connecticut Test Borings, LLC ................................................. 67 Conrad Geoscience Corporation .............................................. 32 Delta Well & Pump, Co., Inc ....................................................... 6 Directional Technologies, Inc .................................................... 44 Diversified Geophysics, Inc ........................ Inside Rear Cover...87 Drilex Environmental, Inc ............................................................ 3 EAI, Inc ...................................................................................... 72 Earth Data Northeast, Inc ......................................................... 27 Eastern Analytical, Inc .............................................................. 20 EcoTest Labs,Inc ...................................................................... 52 EnviRent ................................................................................... 47 Environmental Assessment & Remediations ............................ 52 Environmental Closures, Inc ..................................................... 45 Enviroscan ................................................................................ 30 EWMA ....................................................................................... 47 Expedition Drilling, Inc .............................................................. 31 Gannett Fleming ....................................................................... 24 GEI Consultants, Inc. ................................................................ 71 General Borings, Inc ................................................................. 38 Geo-Cleanse International, Inc. ................................................ 13 GEOD Corporation .................................................................... 14 Geomatrix Consultants ............................................................. 54 Geophysical Applications, Inc ................................................... 43 GEOSPHERE Environmental Management, Inc. ..................... 74 GeoVision ................................................................................. 27 Hager Geoscience, Inc ............................................................. 23

(Index of Advertisers continued on page 9)

- 9 -

Hager-Richter GeoScience, Inc ................................................. 58 Haley & Aldrich .......................................................................... 34 Hatch Mott MacDonald .............................................................. 62 Hetager Drilling, Inc. .................................................................. 21 Jonathan Paul Associates, Inc. ................................................. 82 JPI Associates, Inc. ................................................................... 22 Layne Christensen Company .................................................... 77 Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. ...... Outside Rear Cover...88 Lincoln Applied Geology, Inc. .................................................... 57 McLane Environmental, LLC ..................................................... 20 MC Environmental, LLC ............................................................ 53 Maine Test Borings. ................................................................... 54 Malcolm Pirnie ........................................................................... 81 Morris Industries, Inc. ................................................................ 18 NAEVA Geophysics, Inc. ........................................................... 61 New England Boring Contractors of CT., Inc. ........................... 24 Pennsylvania Drilling Company ................................................. 64 Probe Support Services ............................................................. 86 Pure Earth, Inc. .......................................................................... 32 Quality Inspection Services, Inc. ............................................... 17 Quantitative Hydrogeology, Inc ................................................. 81 Regenesis .................................................................................. 53 ReRem ....................................................................................... 77 Rich, C. A., Consultants, Inc ................... Outside Rear Cover...88 Rinbrand Well Drilling Co., Inc. .................................................. 69 Roux Associates, Inc ................................................................. 11 SGS Environmental Services, Inc. ............................................ 42 SJB Services, Inc. ..................................................................... 36 Soil Mechanics .......................................................................... 41 Soiltesting, Inc ........................................................................... 58 StoneHill Environmental, Inc ..................................................... 23 Stothoff, Samuel, Company, Inc ................................................ 64 Summit Drilling Co., Inc ............................................................. 66 TAM International ...................................................................... 81 Terracon .................................................................................... 70 Thermal Remediation Services, Inc .......................................... 46 TRC Environmental Corporation. .............................................. 16 URS Corporation ....................................................................... 83 Zebra Environmental ................................................................. 48

(Index of Advertisers continued from page 8)

- 10 -

Presidential Ramblings

Mike Greenman, CPG-10442

President, NEAIPG

Following the title of this article, I have decided to ramble on about several unrelated topics. Since my last writings which were gloomy concerning the state of municipal finances and the problems facing many in our profes-sion, there have been serious issues raised by state and city governments. Foremost of these was the attempt by the State of Wisconsin to end collective bargaining agreements with their civil service unions. I spent the first thirty three years of my profes-sional career protected by these collective bargaining agree-ments. Although pay and benefits were always front and fore-most, items such as working conditions and hours, grievance processes, and a host of other topics turned out to be just as im-portant. The Governor of Wisconsin has vilified collective bargaining and has tried to abolish it. It’s true that the state does not have the funds to continue its wild spending but it should still work with the unions and make them partners in solving the State’s problems. Abolishing the right to bargain will just make the two sides more antagonistic. In the 1970’s when New York City was going down the proverbial porcelain fixture, the administration, along with the State and various City unions, jointly worked out agreements to save the City. This was all done under the now hated collective bargaining. What most people forget is that for years civil ser-vice workers were grossly underpaid in relation to those in out-side industry. In order to compensate for the low pay, workers received expanded benefits. These benefits included health care, drug and eyeglass coverage, pensions, vacation, sick time and other benefits. Some of these benefits were partially paid for by the workers.

(Ramblings continued on page 11)

- 11 -

Problems started to arise, however, because some unions had more clout when it came to strikes. If the sanitation union went out on strike, the public clamored for an immediate end as the sights and smells overwhelmed the City. Transit strikes brought the City to a temporary halt on several occasions. These un-ions would get their way but woe to other unions such as the teachers or the union representing most of the other City work-ers (District Council 37). At this point I would mention that the Geologists and other technical people working for the City were represented by the Technical Guild of DC 37. Can you imagine a public outcry if these workers went on strike? The response would probably be something like, “We have Geologists work-ing for the City?” As I write this, New York City Mayor Bloomberg is looking at the possibility of laying off 6,000 teachers in order to balance the budget. Some of this is due to cuts in state aid to education. When the teacher’s union (UFT) struck in the past, its leaders

(Ramblings continued from page 10)


- 12 -

were put in jail and the public offered very little support to teach-ers. Teachers get very little sympathy since a good part of the public considers teaching as a part time job. Tell this to my wife who taught High School and Advanced Placement Chemistry for many years. After spending 6 -7 hours in school, she then spent another three hours marking lab reports and homework each night, not to mention preparing lessons for the next day. The Mayor wants the right to do away with seniority in laying off teachers with the assumption that the new teachers will be bet-ter for the students. This would be fine if there was an objective way of measuring teacher’s performance. Is this a ploy to get rid of senior and higher paid teachers from the City’s work-force? Teachers, along with many other civil servants, are also coming under attack in New Jersey from Governor Christie. Government overall has been trying to unilaterally cut pension and health plan costs. Wouldn’t it be better to work with the un-ions? Since I started in civil service 42 years ago, there have been three major changes in the pension system in New York State. All of these have been through the efforts of collective bargain-ing. It is time for both sides to come to the table and come to a reasonable accommodation. There is no reason why a worker should be able to double his pension by working overtime in his/her last year or claim some mysterious heart ailment that adds another 50 percent to their retirement. Billions of dollars are at stake that could better be used for teachers, infrastructure, so-cial services, etc. Rambling Item Number Two: another large earthquake. As I write this, a large earthquake has hit Japan. This is another in a string of major earthquakes to hit our planet in a little over a year. On January 12, 2010, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake oc-curred just outside Port-au-Prince, Haiti. The quake left thou-sands of people dead, injured and homeless. On February 22, 2011 a quake of magnitude 6.3 hit the New Zealand city of Christchurch leaving several hundred people dead and missing. Finally on March 11, 2011 a major quake has occurred on the



