Nicholas Albergo, DEE, PE.
0 reviews
Listed in Chemistry, Environmental Issues
- 4019 East Fowler Avenue Tampa, FL 33617
- (813) 971 3882
- www.ghd.com
- Nicholas.Albergo@ghd.com
Education and Credentials:
PhD. Candidate - Chemical Engineering (Admitted 08/05)
Master of Science – Civil Engineering 08/86
Bachelor of Science - Engineering Science 08/86
Master of Science – Civil Engineering 08/86
Bachelor of Science - Engineering Science 08/86
Specialties:
environmental / geotechnical / chemical engineering including well design, landfill design, environmental site assessment and remedial design, advanced hydrogeology, geochemistry, contaminant fate and transport, risk assessment, water/wastewater quality/treatment design, regulatory compliance, waste characterization, ground subsidence and structural settlement evaluation.
Experience:
Nick has been previously qualified as an expert in the fields of environmental and chemical engineering, engineering geology, forensic analysis, facility operations, environmental site assessment, waste characterization, soil assessment, transport, fate and migration of contaminants and fugitive emissions, risk analysis, and remedial design and performance. Both his academic and professional experience also includes substantial training in the fields of biology and chemistry.
He has served as an expert during jury and non-jury trials, within State, Federal and international court systems, and has represented plaintiffs and defendants evenly. He has also assisted counsel with Daubert challenges to the admissibility of expert testimony based on Fed. R. Evid. 702, where he has provided support or expert testimony regarding a factors analysis including: 1) Was it subjected to peer-reviewed publication? 2) Does it have a known or knowable error rate? 3) Is it generally accepted in the relevant scientific field? And 4) Has it been tested or is it testable?
His strengths as an expert witness include: credibility, ability to articulate, sincerity, authoritativeness, correctness, common sense, wisdom, invulnerability, professional manner, and an ability to be a problem solver. He speaks in a language that is understandable to the judge and jury. In summary, he has an outstanding reputation as a "street smart" scientist with a strong theoretical background. His hands-on expertise gained through experience and training, has afforded counsel and their clients with a persuasive advantage in cases involving the application of principles, as opposed to many academics that merely offer an explanation of principles. He always remains cognizant of the importance of satisfying the primary objectives of assisting the judge and jury's understanding of the case, and presenting an opinion that determines the verdict.
In offering an opinion, he traditionally performs several separate functions as follows: (i) establish the facts by studying available documentation, and determine technical information of relevance; (ii) interpret the facts so as to provide a technical basis for the case; (iii) define the "standard of care" which should be exercised by professionals in the field; and (iv) comment on the opposing expert's facts and opinions through an "intelligence" effort.
He has served as an expert during jury and non-jury trials, within State, Federal and international court systems, and has represented plaintiffs and defendants evenly. He has also assisted counsel with Daubert challenges to the admissibility of expert testimony based on Fed. R. Evid. 702, where he has provided support or expert testimony regarding a factors analysis including: 1) Was it subjected to peer-reviewed publication? 2) Does it have a known or knowable error rate? 3) Is it generally accepted in the relevant scientific field? And 4) Has it been tested or is it testable?
His strengths as an expert witness include: credibility, ability to articulate, sincerity, authoritativeness, correctness, common sense, wisdom, invulnerability, professional manner, and an ability to be a problem solver. He speaks in a language that is understandable to the judge and jury. In summary, he has an outstanding reputation as a "street smart" scientist with a strong theoretical background. His hands-on expertise gained through experience and training, has afforded counsel and their clients with a persuasive advantage in cases involving the application of principles, as opposed to many academics that merely offer an explanation of principles. He always remains cognizant of the importance of satisfying the primary objectives of assisting the judge and jury's understanding of the case, and presenting an opinion that determines the verdict.
In offering an opinion, he traditionally performs several separate functions as follows: (i) establish the facts by studying available documentation, and determine technical information of relevance; (ii) interpret the facts so as to provide a technical basis for the case; (iii) define the "standard of care" which should be exercised by professionals in the field; and (iv) comment on the opposing expert's facts and opinions through an "intelligence" effort.
Listing Attachments: