UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND ) ) ) Plaintiff and Counterclaim ) Defendant, ) ) v. ) ) NEW ENGLAND CONTAINER COMPANY, ) INC; et al., ) ) Defendants and Counterclaim ) Plaintiffs. ) ) ) EMHART INDUSTRIES, INC., ) ) Plaintiff and Counterclaim ) Defendant, ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ) AIR FORCE; et al., ) ) Defendants, Counterclaim ) Plaintiffs, and Third-Party ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) BLACK & DECKER, INC.; et al., ) ) Third-Party Defendants. ) ) EMHART INDUSTRIES, INC., C.A.
06-218 S C.A. 11-023 S PHASE II FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. Introduction Dioxin and other toxic chemical pollution at the Centredale Manor Restoration Project Superfund Site (“Centredale Site” or “Site”) in North Providence, Rhode Island, has led to going on ten years of litigation over which parties are responsible and what is the appropriate remedy. The Court divided the litigation into three phases. (See Eighth Revised Case Management Order, ECF No. 295.)1 At the close of trial in Phase I, the Court found Emhart jointly and severally liable for the release of dioxin at the Site. The Court has now concluded Phase II of the trial 2 and must provide findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the following two issues: (1) whether the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) remedy-selection process was arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise not in accordance with law; and (2) whether Emhart had sufficient cause to refuse to comply with EPA’s June 10, 2014 Administrative Order.
The necessary contributions, if any, of third-party defendants will be addressed in Phase III of the trial. The Court provided a comprehensive background discussion and procedural history of this case in its Phase I opinion and need 1 The present case was also preceded by other insurance coverage litigation. The Centredale Site is truly a litigation gift that keeps on giving. 2 The Court received evidence over the course of thirteen days, concluding on January 19, 2017. (See Trial Trs. 1-13, ECF Nos.
448-57, 494-96.) This included thousands of pages of exhibits from both the United States (Bates numbered “US”) and Emhart (Bates numbered “Emhart”). The parties supplied posttrial briefs thereafter. (See Emhart Post-Trial Brief, ECF No. 461; Gov’t Post-Trial Brief, ECF No. 466; Emhart Post-Trial Reply Brief, ECF No. 497.) Lastly, the Court heard oral argument on April 4, 2017.
(See Trial Tr. 534.) 2 not repeat it here. (See Phase I Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (“Phase I Findings”), ECF No.
405.) However, since issuing the Phase I Findings, there have been three new and important developments in the case relating to the Phase II litigation. First, the parties have come to an agreement regarding the United States’ past response costs in light of the Court’s findings in Phase I. (See Stipulation Regarding United States’ Past Response Costs, ECF No. 444.) As such, the Court need not determine the amount of past response costs. Second, the Government moved to limit the scope of judicial review during Phase II.
To Limit Disc. And Scope of Review, ECF No. 415.) The Government argued that, because judicial review under CERCLA is strictly limited to the administrative record, Emhart should be prohibited from presenting any evidence or arguments not found in the administrative record. Emhart opposed the Government’s motion, arguing that review under CERCLA is not so limited.
(Emhart Obj., ECF No. 416.) The Court denied the Government’s motion without prejudice, thereby allowing Emhart to conduct discovery and present the objected to evidence and arguments at trial. To Limit Disc. And Scope of Review 6, ECF No. 421.) However, the Court has reserved its judgment on the ultimate admissibility of the challenged evidence and arguments to this point.
At 6.) 3 Third, and lastly, the Government moved to exclude certain portions of testimony provided by Emhart’s expert, Mr. Jeffrey Loureiro. To Exclude Certain Test. Of Jeffrey Loureiro, ECF No.
447.) The Government argued that significant portions of Mr. Loureiro’s opinions had not been disclosed in his expert report in violation of Rule 26(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. According to the Government, the admission of Mr. Loureiro’s testimony would be “highly prejudicial. Given the United States’ discovery or inability to counter to explore them such effectively opinions through through rebuttal testimony.” (Id. At 2.) In light of the Government’s concerns, the Court decided to allow the testimony of Mr. Lourerio but provided the Government an opportunity to conduct additional discovery and to designate and utilize rebuttal experts to address the concerns highlighted in the Government’s motion.
Associated Websites
The Court therefore denied that motion as moot. (Text Order of.) In this decision, the Court will set forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law with regards to the question of remedy, and address along the way the various issues reserved to this point. The decision begins with an overview of the CERCLA process by which EPA may choose a response action, as well as the standards of judicial review for challenges to a response action. Next the Court provides specific findings of fact, starting with a history of EPA action at the Site, and then 4 moving into the topics which provide the bases for Emhart’s challenge. After each topic the Court provides conclusions of law. Remedy Selection Congress enacted the Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., “in response to the serious environmental and health risks posed by industrial pollution.” United States v.
Bestfoods, 524 U.S. 51, 55 (1998). To address those risks, CERCLA “grants the President broad power to command government agencies and private parties to clean up hazardous waste sites.” Id. (quoting Key Tronic Corp. United States, 511 U.S. 809, 814 (1994)).
These cleanup efforts are called “response actions,” and may require both “the cleanup or removal of released hazardous substances” as well as other “remedial action. To prevent or minimize the release of hazardous substances.” 42 U.S.C.
§ 9601(23)-(25). EPA acts on the President’s behalf in choosing the appropriate response action. 12580(b)(1), (g). In doing so, EPA must work within the framework provided by CERCLA and the National Contingency Plan (“NCP”). See 42 U.S.C. 9604(a)(1) (requiring EPA to act “consistent with the national contingency plan”); National Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R. § 300, et seq.
In addition, EPA has established various guidance documents to assist in the CERCLA process. While these guidance documents are nonbinding on EPA, they do represent EPA’s collective wisdom as to 5 best practices. 3 The steps required by CERCLA and the NCP, and implemented with the assistance of EPA guidance documents, are outlined below.
National Priorities List The first step in the CERCLA process is placing a site on the National Priorities List (“NPL”). See 42 U.S.C. § 9605(a)(8)(b); 40 C.F.R. A site is appropriately included on the NPL if, for example, EPA determines that a hazardous substance poses “a significant threat to public health.” Id. § 300.425(c)(3)(ii).