- 13 -

- 14 -

- 15 -

northeast coast of Japan registering 9.0 on the Richter Scale. The quake then generated a tsunami that did even more dam-age, including damaging nuclear power plant complexes. At the time of this article, the damage to the nuclear reactor seems to be irreparable. Not only did the tsunami do extensive damage in Japan but its wrath was felt as far away as Hawaii and Santa Cruz in South-ern California. The damage in Santa Cruz was in the tens of millions of dollars. When the destruction occurred in Haiti, it was said that it was due to the nature of the poor building con-struction. Japan, with probably the best earthquake engineer-ing in the world, suffered an even greater tragedy. Although Japan’s skyscrapers withstood the massive quake thanks to their shock absorbing foundations, the effects of the tsunami were a different story. Japan, expecting the possibility of a tsu-nami, built massive seawalls up to forty feet high, but these walls were no match for the tsunami as early pictures show wa-ter rolling over these walls. The wave also knocked out power to the nuclear power plant complexes, adding to the catastro-phe. The Japanese experience brings up the specter of earthquakes and nuclear power plants. Indian Point in Buchanan New York, just south of Peekskill, was built just 2 feet from the Ramapo Fault. It also is only a mile away from the junction of the Ramapo Fault with another active fault. Seismic activity along the Ramapo Fault in New York and New Jersey occurs with small quakes in the 1.0 – 3.0 magnitude range. When I was in graduate school, my field mapping was along the Ramapo Fault in the Canopus Valley, which runs northeast from Peekskill along the south side of the fault. The Canopus Pluton was in-truded along the Ramapo fault during a previous tectonic event. The Indian Point nuclear power plant along the Hudson River is unlikely to be affected by a tsunami, but a larger earthquake affecting the plant is not out of the question. There is already a leak in the spent fuel pool at Indian Point. Would a quake widen this breach and unleash radioactive water into the Hud-



- 16 -

son? Indian Point is only 25 miles north of New York City and has millions of people within 50 miles. Opponents of the plant are planning to fight the renewal of its operating license when it comes up for renewal in two years. How safe is New York City? Offshore quakes in the range of 6.0 have occurred in the recent past, luckily without tsunamis. New York City’s building code has been changed to reflect the latest changes in seismic technology. The greatest danger in a quake would probably come from liquifaction and settlement of unconsolidated materials. In 2002 I was a co-author of a paper that helped the City to revise its seismic code, including defining the design criteria and necessary testing. I will leave earth-quakes and the potential effects on New York City for a future article. Hopefully my next article will be of a lighter note. -The End.


- 17 -

- 18 -

- 19 -

News of NEAIPG Members Tom Wolford, CPG-10577, reports that after working with Groundwater & Environmental Services in Connecticut, he found a job with Ausenco Vector in Lima, Peru. Tom reports that the mining activity is booming in Peru and also in other parts of South America. This mining boom is primarily driven by the high price of metals. With the resulting mining ac-tivity, the economy of Peru has really taken off, with a lot of construction activity in Lima. Best wishes to Russ Slayback, CPG-02305, for a speedy recovery after his recent surgery. Dick Young, CPG-3356, recently completed an underground geotechnical investigation of the condition of the rock that will serve as the crown/roof of a Pump Room on the Second Avenue Subway. The work was conducted about 100 below Second Avenue, near 78th Street, from a two-story high work deck, within the recently completed, 22-foot diameter West Bore TBM (Tunnel Boring Machine) Tunnel. Three sub-horizontal (+15 degrees) core holes were drilled from the second story of a work deck, to a depth of ~40 feet into the roof rock between the completed West Tunnel and the future location of the recently started East Tunnel. Rock problems during tunneling, as well as the subsequent geological tunnel mapping of three separate, intersecting sets of joints/faults/structures right within the confines of the proposed Pump Room footprint, drew attention to the area. The recent core holes were used to get a detailed look at and an evaluation of the condition and the quality of the rock that will serve as the crown/roof of the ~60 foot long by ~30 foot wide by ~30 foot high Pump Room. This work will be used to develop re-vised excavation and support plans.

(News of Members continued on page 21)

- 20 -

- 21 -

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Work is expected to resume soon at St. Brigid’s Church ( h t t p : / / e n . w i k i p e d i a . o r g / w i k i /St._Brigid's_Roman_Catholic_Church_(New_York), which is located near Tompkins Square Park in the East Village of Manhattan. During December, 2010, Dick worked with a team that was providing the geotechnical solution for stabiliz-ing and supporting the subsiding, cracked chancel wall of the church. At that time, about 20 Drilled Grout Piles were in-stalled through the underlying peat layer, to serve as support for abutments to the chancel wall. That initial support is ex-pected to be completed soon, so that work may continue on installation of about 50 more Drilled Grout Piles to stabilize and support the entire structure.

(News of Members continued from page 19)


- 22 -

Photo 1: Dick Young, CPG 3356, recently completed an underground geotechnical investigation of the condition of the rock that will serve as the crown/roof of a Pump Room on the Second Avenue Subway. The work was conducted about 100 below Second Avenue, near 78th Street, from a two-story high work deck, within the recently completed, 22-foot diameter West Bore TBM Tunnel.



Photo 1

- 23 -

- 24 -

- 25 -

Photo 2: Working about 100 below Second Avenue, near 78th Street, within the recently completed, 22-foot diameter West Bore TBM Tunnel, three sub-horizontal (+15 degrees) core holes were drilled from the second story of a work deck, to a depth of ~40 feet into the roof rock between the com-pleted West Tunnel and the future location of the recently started East Tunnel.



Photo 2

- 26 -

Photo 3: The two-story high work deck provided a solid base from which to drill sub-horizontal (+15 degrees) core holes to a depth of ~40 feet into the roof rock between the completed West Tunnel and the future location of the re-cently started East Tunnel. As witnessed by the ring steel and lagging, rock problems during tunneling, as well as the subsequent geological tunnel mapping of three separate, in-tersecting sets of joints/faults/structures right within the con-fines of the proposed Pump Room footprint, drew attention to the area.



Photo 3

- 27 -

STRADDLE PACKER TESTING

• Full Data Logging Capabilities • Vertical Delineation of Contaminant

Concentrations • Discrete Ground Water and Vapor

Sampling REMEDIAL SLURRY INJECTIONS

• Fractured Bedrock and Soils

BOREHOLE LOGGING

• Color Downhole/90º Video • Borehole Geophysical Logging • Heat-Pulse Flowmeter • Acoustic Televiewer

GEOPROBE SERVICES

• Soil Sampling • Groundwater Sampling • Vapor Sampling and Onsite GC Analysis • HRC-ORC Injection

www.earthdatane.com

ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD SERVICES See our web page for additional Logging services

1-800-279-9466

- 28 -

Photo 4: Given the timely concerns with evaluating the rock con-dition, as well as to minimize disruption of on-going tunnel activi-ties, coring continued on all three shifts during mid- March, 2011. Photo 5: In m i d - M a r c h , 2011, the Tun-nel Boring Ma-chine (TBM) was just start-ing the East Bore of the 22-foot diameter Second Avenue Subway Tunnel from the 92nd Street face of the launch box, which is 75 feet below street level. The re-cently-completed West Bore is visible in the right side of the photo.



Photo 4

Photo 5

- 29 -

- 30 -

- 31 -

Photo 6: A portion o f the length and the size of the Tunnel Boring Ma-c h i n e (TBM) is visible in this photo, as the TBM starts the East Bore of the S e c o n d Avenue Subway Tunnel from the 92nd Street face of the launch box, which is 75 feet below street level. The recently-completed West Bore is visible to the right. -The End

(Continued from page 28)

Photo 6

- 32 -

- 33 -

‘Til Depth Do Us Part By

Charlie Rich, CPG-04433 The number and cost of monitoring wells drilled in response to federal and state regulatory compliance requirements, as well as those drilled for privately initiated programs such as property audits and aquifer impact assessments, will increase dramati-cally in future years. Considerable controversy exists over whether the location, number, depth, design and construction of these specialized wells should be more consistent from state to state in order to improve their overall adequacy. Simplistically, proponents of standardization argue we may be better able to enforce and evaluate the myriad of pollution sources and their effects upon ground water if monitoring wells are of similar and predictable construction. Opponents support the value of customizing drill-ing method and technique to site-specific geologic conditions, equipment availability, and the character and geometric diver-sity of the point or non-point source terms. This approach would also ensure that future well technology development is not driven in a specific direction by any one popular regulatory policy. Obvious advantages associated with the implementation of ge-neric design requirements for specific types of monitoring well programs include the effectiveness that the administration of a uniform well construction specification would have for such nu-merous and easily monitored source terms as underground storage tanks, for example. Alternatively, a uniform well con-struction specification would be a distinct disadvantage when establishing responsive monitoring networks in floodplains, frac-tured rock terrain (granites, limestones, etc.), near centers of pumpage, adjacent to surface water or springs, or in efforts to monitor dynamic source terms such as an expanding landfill; in short, source term situations that are hydrogeologically unique to their settings.

(‘Til Depth Do Us Part continued on page 34)

- 34 -

We feel the best solution to this problem is not the standardiza-tion of well placement and construction specifications on a state by state basis, but rather the application of preferred and con-sistent monitoring well design in accordance with monitoring objectives. This is best achieved by utilizing the combined ex-perience of both the contractor and the consultant. For exam-ple, a pre-drilling planning of a meeting of both geologist and driller can minimize the likelihood of an inadequate system re-sulting from a misinterpretation of job specs, unforeseen site conditions, and/or scope adjustment necessitated by complex subsurface geology. This meeting prior to mobilization can an-ticipate potential problems before they occur. In our shop, perhaps 50 percent of our outside staff activities involve geologists working side by side with water well contrac-tors. In this way, the experienced consultant develops an appre-ciation for the technical complexities a job might present and learns the value of the subsurface knowledge the local driller has accumulated over the years. Likewise, the driller appreci-

(‘Til Depth Do Us Part continued from page 33)


- 35 -

ates the theory, perspective and cost-saving potential that a well-trained and experienced hydrogeologist can bring to the job by understanding and coping with site-specific problems. This contractor/consultant interdependency continues to be an understated and important consideration that may affect whether or not a job is successfully completed not only within the schedule and budget prescribed by the client, but also within the purview and approval of the regulatory authority charged to grant or withhold a permit to operate and maintain the ground water quality monitoring plan. Thus, the identifica-tion of some of the more commonly felt areas where contractor/consultant problems arise is a helpful step toward improving the adequacy of our well systems, not only to avoid standardized specifications and the false sense of security it would bring, but to further cement what we already recognize to be a very pow-erful and productive union. To accomplish such a preliminary assessment, we polled a vari-ety of reputable drilling contractors located across the country in order to open avenues of communication relative to personal and candid opinions of the contractor/consultant working rela-tionship. The majority of those queried said that for the most part they enjoy a good and productive working relationship with their consultants on any given job. There is no reason to dis-cuss the positive feedback from our poll. However, we did ex-perience some candid negative feedback from about 3 percent of our respondents, which should be understood to remedy and prevent the problematical situations disclosed to us from recur-ring. The more frequently expressed concerns contractors had about some of the consultants they worked with on monitoring well jobs follows: "Consultant keeps sending out inexperienced field people..."(IL) "...different consulting firms do things differently and sometimes the project manager specifies one thing but the field man wants it done another way." (CT)



- 36 -

S

G

C

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS

property transfer site assessments

groundwater development, management, protection, permitting

UST closures and investigations

litigation support Carol S. Graff, CPG-06429 Phone: 609-393-4442 109 Renfrew Avenue FAX: 609-393-5999 Trenton, NJ 08618-3335 E-mail: [email protected]

- 37 -

" ...having to wait to get paid until the consultant gets paid." (NY) " ...big communication gap between consultant and driller." (NJ) "Consultants write specifications for wells without always realiz-ing what is physically feasible in the field ..." (IA) 'Well specs that cannot be adhered to in the field... " (FL) "A lot of firms write specifications without being aware of ad-vances in drilling technology. They want us to do things the way they were done 30 years ago." (TX) " ... we work on price per foot....we constantly have to stop drill-ing waiting for an inexperienced field person to run back and forth to a phone to talk to their boss in the office ... this wastes a lot of time and money." (NY) "when a consultant is an engineer , without any background in ground water or geology ..." (NJ) "Too many folks standing around watching us work ...some get in the way and we have to watch out for them." (CA) We agreed with these comments. The "inexperienced field peo-ple" and related quotes were particularly pervasive. We cannot overemphasize the importance of curtailing this potentially dan-gerous and damaging situation. The more experienced professionals have to continue to "quarterback" their work mostly from the office relying on less experienced field personnel to report back drilling conditions and progress. This condition is not likely to change because, in consulting, the time it takes to serve a client properly is key to generating repeat business and new referrals. In a world where opinions are rendered for a fee that may be billed by the hour, the senior scientist often becomes too expensive to assign to anyone particular project on a full-time basis. However, it is not



- 38 -

- 39 -

the drillers' responsibility to train the consulting firms' employ-ees. Nor should a 30-year drilling veteran knee-deep in mud, who has been installing wells since before ground water quality was questioned, have to be told by a young professional two months out of college how to go about his business. Our solution to this problem is "teamed apprenticeship." We suggest that the less experienced field man always be accom-panied by an experienced hydrogeologist until he is comfortably able to ensure that monitoring program objectives are being met--without having to run a relay between the job site and the phone booth. The comments such as "having to wait to get paid until the con-sultant gets paid," is an unfortunate reality. The driller is not in partnership with the consultant. Commercial arrangements and scheduled pay dates should be agreed to beforehand. Keep in mind, however, that the consultant has his own costs of doing business-primarily salary dollars for highly trained and educated professional scientists followed by office-related equipment and expenses to support these personnel. Our suggestion to this problem is that the consultant pay the driller for mobilization costs up front or at least early on in the monitoring program. For consultants subcontracting work to drillers, remember that the major cost a driller has to contend with on a daily basis is the purchase price of equipment (including all financing), main-taining and mobilizing drilling rigs, and the availability of experi-enced labor. These costs are followed by the percentage of operating capacity the company can maintain and costs for aux-iliary equipment and insurance. If rigs are already paid for, the drillers' cost of doing business may be somewhat more com-petitive than those borne by an alternate driller to operate new equipment. This may allow the former to offer flexible commer-cial terms but the most recognizable disadvantage in older equipment is potentially increased downtime due to equipment failure. In addition, the diversity of drilling costs from one region of the country to another further necessitates that there be a thorough understanding between consultant and contractor



- 40 -

about the specific method of drilling to be used, expected auxil-iary job costs, and the importance of maintaining schedule. Our solution is to understand all the terms before starting the job. Consultants write specifications for wells without realizing what is physically feasible in the field. The consultants' training is largely academic, scientific and derived from a classroom situa-tion. He is often unfamiliar with the territory in which he is work-ing since he moves from one region to the next based upon project location and has to rely heavily on existing maps and other available information. He or she may be called upon to do varying types of project-related work such as expert testimony one day, overseeing monitoring well installations another day, and presenting the results of a site assessment to plant man-agement a third day-perhaps in three different states. On the other hand, contractor training is largely practical, mechanical, area specific and derived from actual field situations. The driller is required to fix things, keep equipment running, improvise and perform often under adverse working conditions. Lately, client awareness and curiosity has us describing specific monitoring well construction techniques, the capabilities and experience of the contractors or subcontractor drilling crew, ap-proaches to the design of the well program, and/or why we pre-fer this drilling equipment over that equipment to prevent the likelihood of cross contamination. Since the frequency of these discussions are likely to increase, we strongly suggest that con-tractors develop a brochure or literature that details the drilling capabilities, rigs and experience accumulated In the particular area of service. Consultants would know exactly what type of equipment, labor and material is coming out to the job site so that the chance of specifying something that is not feasible is reduced. In summary, the average contractor has everything to gain and nothing to lose by educating his consultant counterpart as to what can and cannot be physically accomplished in the field. When this happens, good and productive working relationships are inevitable. Teaming the consultant's expertise with the ex-



- 41 -

- 42 -

SGS Environmental Services Inc.

Drilling Division www.sgs.com

West Creek, NJ 609-294-1110 Baltimore, MD 410-483-2200

A Full Service Environ-mental Drilling Company, Serving the United States and the Caribbean. All employees are OSHA certified, and medically monitored according to OSHA, and DOT

Licensed in: NJ, NY ,PA ,DE ,MD ,CT ,SC ,NC ,GA,

FL, MA, MI, VA, WVA, USVI

DUAL ROTARY DRILLING

6”, 8”, 10” ODEX

DRILLING

AIR ROTARY DRILLING

MUD ROTARY DRILLING

HOLLOW STEM AUGER

HYDROPUNCH SAMPLING

BEDROCK CORING

ATV GEOPROBE®

SAMPLING

Members NGWA, MDWWA and NJGWA

MONITORING WELLS

RECOVERY WELLS

GEOPROBE SAMPLING

WELL ABANDONMENT

PACKER TESTING

CERTIFIED SOLINST® CMT MULTIPORT SYSTEM INSTALLER

VIBRASONIC DRILLING

BACKHOE AND TEST PITTING

- 43 -

perienced monitoring well contractor will virtually ensure instal-lation of reliable and responsive monitoring well systems with-out the need for regimented standards. So, how about some of you old timers showing some of these young upstarts just how it's done! Charles Rich operates CA Rich Consultants Inc., Plainview, New York Article reprinted by permission from the author, originally pub-lished in the Water Well Journal, March, 1986. Some things never change, do they? - Ed.


- 44 -

- 45 -

- 46 -

- 47 -

- 48 -

- 49 -

Environmental Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Using Vapor Barriers and SSDS/SSVMS Systems

Robert Carvalho, CPG-10588

Vapor intrusion is a concern or potential concern on numer-ous former/current industrial and manufacturing sites throughout the North East, United States, and beyond. Re-fineries, oil storage facilities, landfills, old gas stations, manu-facturing facilities “Brownfields” are being redeveloped into schools, retail storage, and housing/apartment facilities. The problem is that by-products or the products themselves that were manufactured or stored leaked into the ground and/or groundwater and will be released into the new build-ing unless the areas below in the buildings are entirely reme-diated below and around the building. In the past it was not economically feasible to remediate the soils and groundwater in their entirety prior to building placement or buildings were placed on contaminated land that had no remediation or miti-gation performed. Prior to redevelopment; an environmental consulting com-pany or engineering/geological company delineates the verti-cal and horizontal extent of contamination. They do that util-izing soil, water, and soil gas sampling. Often the environmental consulting geologist, engineer, owner or regulatory agency requires a mitigation system to be placed over contamination that will remain in place or that cannot be economically remediated. In order to satisfy long term liability issues, the site will have a sub slab duct work system installed in conjunction with a vapor barrier.

(Vapor Intrusion continued on page 50)

- 50 -

The duct work system design is performed by the consultant and can take the form of slotted or perforated PVC, Geovent, Cast Iron or other material each hailing its unique attributes. Clean stone is also installed as a plenum or vapor transmis-sion pathway to the duct work which is either active or pas-sive. The vapor barrier system itself can take the form of Liquid Boot which is a latex rubber emulsion, high density polyethyl-ene sheet product or other type of extruded polyethylene lay-ered sheet. The Environmental vapor barrier is installed prior to placement of slabs and can be installed on below grade walls. The environmental vapor barrier system used in conjunction with a sub-slab depressurization system is a great way to avoid the horror scenario of a vapor intrusion issue found after the building placement. Stay tuned for the next issue that will have an article about the pros and cons of the different types of systems and the cost involved with the installation of the systems. Robert is the President of EAI, Inc., an environmental con-tracting and consulting company located in Jersey City, NJ and MD. He can be reached at 201-395-0010 ext 229 or via the web at [email protected]. EAI, Inc. is one of the larg-est installers of Vapor Barriers and Sub-Slab Depressuriza-tion Systems in the United States and installed the 1st system ever at a NYC school. -The End

(Vapor Intrusion continued from page 49)

- 51 -

News From the Northeast AIPG TRIES TO HELP STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS IN THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CLIMATE

By Dorothy Richter, CPG-07033 & Bob Blauvelt, CPG-06508 The news media are bursting with stories about the economic hardships and enormous revenue and budget shortfalls experi-enced by all state governments in 2011. One consequence of the economic uncertainty has been negative impacts on various state geological surveys. AIPG members directly benefit from the information published by state geological surveys and should be prepared to support any that may be in jeopardy. AIPG was solicited by AASG (Association of American State Geologists) to compose a general document that could be used by state geological surveys to help support their efforts to main-tain state funding for their efforts. In the spring of 2010, Bar-bara Murphy (CPG-06203), the current AIPG President-Elect, assembled and chaired a committee of members from across the nation that solicited information and ideas from each state geological survey to distill into a single document. As might be expected, participating in a document constructed by a large committee is very difficult, but Barb managed to consolidate everything she could into a ‘white paper’ entitled “IMPORTANCE AND FUTURE ROLES OF STATE GEOLOGI-CAL SURVEYS,” which was published in the fall of 2010 and is posted on the AIPG website with a link from the home page.

