We take a different approach to managing environmental liabilities. Where others take a cookie-cutter approach, we focus on developing the right solution. This involves a sharp focus on the site level combined with an understanding of the client’s environmental program, business drivers, and the equitable balance of risk and reward.
Although the development of an environmental remediation solution can be standardized, our experience tells us that the evaluation of site-specific data is crucial to achieve the ultimate remediation goal. This perspective also applies to evaluation of a contracting approach: what is the best—the most practical—solution to achieving our client’s portfolio goals, tailored to real-world requirements with the flexibility to support changing needs?
The most practical solution often centers on life cycle management and the development of a project progression plan that evaluates the costs, benefits, and risks of alternative paths to closure. Day-to-day tools include regulatory consulting, project management, engineering design, and technical field services such as system optimization, O&M, and sampling and monitoring. Remedial strategies include risk-based closure as well as innovative, traditional, and green technologies, as well as natural attenuation. We actively pursue the optimal strategy through our respectful relationships with local regulating authorities. Based on the contracting scenario and business strategy, insurance products may be a component of the customized liability management solution.
GES has been helping our clients define, understand, and manage their environmental liabilities for more than a quarter-century. We know from experience: When program goals are well defined, they ultimately can be achieved. The communication, alignment, and development of shared risk opportunities that combine the client’s goals and the consultant’s expertise offer tremendous potential for successful liability-risk reduction programs to both client and consultant.
We can develop and safely execute contracts under a variety of scenarios with the flexibility to combine approaches and pricing mechanisms for the greatest benefit to contract stakeholders.
- Liability transfer of existing regulatory obligations with firm cost-to-closure pricing
- Cost-to-closure to achieve no further action approval
- Pay-for-performance for a specific scope of work
- Cost-to-objective based on contaminant concentration reduction
- Closure-by-portfolio with cost/labor allocation based on evolving needs