A notice and comment period is required before a site is officially placed on the NPL. § 300.425(d)(5). Once the notice and comment process is complete, and if EPA determines that NPL listing is still appropriate, EPA may begin the process of developing a response action for the site. Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study EPA is required to conduct a remedial investigation (“RI”) and feasibility study (“FS”) before choosing a response action. The end goal of the RI/FS process is “to assess site conditions and evaluate alternatives to the extent necessary to select a remedy.” Id.
§ 300.430(a)(2). The first step is the RI, which seeks to “collect data necessary to adequately characterize the 3 (See, e.g., Ms. Taylor Test., Trial Tr. 2, 5:3–9, ECF No.
449 (acknowledging that EPA guidance represents “the collective information and practices developed by EPA through its experience in implementing remedies”).) 6 site for remedial the purpose of alternatives.” developing Id. § and evaluating 300.430(d)(1). EPA effective is given significant leeway to develop a RI process specific to the site. But, at a minimum, EPA must conduct a field investigation (i.e., collect site-specific data) and create a baseline risk assessment. The data collected during the field investigation includes the physical characteristics of the site and the hazardous material present as well as the exposure pathways through which the hazardous material may affect human health and the environment. § 300.430(d)(2)(i)-(vii).
Little did I know how enjoyable and rewarding this is in itself. I cannot praise this instructor enough. Corel draw tutorials in hindi pdf.
Part of this process involves estimating the reasonable maximum exposure that is likely to occur for both current and potential future land use at the site. (EPA, Interim Final Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (“IFRAGS”), vol. I, Emhart579-24.) EPA then uses this data in the baseline risk assessment to understand the extent to which hazardous materials pose a threat to human health and the environment, as well as what would be “acceptable exposure levels” for the site going forward. § 300.430(d)(4). At this point, EPA transitions from the RI process of collecting data to the FS process of finding a remedy. 4 “The 4 While the RI and FS are labeled as separate steps in the CERCLA process, the RI does not end when the FS begins.
Instead, “the RI and FS are interactive processes that are conducted concurrently,” such that “field investigation activities will be 7 national goal of the remedy-selection process is to select remedies that are protective of human health and the environment, that maintain protection over time, and that minimize untreated waste.” Id. § 300.430(a)(1)(i). As an aid to developing potential remedies that accomplish this overarching goal, EPA first establishes what are labeled Preliminary Remediation Goals (“PRGs”) targeting “acceptable exposure levels that are protective of human health and the environment.” Id. § 300.430(e)(2)(i). These PRGs must, among other things, comply with federal and state environmental laws 5 and limit the lifetime cancer risk from carcinogenic exposure. § 300.430(e)(2)(i)(A)(1)-(2).
EPA then develops a range of response alternatives that may achieve those PRGs. In order to choose among the response options for the site, the various alternatives are initially screened using three criteria: (1) effectiveness; (2) implementability; and (3) cost. § 300.430(e)(7)(i)-(iii). At this stage, alternatives that provide “significantly less effectiveness” or are “technically or ongoing during the development and screening of remedial action alternatives.” EPA, The Remedial Investigation: Site Characterization and Treatability Studies, Emhart509-1; see also, 40 C.F.R. § 300.430(e)(1) (“Development of alternatives shall be fully integrated with the site characterization activities of the remedial investigation.”); id. § 300.430(e)(1) (“Preliminary remediation goals should be modified, as necessary, as more information becomes available during the RI/FS.”) 5 These are referred to in CERCLA as Applicable and Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (“ARARs”).
§ 300.505(d)(2)(iii). 8 administratively infeasible” may be eliminated. § 300.430(e)(7)(i)-(ii). Additionally, “costs that are grossly excessive compared to the overall effectiveness of alternatives may be considered as one of several factors used to eliminate alternatives.” Id.
§ 300.430(e)(7)(iii). Alternatives that survive the initial culling proceed to the “detailed analysis of alternatives.” Id. § 300.430(e)(9).
This requires “an assessment of individual alternatives against each of nine evaluation criteria and a comparative analysis that focuses upon the relative performance of each alternative against those criteria.” Id. § 300.430(e)(9)(ii). The nine criteria used by EPA to compare alternatives are: (1) overall protection of human health and the environment; (2) compliance with federal and state environmental laws (i.e., “ARARs” 6); (3) long-term effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment; implementability; (7) (5) cost; short-term (8) state effectiveness; acceptance; and (6) (9) community acceptance. § 300.430(e)(9)(iii)(A)-(I). Once sufficient information has been gathered such that EPA can compare the alternatives based on the nine evaluation criteria, EPA may proceed with remedy selection. Remedy Selection During criteria remedy into selection three EPA categories. Places The the first nine evaluation category, labeled “threshold criteria,” are the criteria “that each alternative must meet in order to § 300.430(f)(1)(i)(A).
Be The eligible two for threshold selection.” criteria are Id. Overall protection of human health and the environment and compliance with ARARs (criteria (1) and (2), above). 7 Once EPA has screened out alternatives that do not meet the threshold criteria, EPA then compares the remaining alternatives based on the balancing second criteria.” category Id.
§ of criteria, labeled 300.430(f)(1)(i)(B). “primary These include long-term effectiveness and permanence, reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment, short-term effectiveness, implementability, and cost (criteria (3)-(7), above). As the label suggests, these “primary balancing criteria” are balanced against one-another. In doing so, the NCP provides certain preferences. For instance, a remedy must be “cost-effective” in that “its costs are proportional to its overall effectiveness.” Id. § 300.430(f)(1)(ii)(D). Emphasize long-term In effectiveness 7 addition, and “balancing reduction of shall toxicity, While compliance with ARARs is one of the “threshold criteria,” there are limited circumstances where a chosen remedy need not meet those standards.
§ 300.430(f)(1)(ii)(C). 10 mobility, or volume through treatment,” thereby focusing on “permanent solutions. To the maximum extent practicable.” Id. § 300.430(f)(1)(ii)(E). However, in the end, the NCP does not dictate exactly how the primary balancing criteria should be weighed. Instead, the NCP provides EPA with considerable discretion to select a remedy that “reflects the scope and purpose of the actions being undertaken and how the action relates to long-term, comprehensive response at the site.” Id. § 300.430(f)(a).