(News From the Northeast continued on page 55)

- 52 -

ECO TEST LABORATORIES, INC. Environmental Testing

Drinking Water • Wastewater • Groundwater Soils • Wastes • Air

377 Sheffield Ave. • North Babylon, N.Y. 11703 (631) 422-5777 • FAX (631) 422-5770

Website: ecotestlabs.com • Email: [email protected] Approvals: NY, NJ, CT, RI, NELAC

- 53 -

- 54 -

THOMAS A. GARSIDE JON RUDNICKI President Vice President

MAINE TEST BORINGS

Complete Test Boring Service P.O. Box 320, Brewer, Maine 04412

Telephone (207) 989-7820 Fax (207) 989-7821

www.mainetest.com E-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

- 55 -

The committee met by conference calls and email over the course of several months. The committee members re-searched each geological survey, interviewed the State Geolo-gists, and reviewed guidance statements, organizational struc-ture, programs, funding levels and staff roles of the surveys across the country. The NE-AIPG states were represented by Bob Blauvelt (CPG-06508) and Dorothy Richter (CPG-07033). Some State Ge-ologists are AIPG members, including Robert Marvinney (CPG-10462) of Maine and Karl Muessig (MEM-0264) of New Jer-sey, and former State Geologists David Wunsch (MEM-0147) of New Hampshire and William Kelly (MEM-0551) of New York, who were still in their positions at the time of the AIPG survey. Although the state geological surveys in the NE Section are smaller than some in other regions of the country, they repre-sent the oldest state geological surveys in the country and have a rich history in the development of the northeastern region and in the science of geology. The NE Section states are fortunate to have State Geologists who are passionate and articulate about their missions and who use innovative methods to stretch whatever funding is available to its best advantage. As working geologists all know, every state geological survey provides “critical functions in a cost effective manner that greatly en-hance each state's economy and environment. The surveys provide the public and private sectors considerable support on all types of important environmental and natural resource is-sues. Continued support of our state geological surveys is criti-cal since the services they provide are invaluable.” Not surprisingly, the ‘white paper’ concludes “The AIPG com-mittee strongly supports the state geological surveys. The com-mittee advises against neglect or termination of any of the pri-mary state survey functions and highly recommends continued and even greater support for the long term and broad-reaching benefits afforded by the services of the surveys. It is vitally im-portant that the surveys continue their efforts to conduct their

(News From the Northeast continued from page 51)


- 56 -

work relevant to the issues of today and the future, to provide basic data and continue to map the geology and resources of each state, to continue the trend of providing information in a digital format, and to continue to work on cooperatively-funded projects, especially for those issues that are of value to each state and the entire nation. It is essential to maintain these valuable programs that are important to the public health and safety, to the environment and sustaining our resources, and the overall economy of each state and the nation.” In the short time since the AIPG survey of the State Geologists in the NE-AIPG states was completed, there have been some changes: • David Wunsch (MEM-0147) resigned as the State Geologist of New Hampshire to take a position with NGWA in the fall of 2010. Due to a hiring freeze, it may be some time before the position is formally filled, and Rick Chormann of the New Hamp-shire Geological Survey is effectively Interim State Geologist. • The Vermont Geological Survey apparently survived a fund-ing crisis for FY2012. Larry Becker, the Vermont State Geolo-gist, had indicated that the Vermont Geological Survey might have to move from the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) to the University of Vermont, but various obstacles prevented that from happening. An ad hoc committee of members of the Ver-mont Geological Society lobbied to continue funding for the Ver-mont Geological Survey. In the Winter issue of the Green Mountain Geologist, the Vermont Geological Society’s newslet-ter, the State Geologist’s report indicates that ANR’s proposed budget for FY2012 will keep the Geological Survey in place. • Bill Kelly (MEM-0559) retired as the State Geologist of New York, and Langhorne B. Smith is Acting State Geologist. Although change is inevitable in this period of fiscal belt-tightening, it is imperative that AIPG members continue to sup-



- 57 -

• Brownfields Evaluation, Cleanup Negotiations and Remediation

• ASTM Phase I and II Real Estate

Assessments • Facility Operations Environmental

Audits • Permit Status/Compliance

Review

• Single and Multiple Lot Septic System Design and Permitting

• Water Supply Siting, Analysis,

and Permitting • Federal, State, and Local

Development Permitting • Boundary Surveying, ALTA/ACSM

Land Title Surveys, Construction Layout, Construction Inspection

163 Revell Drive, Lincoln, VT 05443 802-453-4384 * 802-453-5399 (Fax) * 800-477-4384

Email: [email protected]

port the offices of their State Geologist and state geological sur-veys. Developing Natural Gas from Shale in New York State

Update from the New York State Council

of Professional Geologists

Many New Yorkers are concerned about the potentially adverse environmental impacts of proposed methods for extracting natu-ral gas from the Marcellus shale and other shale formations in NYS. The New York State Council of Professional Geologists (NYSCPG) recognizes the importance of maintaining public



- 58 -

SOILTESTING, INC.

Site & Subsurface Investigations

• Test Boring - Core Drilling • Monitoring Wells • Micro Piles • Helical Piers • Underpinning 140 Oxford Road, Oxford, CT 06478 1-800-388-4473 (203) 888-4531 fax (203) 888-6247

53 Years of Drilling Services

Geotechnical & Environmental

Site Investigations

- 59 -

safety and practicing sound environmental stewardship for fu-ture generations, as well as the importance of securing afford-able energy for a stable economy. NYSCPG neither supports nor opposes a particular policy regarding energy development in NYS, such as the development of natural gas from shale for-mations, but insists that this and other important environmental and energy policy decisions be based on reliable science pro-vided by competent professionals, including geologists. NYSCPG maintains that the professional experience and tech-nical expertise of geologists are critical for addressing the en-ergy development concerns of the people of NYS. For example, geologists in NYS routinely locate, test and evaluate water sup-ply wells; assess the availability, integrity and quality of surface and ground water resources; analyze conditions to minimize soil erosion and pollution; monitor the adequacy of drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations to protect water systems, water-sheds, and basin-wide hydrologic balance; coordinate solid and liquid waste handling and disposal; find and certify aggregate resources for roads and construction; evaluate the significance of potential impacts to ecosystems; monitor chemical use, han-dling and storage; investigate and remediate spills; evaluate soils and slopes for reclamation; and, prepare, review, and ap-prove permits. NYSCPG emphasizes that sound geologic science is essential to address the challenges presented by expanded shale-gas development in NYS. The development of these resources has the potential to provide positive economic benefits to the citi-zenry of the state, but the benefits must be assessed relative to the potential environmental costs. The decision to proceed or not to proceed with shale-gas development is a public policy decision that must be informed by the best available science and technology. Policy based on unreliable science puts the public at risk. -The End


- 60 -

Reflections on the NEAIPG Newsletter:

What Was Involved In Publishing And Dis-tributing The NEAIPG Newsletter, When It

Was “Printed On Paper”