The last criteria.” Id. Category § EPA must consider 300.430(f)(1)(i)(C). The is the “modifying modifying criteria include state and community acceptance (criteria (8) and (9), above).
Download BlackBerry Backup Extractor for free. BlackBerry Backup Extractor - If your BlackBerry has been stolen, lost, broken or BlackBerry Desktop Software fails to. BlackBerry Backup Extractor 2016 Crack Free Download BlackBerry Backup Extractor, download BlackBerry Backup Extractor, BlackBerry Backup Extractor free. Full version of halo combat evolved. Jan 16, 2014. Tags- Free Download BlackBerry Backup Extractor 1.18. 18 full version', 'BlackBerry Backup Extractor 1. Crack blackberry full backup download.
Because the state and community provide formal input during the notice and comment period for the proposed plan, state and community acceptance is typically only considered, at this stage, “to the extent that information is available during the FS.” EPA, A Guide to Preparing Superfund Proposed Plans, Records of Decision, and Other Remedy Selection Decision Documents, Emhart518-33. However, “after public comment is received on the Proposed Plan,” the modifying criteria will be “fully considered.” Id. This means that, “in the final balancing of trade-offs between alternatives upon which the final remedy selection is based, modifying criteria are of equal importance to the balancing criteria.” Id. This does not provide the state or community the power to veto a selected 11 remedy 8; their input is simply considered along with the other balancing criteria.
After completing the “detailed analysis of alternatives” using the nine criteria, EPA chooses a remedy through a “two-step process.” 40 C.F.R. § 300.430(f)(1)(ii). First, EPA “identifies a preferred alternative and presents it to the public in a proposed plan, for review and comment.” Id. The proposed plan functions not only to “supplement the RI/FS,” but also to “provide the public with a reasonable opportunity to comment on the preferred alternative for remedial action, as well as alternative plans under consideration, and to participate in the selection of remedial action at a site.” Id. § 300.430(f)(2).
To accomplish this, the proposed plan must, among other things, “provide a brief summary description of the remedial alternatives evaluated in the detailed analysis” as well as “identify and provide a discussion of the rationale that supports the preferred alternative.” Id. The public is then given “a reasonable opportunity, not less than 30 calendar days, for submission of written and oral comments” as well as an “opportunity for a public meeting.” Id. § 300.430(f)(3)(i)(C)-(D). After receiving public input on the proposed remedy, the second step for remedy selection requires EPA to “review the public comments and consult with the state (or support agency) in order 8 See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 9604(j); id. § 9621(e)(1); 40 C.F.R. § 300.400(d).
12 to determine if the proposed plan remains the most appropriate remedial action for the site or site problem.” Id. § 300.430(f)(1)(ii).
The NCP anticipates that public comments may provide “new information or points of view” that prompt EPA “to modify aspects of the preferred alternative or decide that another alternative provides a more appropriate balance.” Id. § 300.430(f)(4). To the extent EPA makes any significant changes to the remedy, those changes must be documented. 9 EPA must then make the final remedy selection.
§ 300.430(f)(4)(i). Just as EPA is not required to remove all uncertainty at the RI/FS stage regarding the conditions at the site, EPA is also not required to provide complete details of the final remedy at the selection stage. The NCP envisions that EPA will fill in the details of the final remedy during the implementation (or “remedial design”) phase and that the final remedy may require modifications. See generally id. The NCP also allows EPA to reserve decisions regarding how to handle certain portions of the remedy 9 EPA must provide documentation in the record of decision where the final remedy “significantly differs from the original proposal.” Id.
§ 300.430(f)(3)(ii). If the change is so drastic that it could not have been “reasonably anticipated by the public” based on the information in the proposed plan and administrative record, then EPA must allow for an additional notice and comment period on the revised plan.
§ 300.430(f)(3)(ii)(B). If the changes to the plan could have been “reasonably anticipated,” then EPA need only “include a discussion in the record of decision of the significant changes and reasons for such changes.” Id. § 300.430(f)(3)(ii)(A). 13 until remedial design. See, e.g., id.
§ 300.825(a)(1)-(2). This process is discussed below in the “Remedial Design and Remedial Action” section.
Contact Us
Documentation of the Remedy-Selection Process After selecting the final remedy, EPA must “establish an administrative record that contains the documents that form the basis for the selection of a response action.” 40 C.F.R. An important piece of the administrative record is the Record of Decision (“ROD”), which includes “all facts, analyses of facts, and site-specific policy determinations considered” by EPA in selecting the final remedy. § 300.430(f)(5)(i). The ROD is essentially EPA’s justification for its decision, explaining, for example, “how the selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment” and proportional to its costs.” part of this “responsiveness “provides effectiveness Id. § 300.430(f)(5)(ii)(A), (D). As justification, summary,” overall the which ROD is “a also must written include summary a of significant comments, criticisms, and new relevant information submitted during the public comment period and the lead agency response to each issue.” Id.
§ 300.430(f)(3)(i)(F). Lastly, if EPA chooses to reserve certain decisions for a later date, it may, “where appropriate, provide a commitment for further analysis.” Id. § 300.430(f)(5)(iii)(D). 14 The administrative record is not a static document. Even after the final remedy is selected, EPA is responsible for updating the administrative record where necessary. For example, if the ROD did not address a portion of the response action or reserved certain decisions until the implementation phase, EPA must document those later decisions in the administrative record.
§ 300.825(a)(1). Additionally, if EPA decides to modify the final remedy during remedial design, it must document those changes either through an “explanation of significant differences” or a ROD amendment, as appropriate. Remedial Design and Remedial Action The final step is “the development of the actual design of the selected remedy and implementation of the remedy through construction.” Id. § 300.435(a). The NCP labels this as the “remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA) stage.” Id.
While the ROD establishes the final remedy, the NCP leaves it to the RD/RA stage for EPA to determine the remedy’s final design. The “initial building block in developing” the final design is the information contained in the RI/FS, but EPA guidance also envisions that additional “data necessary during acquisition” RD/RA. And EPA, “sample Scoping the analysis” Remedial will be Design, Emhart516-2. EPA then recommends going through multiple design 10 See infra note 11. 15 phases before coming to a “final design” and beginning construction. Once a final design is complete, EPA must – as a final notice to the public - “issue a fact sheet and provide, as appropriate, a public briefing prior to the initiation of remedial action.” 40 C.F.R.
§ 300.435(c)(3). EPA may then implement the remedy, and as long as the “remedial action objectives and remediation goals in the ROD” are accomplished, the CERCLA response action process is largely complete. § 300.435(f)(1); 42 U.S.C.
§ 9621(d) (stating that the response action must “attain a degree of cleanup. Which assures protection of human health and the environment”). If strict adherence to the final design proves unworkable at any point, EPA guidance provides for significant “flexibility” to account for “any constraining factors of the particular site.” EPA, Scoping the Remedial Design, Emhart516-1. The NCP also foresees that “additional work” may be “needed as a result of such unforeseen situations as newly discovered sources, types, or quantities of hazardous substances.” 40 C.F.R. § 300.435(e)(1)(i). Because the “chief task” of RD/RA is “to achieve the goals of the Record of Decision. In a timely manner,” EPA, Scoping the Remedial Design, Emhart516-1, as opposed to blind adherence to any particular design, EPA is permitted to change the remedial design 16 at any point.
The NCP simply requires that sufficient notice and opportunity to comment is provided to the public. Unilateral Administrative Order The parties responsible for the release of the hazard materials at the site are liable for the costs associated with the response action. See 42 U.S.C.
EPA can either complete the response action and seek reimbursement from the responsible parties or require the responsible parties to implement the response action themselves. Where EPA determines that “there may be an imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or the environment,” EPA is authorized to issue a unilateral administrative order (“UAO”) requiring the responsible parties to implement the response action “as may be necessary to protect public health and welfare and the environment.” Id. If a responsible party “willfully violates, or fails or refuses to comply with” the UAO, EPA may seek an order “in the 11 If, after additional data collection or during construction, EPA determines that the final design will “differ significantly from the remedy selected in the ROD with respect to scope, performance, or cost,” EPA must provide the public notice of this change. § 300.435(c)(2). Where the differences “significantly change but do not fundamentally alter the remedy selected in the ROD,” the lead agency will publish an “explanation of significant differences.” Id.
§ 300.435(c)(2)(i). Alternatively, if EPA does “fundamentally alter” the final remedy in its final design, EPA must amend the ROD and provide for another period of notice and comment. § 300.435(c)(2)(ii).
17 appropriate United States district court to enforce” the UAO. § 9606(b)(1).
Additionally, if the district court finds that the responsible party refused to comply with the UAO without “sufficient cause,” the responsible party is subject to daily fines during the period of non-compliance as well as treble damages for any work EPA performed at the site. § 9606(b)(1), 9607(c)(3). By regulation, the daily fine amount is $37,500 per day for every day of non-compliance between December 6, 2013 and November 2, 2015, and $54,789 per day thereafter. §§ 19.2, 19.4. Scope of Review Having described the remedy-selection process as outlined by CERCLA and the NCP, the Court will now provide its findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding EPA’s remedy-selection process at the Site. Before doing so, however, the Court must first determine what evidence and arguments it will consider, as well as the standard of review. As discussed previously, the Government moved, pre-trial, to limit the scope of discovery and judicial review.
According to the Government, the Court should not consider evidence and arguments not contained in the administrative record when making its determination about the appropriateness of EPA’s chosen remedy. The Court denied the Government’s motion without prejudice, permitting Emhart to take discovery and present evidence and arguments at trial not contained in the administrative record. The Court “reserved ruling on the admissibility of any 18 particular extra-record evidence until the time of trial.” (Order Den.
To Limit Disc. And Scope of Review 6.) The Government has reiterated its arguments at trial and in its post-trial briefs, and Emhart has again responded. (See Gov’t Post-Trial Brief 8-13; Emhart Post-Trial Reply Brief 1-22.) The two questions the Court must answer are: (1) whether the Court should consider evidence not contained in the administrative record; and (2) whether the Court should consider Emhart’s arguments that were not made during the notice and comment period. What Evidence Should the Court Consider? CERCLA provides the following limitation to judicial review: “In any judicial action under this chapter, judicial review of any issues concerning the adequacy of any response action taken or ordered by the President shall be limited to the administrative record.” 42 U.S.C.
§ 9613(j)(1) (emphasis added). CERCLA reiterates this limitation when describing the applicable standard of review: “In considering objections raised in any judicial action under this chapter, the court shall uphold the President’s decision in selecting the response action unless the objecting party can demonstrate, on the administrative record, that the decision was arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 19 Id. § 9613 (j)(2) (emphasis added). 12 As these provisions make clear, “under CERCLA, judicial review normally is limited to the administrative record as it existed at the time of the challenged agency action.” United States v. JG-24, Inc., 478 F.3d 28, 33-34 (1st Cir. 2007); see also Murphy v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 469 F.3d 27, 31 (1st Cir.
2006) (“The Supreme Court has consistently stated that review of administrative decisions is ordinarily limited to consideration of the decision of the agency. And of the evidence on which it was based.”) (internal quotations omitted). This ensures that the Court “takes into account ‘neither more nor less information than did the agency when it made its decision.’” Linemaster Switch Corp.
The University of Rhode Island is the State’s public learner-centered research university. We are a community joined in a common quest for knowledge. The University is committed to enriching the lives of its students through its land, sea, and urban grant traditions. URI is the only public institution in Rhode Island offering undergraduate, graduate, and professional students the distinctive educational opportunities of a major research university. Our undergraduate, graduate, and professional education, research, and outreach serve Rhode Island and beyond.
Students, faculty, staff, and alumni are united in one common purpose: to learn and lead together. Dan Briand Greater Boston Area Sr.