By Dick Young, CPG-03356

Volunteer Publisher and Advertising Sales Manager In this life, it is sometimes amusing - and elucidating - to look over our shoulders, . . . to see where we have come from and where we have been. After decades as a “printed on paper” booklet publication, the NEAIPG Newsletter stepped firmly into cyberspace with the Winter 2011 issue in digital form and format (http://issuu.com/neaipg/docs)! So, let’s take a peak back at how “it used to be done,” . . . what it took to have the Newsletter show up quarterly in your U.S. Mail Box! Of course, before any of this publication and distribution work could be accomplished, a huge amount of work and prepara-tion had to be done to create and to finalize the valuable con-tent of each Newsletter. The contribution that Editor Bill Pre-hoda gives to NEAIPG and to each of us in the Section by creating each issue of the Newsletter is both immense and amazing! In that, Bill is mirroring the high calling, as exem-plified by his predecessors, including Ted Clark, Russ Slay-back, Bob Stewart, and others! Likewise, a meaningful amount of work had to be done each year to encourage NEAIPG’s cadre of loyal Advertiser’s to continue with their Advertisements for another year in the 4 Newsletters and the Directory of Members. Clearly, the fi-nancial support of NEAIPG’s Advertiser’s is what allowed the

(Reflections continued on page 63)

- 61 -

NEW YORK VIRGINIA 225 N Route 303, Suite 102 P.O. Box 7325

Congers, NY 10920 Charlottesville, VA 22906

854-268-1800 434-978-3187

854-268-1802 fax 434-973-9791 fax

[email protected] [email protected]

• Magnetics • Electromagnetics • Ground Penetrating

Radar • Seismic Application • Utility Location

http://www.naevageophysics.com

• UXO Detection • Borehole Logging • Downhole Camera • Self Potential • Resistivity • Gravity

- 62 -

- 63 -

production of the quarterly Newsletter over the past 31 years. And for each issue, there were a number of Ad updates and changes to be accomplished. So here is what it took to go from a “paper paste-up” original of the Newsletter ( . . . or an “MS Publisher electronic ver-sion” during the last several years) to a Newsletter in your mailbox, 4 times a year: 1. Quality Control was the first step. When the NL original was received from the Editor, we used a 14-point checklist to assure that the Newsletter content, the Ads, and the format met the standards that NEAIPG had come to expect over the years. This step included proof-reading every article, as well as verifying Ads and locations, page flow, article flow, other content, etc. This typically required about 4-5 working hours. 2. The next step was to pair the pages of the one-sided “originals,” so that the Printer could produce the two-sided pages of the NL. Along with this, we developed a “Print Or-der,” specifying the color of paper stock for the cover/text/Ad pages, along with the number of copies to print of the NL, special pages, insert, etc. The paired NL “original” pages and the Print Order were then delivered to the Printer. This step typically required about 2 working hours. 3. Once the printing was underway, we stopped by the Printer to review a “proof” copy. The goal was to catch any errors in printing, before the job was completed. This step typically required about 1 to 2 hours. 4. When the printing was completed, we picked up the 5 to 6 cases of printing product. This included all of the two-sided pages in stacks of 900 sheets per pair of pages (about 19,000 sheets for a typical Newsletter). These stacks were placed in page order, around the perimeter of large table, at least 20 feet in circumference. For Quality Control, each of

(Reflections continued from page 60)


- 64 -

WATER AND MONITORING WELL DRILLING ROTARY -AUGER-CORE-PROBE RIG

DOWN HOLE VIDEO INSPECTION SERVICES HYDROFRACTURING & WELL REDEVELOPMENT

7 PUMP SERVICE TRUCKS AND INVENTORY OF 400 PUMPS

Dick Stothoff David Lyman FAX: 908-782-9528 Phone: 908-782-2116

- 65 -

the sheets in each of the 21 stacks was then “flip-checked,” to verify that both sides had been printed, that both sides were correctly paired, that both sides had the top at the top, etc. This step typically required about 2 working hours. 5. The next step of collating featured more exercise: 900 trips walking around the table, carefully pulling one sheet ( . . . no more and no less!) off each stack and keeping those sheets in page order. Once collated, each Newsletter pile was tapped on the edges to align the sheets and to protect the edges from damage. Each collated booklet was placed in piles of 50, to be able to track progress. As soon as the first several copies had been collated, another Quality Con-trol check was made, by thumbing through a copy to re-verify page order, alignment, and appearance. Overall the collat-ing step typically required about 5 working hours for each NL. However, for the Directory of Members, sheet count rose to ~40, so a much larger table (~35+ feet around the perimeter) was needed, each collating trip took about twice



- 66 -

- 67 -

Contact Robert Blake Technical Sales Representative

Tel (203) 377-9984 Fax (203) 377-9952

E-mail: [email protected] www.cetlabs.com

80 Lupes Drive Stratford, CT 06615

as long, and this collating step typically required about 10 working hours for the Directory. 6. Once the NL was collated and cross-stacked, the 18 piles of 50 NLs each were moved and stacked on a solid, high workbench, for folding into booklets. Each booklet was folded individually, by placing the stack of 21 pages face down with the centerfold up, folding the Rear pages over the front pages (until the longest edges of the rear pages matched the edges of the front pages), creasing with a wall paper seam roller, using a lot of pressure to set the fold, and then boxing the booklet tightly, to preserve the fold. This step typically required about 3 working hours to fold 900 NLs. 7. Next, the each folded booklet was saddled stapled in two places, to hold the booklet format. This stapling was done



- 68 -

manually, as the two used electric saddle staplers that were given to NEAIPG decades ago had a capacity limit of about 15 sheets. This saddle stapling step typically required about 6 working hours to staple 900 NLs. 8. Weeks before all 900 booklets were ready to be mailed, we had reached out to AIPG National, to obtain mailing ad-dress labels for all ~700 NEAIPG Members, as well as for ~40+ National and Section Officers. Additionally, we had created mailing address labels for ~80 NEAIPG Advertisers, as well as ~20 NEAIPG friends & family, and others. Once the Quality Control steps of deleting label duplicates and of integrating all of the remaining labels in Zip Order were ac-complished, the ~800+ mailing labels were placed on 6.5” x 9.5” kraft envelopes. Additionally, three other labels (Standard/Bulk Mail Indicia, return address, and change Or-der requested) had to be added to every envelope, also. Overall, this step typically required about 13 working hours for each mailing. 9. Then, 2 to 5 Inserts (typically Fall or Spring Meeting An-nouncements, Registration Law Updates, News Flashes, Ballots, PiggyBack Inserts, etc.) were placed into the center-



- 69 -

- 70 -

- 71 -

PIGGYBACKING: SERVICE EXPANDED FOR NE/AIPG ADVERTISERS!

The NE/AIPG Newsletter again has expanded its PiggyBacking options offered to Advertisers. Advertisers can include promotional flyers or brochures along with NE/AIPG's normal distribution of the Newsletter. PiggyBacking gives NE/AIPG Advertisers a cost-effective way to get their pro-motional material into the hands of NE/AIPG's targeted audience of decision-makers. That audience has grown to over 800, including ~700 NE/AIPG Mem-bers and Applicants throughout New York, New Jersey, and the six New Eng-land states, as well as ~40± AIPG National and Section Officers, over 70 Ad-vertisers, and others. NE/AIPG Members benefits from keeping current on available, innovative products and services.

PiggyBack Rates are in two categories: 1. For digital issues (see http://issuu.com/neaipg/docs ), a "Full Page" (~8" high by 5" wide) Space in Full Color costs $125 per issue. A "Double Full Page" (~8" high by 10" wide) Space in Full Color costs $225 per issue, while a "Quad Full Page" (2 Doubles of ~8" high by 10" wide each) Space in Full Color costs $425 per issue. 2. For any issues printed on paper and sent by US Mail, PiggyBack Rates depend upon the size and weight of the pre-printed promotional piece provided by the Advertiser. For instance, a single 8 1/2” by 11" sheet of 20# paper, pre-printed, and pre-folded costs $0.25 each to PiggyBack.. To schedule your Pig-gyBack promotion, or to learn more, just call Dick Young at 973-335-2289.

- 72 -

- 73 -

- 74 -

fold of the completed Newsletter Booklets, which were then stuffed into the previously-completed 800+, pre-addressed, Zip-Ordered envelopes, and the envelopes were sealed. The completed envelopes were boxed into ~20 trays, to keep them in Zip Order. This “stuff & seal” step typically required



Once the Newsletters and inserts had been stuffed into the pre-addressed, Zip-sorted envelopes, and the envelopes had been sealed, the 800+ com-pleted, pre-addressed, Zip-Ordered envelops were Zip-sorted and Zip bundled into packages that yielded the lowest-cost to NE/AIPG and the most-timely delivery to NE/AIPG Members. A typical NL mailing resulted in ~250 pounds of Standard/Bulk Mail, contained in ~20 sacks.

- 75 -

about 5 working hours by each of two people working to-gether. 10. Next, using ever-evolving USPS Guidelines, the 800+ pre-addressed, Zip-Ordered envelops were Zip sorted and Zip bundled into packages that yielded the lowest-cost to NEAIPG and the most-timely delivery to NEAIPG Members. To meet USPS requirements, the count in each bundle and its sort class were recorded. Each bundle of Zip-Grouped NLs (typically containing 4 to 30 envelopes) was then placed with other bundles bound for the same postal sorting facility and placed in mail sacks. A typical NL mailing resulted in ~~250 pounds of Standard/Bulk Mail, contained in ~20 sacks. This step typically required 3 working hours by each of two people working together.



- 76 -

11. Then, the several required USPS forms and total counts by class were completed. Those forms, plus the ~20 sacks were taken to the post Office, where mailing charges of about $500 per NL mailing were paid. This mailing step typi-cally required about 2 working hours. 12. Thus, the total work time for the various steps for publish-ing and distributing a typical NEAIPG Newsletter total about 55 hours. 13. A few days to a few weeks later, almost magically, the NL appeared in your mailbox! Where Did We Come From? For those in-terested in the History of the N E A I P G N e w s l e t t e r , please see the article of the same title on Page 26 of the Holidays 2005 Newsletter. So, lets get the calculator out, 55 hours per issue, 5 issues per year, 31 years. I come up with 355 days—or 1,065 8-hour days! OK, the early issues were smaller, but still, can anyone top the volunteer effort by the Young family? - Ed


- 77 -

- 78 -

NEAIPG NEWSLETTER 2011 PUBLICATION SCHEDULE

Winter Newsletter January 21 Deadline (Material to Editor) February 4 Content ready to print February 21 Dispatch by mail/e-mail March 7 Receipt by Members Directory of Members February 18 Deadline (Material to Editor) March 4 Content ready to print April 11 Dispatch by mail/e-mail April 25 Receipt by Members Spring Newsletter March 11 Deadline (Material to Editor) March 25 Content ready to print April 11 Dispatch by mail/e-mail April 25 Receipt by Members Indian Summer Newsletter July 1 Deadline (Material to Editor) July 22 Content ready to print August 15 Dispatch by mail/e-mail September 1 Receipt by Members Holidays Newsletter October 7 Deadline (Material to Editor) October 21 Content ready to print November 7 Dispatch by mail/e-mail November 21 Receipt by Members

e-mail news and information to Bill Prehoda [email protected]

Advertising rates and information:

contact Dick Young [email protected]

- 79 -

ANGELO TAGLIACOZZO MEMORIAL GEOLOGICAL SCHOLARSHIP

2010-2011 Academic Year

Dennis G. McGrath, CPG-08578 Chair, Scholarship Committee

The scholarship committee (Sam Gowan, Dean Herrick, Len Rexrode, Arnold Schiffman, Craig Werle, Tom West and me) recently completed a review and evaluation of 14 scholarship applications received in December 2010. Evaluation criteria include financial need, academic qualifications, career goals, achievements (e.g., awards, projects, publications, senior thesis, etc.), and the faculty recommendation letter. Finan-cial need and academic qualifications were weighed more heavily than the other factors in accordance with the weight-ing scheme that has been used now for two years. The com-mittee then convened via teleconference to discuss the over-all ratings, recommend an award pool, and select the award recipients. Overall, we received another outstanding group of student applicants. Just to give you an idea, 12 of the 14 applicants maintain greater than a 3.3 (out of 4.0) overall grade point average (gpa); five applicants maintain greater than a 3.8 gpa! The academic qualifications presented by the applicants were truly outstanding, the com-mitments to the profession of geology were strong, and many of the financial needs were compelling. The results of the evaluations among the seven committee members varied a bit as usual, but everyone felt that the compos-ite results accurately represented our evaluation of the applicants. The award amount for this year was chosen after considering performance

(ATMGS Report continued on page 80)

- 80 -

of the fund over the past year and the profit from the geo-physical short course that was donated to the scholarship fund. An award pool of $13,000 was selected as an appro-priate award amount and exceeded the previous record $12,000 awarded in 2007. During the Executive Committee meeting on March 7, 2011, the committee presented the Board of Trustees with a recommendation to award a total of $13,000 to six applicants. The Board of Trustees approved the recommendation. The NE-AIPG is proud to announce the six recipients for the 2010-2011 academic year. The name of each recipient, the college or university they attend, and the award amounts are listed below: Helen Janiszewski Rutgers University $3,000 Allison Platsky SUNY – New Paltz $3,000 Beth Manes Brooklyn College $2,000 Katrina Neiss Hartwick College $2,000 Jonathan Griffith Union College $1,500 Rebecca Snelling Wesleyan University $1,500 The checks have been mailed to each student and each of the 8 applicants that did not receive an award was sent an acknowledgement letter. Those that will maintain their eligi-bility for next year were encouraged to apply again. All appli-cants receive a complimentary one-year student membership in AIPG. I want to close by thanking each member of the scholarship committee for their time and effort evaluating the 14 applica-tions and selecting the six scholarship recipients. -The end

(ATMGS Report continued from page 79)