VP at BayCoast Bank Banking Education Coyle Cassidy 1970 — 1974 University of Rhode Island B.A. Experience BayCoast Bank September 2009 - Present Sovereign Bank 2004 - 2009 Compass Bank 2002 - 2004 Baybank 1979 - 1997 Skills Mortgage Banking, Mortgage Lending, Residential Mortgages, Credit, Banking, FHA, FHA financing, Refinance, Loans, VA loans, USDA, Loan Origination, Small Business Lending, Construction Loans, Consumer Lending, Commercial Lending, Lines Of Credit, Reverse Mortgages, Commercial Banking, Mortgage Underwriting, Government Loans, Commercial Mortgages, Underwriting, Retail Banking. Dan Chace Greater Boston Area Staff Acupuncturist at NESCA Health, Wellness and Fitness Education 2011 — 2014 L.Ac., Chinese and Japanese Acupuncture Styles University of Rhode Island 1992 — 1996 BS Zoology Experience NESCA (Neuropsychology and Educational Services for Children and Adolescents) October 2014 - Present Chace Acupuncture July 2014 - Present New England School of Acupuncture 2011 - Present The Fessenden School August 1998 - June 2011 Skills Acupuncture, Alternative Medicine, Wellness, Holistic Health, Teaching, Pain Management, Sports Injuries, Traditional Chinese., Headaches. Dan Ciccone Branford, Connecticut Sales Engineer at Datto Inc. Information Technology and Services Education 2011 — 2012 Computer Technology/Computer Systems Technology University of Rhode Island 2000 — 2004 Bachelor of Applied Science (B.A.Sc.), Computer and Information Sciences and Support Services Experience Datto Inc.
Dan Connors Greater Boston Area Director of Manufacturing Engineering at CeQur Medical Devices Education University of Rhode Island 1981 — 1985 B.S. Dan Cotta Providence, Rhode Island Area President, American Engineering, Inc. Civil Engineering Education University of Rhode Island 1979 — 1983 BSCE, Civil Engineering Experience American Engineering, Inc. 1989 - Present Skills Subdivisions, Land Development, Erosion Control, Site Plans, Stormwater Management, GIS systems, Land Surveying, Zoning, Septic System Design, Site Development, Soil, Civil Engineering, GPS, Surveying, Legal Descriptions, Drainage, Site Planning, Topographic Surveys, Land Use Planning, Sewer, ArcGIS, Boundary, Grading, Hydrology, Construction, Road, GIS, Septic Systems, Environmental Permitting, Transportation., ALTA Surveys, Water, Highways, Water Resources.
Dan Creedon Washington D.C. Metro Area Federal Funding Executive Financial Services Education MBA University of Rhode Island Experience IBM Global Financing January 2013 - Present Cisco Systems Capital 2003 - May 2011 IBM Global Financing 1985 - 2003 Skills Data Center, Cisco, Channel, VoIP, Cloud Computing, Channel Management, Security, Call Center, Professional Services, Managed Services, Wireless, Product Management, IBM, IBM Global Financing, Cross Border Financing., Permanent Establishment., Enterprise Selling, Financial Solutions., Complex Financial Sales, Executive Selling Skills, Enterprise License. Dan Custer Providence, Rhode Island Senior Building Engineer at Textron Inc. Executive Office Education University of Rhode Island 1983 — 1987 Experience Textron Inc. September 2003 - Present Textron Inc. January 1999 - September 2003 Textron Inc.
September 1996 - September 1999 Textron Inc. September 1995 - September 1996 Skills CAD, Manufacturing, AutoCAD, Continuous Improvement, Facilities Management, Systems Engineering, Microsoft Project, Project Management, Electricians, Process Improvement, HVAC, HVAC Controls. Dan D'Alessio North Providence, Rhode Island Machinery Professional Machinery Education 2000 — 2003 none- 12 credits, Labor Law/ History 1994 — 1998 Post Associate Certificate 30 additional credits to AA degree, Management/Marketing University of Rhode Island 1973 — 1974 none- one year, Physical Education 1971 — 1973 Associate in Arts, Psychology, art Central High School Experience Super Stock Picker April 2013 - Present W.R. Cobb 2009 - 2011 The Home Depot April 2005 - January 2009 The Narragansett Bay Commission February 1984 - September 2004 Skills Inventory Control, Distribution Center., Inventory Management, Forklift Operator, Project Management, Microsoft Excel, Public Speaking, Process Scheduler, Employee Relations, Customer Satisfaction, Operations Management. Dan DanPiscione Providence, Rhode Island Area Manager at Papa Gino's Restaurants Education University of Rhode Island 2003 — 2007 business CCRI Experience Papa Gino's August 2012 - Present Papa Gino's October 2009 - August 2012 Ronzio April 2008 - September 2009 Skills Restaurant Management, Customer Service, Restaurants, Inventory Management, Food Service, Food & Beverage, Microsoft Office, Menu Development, Microsoft Excel, Hospitality, Food, Microsoft Word, Management, Catering, Sales, Retail, PowerPoint, Team Building, Customer Satisfaction, Time Management. Dan DeCiccio Orlando, Florida Area Attorney at Law at DeCiccio & Johnson, Law Practice Education 1980 — 1981 JD, Law 1978 — 1979 JD, Law University of Rhode Island 1972 — 1976 BA, Political Science Experience DeCiccio & Johnson 1993 - Present Orlando,Fl 1986 - 1993 Rumberger, Kirk, Caldwell, Cabaniss & Burke, P.A. 1982 - 1986 Skills Wrongful Death, Automobile Accidents, Employment Law, Workers Compensation, Traumatic Brain Injury, Civil Litigation, Personal Injury, Litigation, Trial Practice, Appeals, Product Liability, Personal Injury., Public Liability, Torts, Commercial Litigation.
Dan Deery, Sr. Dan Edenbaum Greater Philadelphia Area Owner, Drago Illumination Inc Architecture & Planning Education 1986 — 1998 MFA, Architectural Lighting University of Rhode Island 1982 — 1986 BFA, Theatrical Lighting Experience Drago Illumination Inc September 2002 - Present L2AEI 2005 - Present KlingStubbins 2003 - 2009 Grenald Waldron Associates June 1988 - September 2002 Skills Architectural Lighting, Residential Homes, Retail, Exterior, Pharmaceutics, Commercial Buildings, Lighting, Interior Architecture, Lighting Design, Lighting Control, Sustainable Design, Interior Design, Rendering. Danelle Guglielmetti Providence, Rhode Island Area Merchandiser Wholesale Education University of Rhode Island 2003 — 2006 BA, English Cranston West Experience Tanya Creations, Inc. March 2014 - Present LDC, Inc. November 2012 - March 2014 Scorpio Accessories April 2012 - November 2012 Style Accessories October 2009 - April 2012 Chelo's March 2003 - July 2008 Skills Fashion, Trend, Sourcing, Product Development, Merchandising, Product Management, Microsoft Office, Forecasting, Customer Service, Inventory Management.
Dan Frazier Tampa, Florida Seeking Construction Mangement Opprtunities Construction Education 1979 — 1983 BS Degree, Hotel/Hospitality Management University of Rhode Island Business Experience Zirkelbach Construction November 2013 - May 2015 King Arms Controls March 2012 - May 2013 Simon Property Group November 2010 - February 2012 J. Goodison and Son April 2010 - October 2010 Greencore June 2008 - December 2009 Century 21 April 2009 - October 2009 Essex Newbury North Contracting January 2005 - June 2008 D. Gorman Greater Boston Area Corp. Dan Grasso Providence, Rhode Island Area Public Relations Chairman at Sigma Chi: Delta Sigma Chapter Marketing and Advertising Education University of Rhode Island 2014 — 2016 Marketing/Marketing Management, General 2012 — 2014 Business Administration and Management, General Bishop Hendricken High School 2008 — 2012 High School Diploma Experience GNC July 2014 - Present Silent Sherpa: Energy Consulting & Portfolio Management July 2014 - October 2014 Starkweather & Shepley Insurance Brokerage Inc.
May 2014 - August 2014 Emmanuel College March 2013 - May 2014 Starkweather & Shepley Insurance Brokerage Inc. May 2013 - August 2013 Dave's Marketplace February 2011 - August 2012 Skills Social Networking, Event Planning, Customer Service, Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, Social Media, Leadership, Sales, Microsoft Office, Time Management, Teamwork, Facebook. Dan Groben Greater Memphis Area Strategic Planning for Small Businesses & Individuals Management Consulting Education 1991 — 1996 Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.), Finance & International Business University of Rhode Island 1982 — 1986 BSIE, Industrial Engineering Experience Servant Advisors Group LLC 2010 - Present Business Owner & Independent Strategic Consultant 2002 - 2010 Cap Gemini Ernst & Young 2000 - 2001 Swedish Match 1997 - 2000 PepsiCo 1989 - 1996 Skills Operational Excellence, Six Sigma.
Dan Hughes Greater New York City Area V.P. Of Business Development at Path 56 Media Marketing and Advertising Education 2004 — 2008 Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA), Business Administration and Management, General University of Rhode Island Experience Path 56 Media October 2014 - Present DB Interactive Inc.
October 2014 - Present Leadnomics July 2013 - November 2014 Matomy Media Group February 2013 - July 2013 MediaWhiz Holdings, LLC February 2012 - February 2013 MediaWhiz Holdings LLC November 2010 - February 2012 National Securities Corp. July 2009 - October 2010 Skills Affiliate Marketing, Lead Generation, Online Lead Generation, Email Marketing, PPC, Online Advertising, CPL, Customer Acquisition, Mobile Marketing, Media Buying, SEM, SEO, Online Marketing, Analytics, Advertising, Marketing, Digital Media, Integrated Marketing, Web Analytics, Display Advertising, Google Adwords, Web Marketing, Business Development, Conversion Optimization, E-commerce, Direct Marketing. Dania Schnell Providence, Rhode Island Area Primary Care Sales Representative at Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.
Pharmaceuticals Education University of Rhode Island 2006 — 2010 Bachelor of Science (B.S.) and Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Biology, General Science, and Secondary Education Experience Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. Daniel Arellano Baltimore, Maryland Area Cost Engineering Program Manager Global Supply Management at Stanley Black & Decker, Inc.
Consumer Goods Education 2011 — 2013 Master of Business Administration (MBA), MBA, 4.0 University of Rhode Island 2006 — 2007 Master's degree, Electrical Engineering, GPA: 3.8 2001 — 2005 Bachelor's degree, Electrical Engineering, Cumulative Grade Average: 95/100 Experience Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. Daniel Balfour Portland, Maine John Turner Consulting Regional Manager Civil Engineering Education University of Rhode Island 1993 — 1995 civil engineering 1991 — 1993 industrial eng Hudson Falls High School 1987 — 1991 Experience John Turner Consulting, Inc. February 2012 - Present CivEng Technical Services Corp. Daniel Bermingham Washington D.C. Metro Area Partner at DyerBermingham Oil & Energy Education University of Rhode Island Bachelor of Applied Science (B.A.Sc.), Computer Engineering Experience DyerBermingham January 2012 - Present KLDB Consulting May 2009 - March 2012 Neetal Energy May 2009 - November 2010 JPMorgan Chase June 2005 - May 2009 Skills French, Leveraged Finance, Spanish, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Excel, Strategic Planning, New Business Development, Outlook, Social Media, Coaching, PowerPoint, Public Speaking, Fundraising, Forecasting, Event Planning, Pricing.
Daniel Blount Nantucket, Massachusetts Assistant Harbor Master at Town of Nantucket Maritime Education University of Rhode Island 2006 — 2010 Bachelor of Science, Aquaculture and Fisheries Technology Experience Town of Nantucket November 2012 - Present Prudence Island Volunteer Fire Department October 2004 - Present Clean the Bay, Inc May 2010 - November 2011 Blount Brother's Ground Maintenance June 1997 - November 2011 DeAlteris & Associates June 2008 - October 2009 Two Storey Building December 2008 - September 2009 Save the Bay July 2009 - August 2009 Skills Boat, Maritime. Daniel Boxman Brooklyn, New York Licensed Mortgage Loan Originator at United Northern Mortgage Bankers, Ltd. Financial Services Education 2009 — 2012 Bachelor of Science (B.S.), Mathematics University of Rhode Island 2007 — 2009 Finance, General Experience United Northern Mortgage Bankers, Ltd. August 2013 - Present Chase November 2012 - July 2013 Titleland Agency January 2012 - August 2012 United Pet Supply January 2010 - January 2012 Skills Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Office, Mathematical Analysis, Outstanding., Leadership, Insurance, Training, Residential Mortgages, Loan Origination, Mortgage Lending, Task Driven, Dependable Team Player, Creative Problem Solving, Java, Customer Service, Sales, Refinance, Credit, Microsoft Word, Underwriting, Real Estate, Investment Properties. Daniel Catizone Asbury Park, New Jersey Sea Turtle Tagging Intern (USGS) Environmental Services Education University of Rhode Island 2011 — 2015 Bachelor of Science (B.S.), Wildlife Conservation Biology Experience U.S. Daniel Catterson Reseda, California Apprentice Superintendent at The Los Angeles Country Club Environmental Services Education University of Rhode Island 2008 — 2012 Enivronmental Horticulture and Turgrass Management, Environmental Horticulture/Turfgrass Management Experience The Los Angeles Country Club November 2013 - Present Lake Of Isles April 2012 - September 2013 Skills Construction, Construction Management, Process Scheduler, Project Planning, Water, Budgets, Renovation, Leadership, Management, Landscaping, Project Coordination, Public Speaking, Landscape Design, Team Leadership.