- 81 -

- 82 -

25 YEARS AGO IN THE NEAIPG NEWSLETTER Spring 1986

• NEAIPG President Ted Clark discussed the need for increased membership in NEAIPG, “We offer no free trips, gold pen sets or even baseball caps for bringing in new members. We offer some-thing better—the personal and professional satisfaction of doing something you believe in.” • Granite State Explorations of Charlestown, NH was advertising Test Borings, Diamond Core Drilling, Undisturbed Sampling and Monitoring Well Installation. Richard L. Holmes, proprietor. • The 23rd annual AIPG meeting was to be held in Keystone, Colo-rado in September. • John Sanders, President of PESNY announces a one-day field trip to Robert Moses State Park on Fire Island. • The NEAIPG Spring Meeting was slated to occur at the American Museum of Natural History in NYC, with a theme of “future Trends in Geology”, centering on current and future employment of geolo-gists. • Attendees of the January 15, 1986 NEAIPG Executive Committee

(25 Years Ago continued on page 83)

- 83 -

meeting were: Ted Clark, Carol Graff, Fred Troise, Charles Dimmick, Larry LaChance, Rich Barbour, Dick Young, Michael J. McEachern and Angelo Tagliacozzo. • Brian Fowler was on New Hampshire’s seven-member committee of scientists chosen by Congressman Gregg to respond to DOE’s reconnaissance of the State’s crystallines for a high-level radioactive waste repository. • Manion Associates, Professional Recruiting and Consulting Ser-vices of Rutherford, NJ advertised for immediate positions available at the junior, intermediate and senior levels of geologists and hydro-geologists. • Jeff Lennox of LBG was putting the final touches on a digital model of the Mill River Basin Aquifer in the Hamden-Cheshire are of Con-necticut for the Regional Water Authority. • Dr. Kurt Lowe, President of the Northeast Section in 1976, visited the Section’s Colloquium at the Northeast GSA Meeting in Kiamesha Lake, NY. • George Banino of Dunn Geoscience, presented a symposium at the Con/Agg 86 Show in Las Vegas on “Modern Methods of Explora-tion for Sand and Gravel”. - The end.

(25 Years Ago continued from page 82)

- 84 -

FRIENDS OF THE FUND ($1,000+) AQUIFER DRILLING AND TESTING, INC. BANINO, GEORGE LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. MILLER, DAVID W. NE-AIPG REXRODE, H. LEONARD , JR. ROUX ASSOCIATES ROUX, PAUL H. SLAYBACK, RUSSELL G. VALKENBURG, NICHOLAS YOUNG, RICHARD H. BENEFACTORS ($500+) BLAUVELT, ROBERT P. EMERSON, MARK HERRICK, DEAN H. HIGGINS, JONATHAN B. (IN MEMORY OF LEO HALL) KASABACH, HAIG F. KAYLER, KYLE STONE, TIMOTHY S. PATRONS ($250+) AIRMAG SURVEYS, INC. ANONYMOUS BRINCKERHOFF, LAURA (IN HONOR OF FRANK MCCARTHY) BURKE, MICHAEL CHAMBERLAIN, JOHN MARK DIMMICK, CHARLES WM. GRAFF, CAROL S. GAVRAS, JOHN M. HARRINGTON, JONATHAN HIGGINS, JONATHAN B. KLEIMAN, AMY MCGRATH, DENNIS Nova Consulting & Engineering RICH, CHARLES A. RICHTER, DOROTHY ROSENFELD, MORDECAI SCHIFFMAN, ARNOLD SOILTESTING, INC. SPONSORS ($125+) ALLEN, BOYD, III ALPHA GEOSCIENCE DE ANGELIS, JAMES ERM-NORTHEAST

GRAHAM, JACK B. GREENMAN, MIKE HINCE, ERIC KOCH, ELLIS KRAEMER, CURTIS A. MASLANSKY, STEVEN P. MATHEZ, MURIEL PIERIBONI, JOHN PREHODA, BILL SCHECHNER, CLAIRE AND LOUIS SHOPE, STEVEN B. STANDISH, RICHARD STEWART, ROBERT A. TSACOYANNIS, NICHOLAS URBAN-MEAD, RUSSELL B. WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC. (MATCHING GIFT ON BEHALF OF GEORGE BANINO)

CONTRIBUTORS ($50+) ARGUDEN, A. TEFVIK Barish, James M. BECKER, ARTHUR E. BELL, DAVID L. BELT, EDWARD S. BUGH, JAMES CLEMENS, ROBERT H. DAVIS, R. LAURENCE ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE, INC. (ON BE HALF OF JOSEPH TORLUCCI) FAKUNDINY, ROBERT GALLAGHER, EVELYN A. HANLON, KERRY HEINDEL, CRAIG HERMAN KARPEL MEMORIAL FOUND. (ON BEHALF OF FRIENDS OF RHODA TAGLIACOZZO) HIXON, RICHARD HNOTTAVANGE-TELLEN, KEN Hoogerhyde, Kevin HOUSMAN, JOHN J. , JR. Jonathan Paul Associates, Inc. KACZOR, SOFIA KETANI, RALPH Mase, David MOZER, ROBERT PENN, WILLIAM E. RICE, JOHN RHYNER, JOHN ROSS, LOREN RYAN, MICHAEL J. SCHEUING, LAURIE (ATMGS Contributors continued on page 85)

ANGELO TAGLIACOZZO MEMORIAL GEOLOGICAL SCHOLARSHIP TRUST FUND LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS SINCE 1987

(List Updated Through December 2009)

- 85 -

CONTRIBUTORS ($50+) SCOTT, DAVID Sillman, Robert and Roberta STOKES, KURTIS W. SPARROW, LESLIE ST. GERMAIN, DANIEL STONEHILL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. TATLOCK, DEREK TIMMONS, ROBERT TORLUCCI, JOSEPH TYERS, GEORGE WARING, ANDREW D. WENZ, KENNETH P. WERLE, CRAIG WEST, William T. WOHLFORD, THOMAS

DONORS (UP TO $50) BRADLEY, MARGARET BUSA, MARK D. COX, PETER FALDETTA, SARAH FOURNIER, LEROY GANNETT FLEMING, INC. FREDERICK, WILLIAM T.

HARWOOD, DAVID G. HAGER, JUTTA HERGERT, DAVID KING, DANIEL KOWALSKI, RICHARD G. MAHIER, LUKE SASS, DANIEL B. (IN HONOR OF K. E. CASTER) SHAKTI ASSOCIATES SKEHAN, JAMES SUSCA, MICHAEL VOZZA, SCOTT WEINSTOCK, ERIC

ANGELO TAGLIACOZZO MEMORIAL GEOLOGICAL SCHOLARSHIP TRUST FUND LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS SINCE 1987

(List Updated Through December 2009) (con’t from pg. 84)

Why Isn't Your Name On This List? Solve it! Simply see below, and then

move into Action!

Do Your Part Today: Give Back to the Profession That Has Given You So Much !

“Preservation of Every Dollar You Contribute” … is the cornerstone concept of NE-AIPG’s

Angelo Tagliacozzo Memorial Geological Scholarship Perpetual Trust Fund (PTF)

Scholarships are funded from the income on the PTF, So your tax deductible contributions are preserved, perpetually !

Make checks payable to ATMGSPTF, and mail to:

NE-AIPG c/o Dennis G. McGrath The Louis Berger Group, Inc.

565 Taxter Road, Suite 510, Elmsford, NY 10523 E-mail: [email protected]

Become a Perpetual Philanthropist !

- 86 -

- 87 -

- 88 -

Documents

Spring 2011