Daniel Chaves-Email Worcester, Massachusetts Research Education Universidade de Lisboa, Faculty of Medicine/Instituto de Medicina Molecular 2005 — 2015 Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Biomedical Sciences Universidade de Lisboa, Faculty of Sciences 2000 — 2004 Licentiate degree (Bachelor's + Masters equivalent), Microbiology and Genetics, 18/20 University of Rhode Island 1997 — 2000 Bachelor of Science, Microbiology Experience University of Massachusetts Medical Schoool February 2005 - Present Skills Microsoft Office, Research, Photoshop, C. Elegans Genetics, Immunocytochemistry, Protein biochemistry, small RNA-Seq, Illustrator, High Throughput., Mammalian Cell Culture, Molecular Cloning, Recombinant Protein., CLIP-seq, RNA-Seq, ChIP-Seq and ChIP-qPCR. Daniel Dickerman Providence, Rhode Island Area Adjunct Professor at University of Rhode Island Higher Education Education University of Rhode Island 1988 — 1992 Bachelor of Science (B.S.), Accounting Experience ForensicSoft 2005 - Present University of Rhode Island September 2004 - Present U.S. Department of the Treasury March 2003 - Present U.S.
Department of the Treasury November 1995 - Present Skills Computer Security, Digital Forensics, EnCase, Computer Forensics, Vulnerability Assessment, Linux, Entrepreneurship, Data Analysis, Network Security, Analysis, Forensic Analysis, Security, Business Development, Teaching, Windows, Ubuntu, Expert Witness, Research, Information Security, Public Speaking, Law Enforcement, Cybercrime, Criminal Investigations. Daniel Dittman West Palm Beach, Florida Area Project Manager Aviation & Aerospace Education University of Rhode Island 2004 — 2008 Bachelor's degree, Mechanical Engineering Experience Belcan Engineering April 2015 - Present Thielsch Engineering August 2008 - January 2015 Skills Project Engineering, Engineering, Energy, Power Generation, Solidworks, AutoCAD, Energy Efficiency, Inspection, Root Cause Analysis, Failure Analysis, Materials, Matlab, Engineering Management, Welding, Pressure Vessels, Piping, Heat Exchangers, SolidWorks. Daniel Federici Greater New York City Area Sales Consultant at Paychex Inc Human Resources Education University of Rhode Island 2003 — 2007 Bachelor's degree, Communications Experience Paychex February 2015 - Present Mpowermed, Inc.
October 2014 - January 2015 Paychex June 2007 - September 2014 Skills Cold Calling, Salesforce.com, Sales Process, Selling, Lead Generation, Sales Presentations, Building Relationships, Sales Management, Customer Retention, Account Management, Management, Sales, Relationship Building, Customer Service, Team Building. Daniel Ferrigno Silver Spring, Maryland I provide solutions that translate complex human and technology problems into opportunities. Information Technology and Services Education Master's Degree, Computer Information Systems Master's Degree, National Security Policy Studies University of Rhode Island Bachelor's Degree, Communications/Pol. Science/Russian Studies Master's Degree, Urban and Environmental Planning Experience Walton Management Services, Inc. 2009 - 2015 Strategy Gamers, LLC 2005 - 2008 Independent Consultant / Contractor 1996 - 2008 ASTHO 2001 - 2004 Savanet, Inc. 1998 - 2000 The U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Liquidation, Receiverships Office 1991 - 1995 Skills IT Strategy, IT Service Management, IT Management, Information Technology, Program Management, Business Process, Process Improvement, Change Management, Business Analysis, Business Intelligence, Requirements Analysis, Business Continuity., Requirements Gathering, Disaster Recovery, Project Planning, Project Management, Software Documentation, Databases, SharePoint, SQL, SDLC, Budgets.
Daniel Fierro Maitland, Florida Technical Writer at Abila Computer Software Education 1994 — 1996 MS, Technical and Professional Communications University of Rhode Island 1982 — 1987 BA, English Experience Abila, Inc. March 2015 - Present The Criterion Group, Inc. February 2014 - February 2015 King Sales Group, Inc. Daniel Finan Greater Boston Area Youth Counselor at Boys and Girls Club of Souhegan Valley Philanthropy Education University of Rhode Island 2014 — 2018 Bachelor of Science (BS), Electrical and Electronics Engineering Milford High School 2010 — 2014 High school diploma Experience Boys and Girls Club of Souhegan Valley VideographerTown of Milford, NHJune 2011 - October 2013 Skills Customer Service, Public Speaking, Nonprofits, Research, Event Planning, Microsoft Word, Social Media, Strategic Planning, Program Development, Microsoft Excel.
Daniel Finn Saunderstown, Rhode Island IT Systems Administrator Information Technology and Services Education University of Rhode Island 1976 — 1981 BA, English Experience Cathedral Art Metal Co., Inc. July 2015 - Present VMS BioMarketing November 2010 - January 2015 Baldwin & Lyons, Inc. December 2009 - August 2010 BSA LifeStructures 2006 - 2010 Borders Books and Music July 1992 - September 2003 Skills SharePoint, Visio, Microsoft Office, IT Operations, Customer Service, IT Management, Active Directory, Windows Server, Business Analysis, Help Desk Support, Project Management, Strategic Planning, Microsoft Exchange, Management, Team Leadership, Software Documentation, VMware, Vendor Management, Disaster Recovery, Process Improvement, Music, CIC 4.0 CaaS, Interaction Dialer 4.0, Interaction Recorder. Daniel Geary Denver, Colorado Sr. Daniel Grandfield San Diego, California Licensed Maritime Captain Maritime Education University of Rhode Island 2004 — 2008 Bachelor's degree, Maritime Studies Experience Hilton Del Mar December 2009 - Present SEA TOW San Diego June 2010 - September 2012 Scituate Harbormaster May 2008 - November 2009 Skills USCG Captain, Ablebodied Seaman, TWIC Card, AED, First Aid, Lifeboatman Certified, Diving, Boat, GMDSS, Seamanship, Shiphandling, Maritime Security, STCW, Vessels, Scuba Diving, Celestial Navigation, Vessel Operations, ARPA, Marine Operations, Maritime Safety, Navigation.
Daniel Henegan Greater New York City Area Sage 300 CRE Consultant at CPA Technology, LLC Real Estate Education 1981 — 1982 University of Rhode Island 1978 — 1980 Accounting, Geology, English Literature Experience CPA Technology, LLC November 2014 - Present Weichert, Realtors Chatham, NJ May 2012 - October 2014 Weichert Realtors April 2010 - May 2012 Accordant Company, LLC October 2005 - December 2009 Henegan Construction Co. January 1981 - December 2001 Skills Real Estate, Residential, Construction, First Time Home Buyers, Sellers, First Time Buyers, Resale, Rentals, Seniors, Home, Investment Properties, Negotiation, Selling. Daniel Hoffenberg Greater Boston Area Director of Operations Atlantic Ambulance Hospital & Health Care Education University of Rhode Island 1994 — 1998 Business Administration, Marketing Experience Atlantic Ambulance Service - A Division of Cataldo Ambulance October 2014 - Present Cataldo Ambulance Inc. September 2007 - Present Salem Five Bank May 2006 - September 2007 Citizens Bank - Woburn, MA May 2004 - April 2006 Citibank- San Diego, CA April 2003 - April 2004 Prudential Securities - LaJolla, CA May 2001 - May 2002 Skills Financial Analysis, Banking, Process Improvement, Sales, Business Development, Account Management, New Business Development, Event Management, Business Strategy. Daniel Joubert New London/Norwich, Connecticut Area Member of the Planning Board in the Town of Westerly Defense & Space Education University of Rhode Island 2005 — 2009 Bachelors, Civil Engineering Experience The Town of Westerly January 2013 - Present Resource Control Associates, Inc. February 2010 - March 2012 Skills AutoCAD, Water, Engineering, Environmental Compliance, Construction Management, Solidworks, Groundwater, Microsoft Excel, Structural Analysis, MathCAD, Groundwater Remediation, Civil Engineering, Stormwater Management. Daniel Kment Providence, Rhode Island Area Design/Build Command Centers Information Technology and Services Education University of Rhode Island Bachelor of Science (BS), Business Administration and Management, General Experience Constant Technologies, Inc.
February 1998 - Present Dun and Bradstreet July 1996 - December 1997 Skills Customer Service, Project Management, Critical Thinking, Training, Data Analysis, Leadership Development, Customer Satisfaction, Cross-functional Team., Vendor Management, Operations Management, Strategy, Account Management, Business Development, Business Planning, Business Strategy, Process Improvement, Program Management, Integration, Cloud Computing, Direct Sales, Disaster Recovery, Product Management, Solution Selling, Strategic Partnerships. Daniel Kreisler Greater New York City Area President, Acton Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Pharmaceuticals Education University of Rhode Island 1974 — 1979 BS, Pharmacy Experience Acton Pharmaceuticals, Inc May 2009 - Present Noven Pharmaceuticals (fka JDS Pharma) August 2007 - May 2009 JDS Pharmaceuticals July 2004 - August 2007 Forest 1986 - 2002 Sterling Drug, Inc 1982 - 1986 Skills Business Development, Pharmaceutical Industry, Regulatory Affairs, Oncology, Pharmaceutical Sales, Biotechnology, Technology Transfer, Drug Development, Managed Care, Clinical Development, Pharmaceutics, Commercialization. Danielle Beaudoin Warwick, Rhode Island Exercise physiologist at The Miriam Hospital Health, Wellness and Fitness Education University of Rhode Island 2000 — 2008 Bachelor of Applied Science (B.A.Sc.), Kinesiology and Exercise Science 2003 — 2003 Certificate, Massage Therapy/Therapeutic Massage Experience The Miriam Hospital September 2008 - Present Skills Fitness, Wellness, Healthcare, Personal Training, Strength Training, Microsoft Office, Exercise Physiology, Customer Service, Public Speaking, Nutrition.
Expert Witness No.1480 Profession: Professional Engineer and Consultant with experience, education, and training in the fields of Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering and Forensic Engineering. Expert 1480's practice currently focuses on providing consulting services to legal, insurance, governmental, and corporate clients throughout North America. Specific areas of expertise include vehicle collision reconstruction, commercial vehicle crash investigation and analysis, highway work zone traffic control, traffic control devices, vehicle system components and dynamics, and driver factors. Expert 1480 has provided consulting services in 11 states including expert witness testimony at the deposition or jury trial levels in Florida and Illinois. With a professional and academic background in both Mechanical Engineering and Civil Engineering, Expert 1480 investigates product and premises liability and mechanical failure cases.
Expert 1480 applies his forensic expertise to construction inspection and materials testing of commercial, residential, and high‐rise buildings. His professional experience includes inspection of structural elements, masonry, steel reinforcing, cables, formwork, bolts, and fireproofing.
Included areas of expertise are construction plan compliance, construction equipment failure, construction and materials defects, worksite accidents and other worksite issues as they relate to construction. Education: University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering, 2002 University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida Masters in Civil Engineering, 2009 Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois Advanced Traffic Accident Reconstruction, 2008 Member of Chi Epsilon National Engineering Honor Society for outstanding academic achievement Licensure & Professional Engineer, State of Florida: American Concrete Institute (ACI) Certified Structural Masonry Inspector Experience: Bloomberg Consulting, Inc. – Tampa, Florida 2010 – Senior Forensic Engineer. Vehicular Crash Investigation & Reconstruction.
Mechanical Failure Analysis. Product and Premises Liability.
Facility and Site Safety Investigation. Electronic Event Recorder Data Retrieval. Construction Materials and Compliance Inspection & Testing. Construction Accident Investigation & Reconstruction Armstrong Forensic Engineers, Inc.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |