Good morning and thank you for joining us. By now, you should have received a copy of the press release. If you have not, please contact the corporate offices at 626-351-4664 and we will get one to you right away. With us today from management are Dan Batrack, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and David King, Chief Financial Officer. They will provide a brief overview of the results and then we will open up the call for questions. During the course of the conference call, Tetra Tech management may make forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These include statements concerning future events and Tetra Tech’s future financial performance. The statements are only predictions and may differ from actual future events or results. Tetra Tech’s Form 10-K and 10-Q reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission identify certain risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Tetra Tech’s undertakes no duty to update forward-looking statements. At this time, I would like to inform you that all participants are in a listen-only mode. At the request of the Company, we will open up the conference for questions and answers after the presentation. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Dan Batrack. Please go ahead Mr. Batrack.

Thank you very much and good morning and welcome to our Fiscal Year 2009 First Quarter Earnings Release Conference Call. I am very happy to present our financial results for what was perhaps our strongest first quarter ever certainly on our financial metric basis. While David King, our Chief Financial Officer will present the specifics of our financials. I will start with a brief overview of some of our key financial metrics of the first quarter. For the first quarter, our total revenue was up about 36% or $168 million over the first quarter of 2008. Our net revenue was up approximately 19%, which represents an addition of more than 250 full time staff than we had here at Tetra Tech a year ago in Q1. Most of our net revenue is driven by our labor. Our operating income was up more than 25%. And not only was the operating income up 25%, but our margin was up about 0.5 basis point over last year. So, our margins increased with the resulting operating margin of 8.7% for the quarter. On a percentage basis, our backlog grew at the fastest pace of all. With our backlog growing at slightly above 36% from the same quarter last year and up sequentially about $120 million higher than what we had at the end of the previous quarter. In the first quarter, we substantially grew both our federal and commercial projects in revenue. Our federal work grew with an extraordinary strength from two primary areas. First was, the Army core of engineers and that was primarily base realignment and closure and contacts and the second was United States Agency for International Development, we saw particular strength there, but those weren't the only major contributors from our federal clients. We also saw strength with all…

Thank you, Dan. Before I get into quarterly financials let me spend a minute or two on new segmentation, why and how we did it. Tetra Tech started to report three segments resource management, infrastructure and communications in the late 90s, when the company was about $0.5 billion dollars in revenue. Today, we are a two plus billion dollar company with a very different business profile and management structure. First, as Dan indicated, communication has become a significant part of our portfolio. In fact, it has been less than 5% of our revenue for the past five years. Second resource management has exceeded 60% of what we have done in the past five years ending 2008 at 69% of the revenue. As we continue to grow the composition of the business continue to change, so as our management and organizational structure. At the beginning of fiscal 2009 we made a change and started to report our four business segments as Dan indicated earlier. We started our plans, we also indicated in our last year’s Form 10-K and more recently earlier this week actually we posted all of the changes and detail on our website and comparing and cross-working the old segments to the new segments before you. Bottom line, we would no longer report communication as segment is now part of the RCM repetition and construction management. We also moved to operating units out of infrastructure to better reflect our infrastructure design business. Given this propositional large percentage of resource management we broke it into three segments to provide to you with a better visibility. Frankly this change of segmentation has taken us about two years of thinking and planning, we belief the new segment reflects how we manage our operations, how we serve our clients and how we execute…

Thank you very much David. I’d like to continue by presenting, as David just indicated our newest acquisition. While we are always looking for the right acquisition in our core market areas, areas like water, energy or infrastructure. Over these past years we’ve been particularly focused on identifying an international acquisition and we’ve been looking in three countries in areas specially. We have been looking in Australia, the United Kingdom or Canada. Those are the areas we’ve really been spending a lot of time. We believe these locations provide us the greatest opportunities to expand our services to growth markets while minimizing our cultural, language and integration risks. So, we are looking for high growth area with low risk to the Company’s, we took next step. I’m very pleased to announce that as of yesterday our Wardrop Engineering has joined Tetra Tech and we’re just very happy to have them on board. I’d like to say few words about them. First of all, Wardrop is the Canadian-based consulting and engineering company. They’ve been in existence for over 50 years. They have approximately 1200 staff and generated a $120 US million in revenue in fiscal year 2008 and their fiscal year matches up with Tetra Tech. So, we’re seeing that with respect to how they’ve been managing their financials. Their company was founded on water resources, very similar to that of Tetra Tech and those are expanded by its original founder [Len] Wardrop, focused on water resources. Its one of the Canada’s leading consulting and engineering firms focused now, today on natural resource management and energy and infrastructure. All of that sounds just like Tetra Tech and we’ve spent last several months with them and they are just like Tetra Tech. I’d also like to say one more thing about them…

(Operator Instructions)Your first question comes from John Quealy - Canaccord Adams

Just a couple things on the deal, did you disclose price on that or price metrics? Was it in range with standard E and C multiples?

John we did not disclose the terms of the acquisition and for competitive purposes we would elect not to do that, but I would indicate that it is inline with the multiples that we have paid for other acquisitions.

In terms of backlog, what show you look for in Q2? What was the relative contribution from this business?

3 to 5 months.

So, in dollars of 3 months to 5 months of business would be in backlog at anyone given time?

Let me backup. The backlog that we have is funded and authorized, the $1.7 plus billion. About 75% to 80% of that amount would be expended over the next 12 months and the remaining 20% to 25% would be expended over roughly the next six months. So, most all of the backlog would be expended or is slated for completion of the work in the next 18 months. Does that answer the question?

It doesn’t actually, I should have been clear. I was asking about the acquisition, how much backlog would that add upon consolidation?

I am sorry the backlog, because of the consulting and engineering aspect of the business they are mostly commercial in nature. It is a much shorter amount of contract duration and so typically three to four months of their annual revenues are in backlog. So, relative compared to Tetra Tech is a much smaller percentage.

Okay and then just two more housekeeping questions on the acquisition. Was it primarily geography or business line that was attractive here?

Both, we looked a lot of companies and this is one that they hit it right. One of all the locations in the world, we were anxious to get located in it was Canada for some simple reasons like language, culture, time zone some practical things. Two great end markets and great clients. They have a lot of natural resource work. They do lots of work in the nuclear industry for the energy, which is a major component of their work. They provide a lot of water resource work and natural resource mining brings as lot of new mining client. So its clients, its technical service and its geography really hit all of the areas that we have hoped to add to the company.

My last two questions; first on the cash flow, I’m sorry I missed it. Did you mention cash flow from operation expectations for fiscal ‘09?

Yes.

I will go back and look at that. Dan may be for you. If the stimulus does come to fruition, as if currently envisioned, do you think the margin profile of this work changes at all on the water and wastewater side or the stuff you have folks would be targeting or do you think it still keep this sort of 8.5 trending towards 9 EBIDTA margins across-the-board?

Thanks a question received frequently, quite often from our own staff. We’ve think the margins again remain similar to what we had before, because this $8 billion that I referred to and that in our slide presentations we’ve actually presented the detail of it. These are contracts where the fee or unit rates have already been negotiated and so these are contract terms, scope of work and rates have already been established on these for the most part. So, I would expect the margins to be similar to what you have seen before from us.

Dan just a step back and kind of looking at the growth outlook, it has been hard to judge things given crosscutting current in the economy and the other new stuff you are doing, but I guess I’m still having a hard time reconciling this kind of backlog growth. Then you ran through your rough growth expectations for the segments and if we add all those together it comes up to something like 6% to 7% growth. How do we reconcile that with 35% backlog growth?

I don’t want to say it’s simply from the newspaper, but it’s difficult to get up in the morning and listen to the financial abundance and the newspapers. It certainly, it seems that the negative sentiments out there from forecasters are probably, 5 to 1 from anybody who has the rosy outlook. Certainly our backlog is up, we feel good and with our clients we have great visibility primarily driven by our federal side. I don’t want to say that we’ve are being cautious, but unless we have specific authorization to complete the work in a very short period of time, we are being judicious with respect to our forecast. They are longer term projects. We’ve had good success in getting work that goes out. So, some of the work is not as immediate, so it’s booked and execute in one or two quarters and so some of the work does go out to the end of this fiscal year and even into early fiscal year 2010. Finally a lot of the work and the backlogs that we have are disproportionately weighted toward our federal work. In fact the composition of our backlog is about 60% from our federal clients. Now it represents sort of mid 40’s in revenue, but all the way up it just over 6 and the federal work, very low-risk, longer visibility, but in some instances a bit lower margin. So, for those reasons we’ve been judicious with respect to our guidance.

Sure and certainly, I think everybody is cautious on the state and local and the even in the industrial economy and I guess it is the federal piece that isn’t making quite as much sense to me given the bookings that you’ve already done that you are still looking for only somewhere around 5% growth in that segment and I guess what you are saying is that a fair amount of the backlog is fairly backend loaded on the federal side? Or is it cut out over the full six quarters?

That’s true; there is some other that’s a bit more back loaded. Although, I wouldn’t say particularly, but do let me mention one large moving piece for us on the federal side. We had a pretty fair amount of work both in fiscal year 2008 and even in the first quarter from work we were doing for the department of defense in Iraq and our forecast has been, if that is going to not only ramp down, but complete in totality. So, for instance, I’ll give you one example. Our unexpected ordinance program where we were supporting the Army Corps of Engineers, in fact has completed on December 31, both the work and the prospect for work under the current vehicles have all completed. Now it has been a contributor of about $25 million per quarter on the total revenue basis and even with that going from 25 to zero, we are still forecasting a growth in our federal business. So, when you take it in context of these two moving pieces our underlying federal work is actually very, very strong, but we do have that one counter moving piece that’s tampered the overall growth in that.

Okay, that is true. Then just on the ongoing mix, you said you do expect the federal government piece as a percentage of the total to continue to grow, but you also said that Wardrop is primarily commercial. How should we think about, I mean I guess that means Wardrop fits into the 5% to 10% growth profile that you outlined for commercial, is that how we should think about that and is pretty much the entire bulk of that the $100 million in that revenues go to the commercial side or is there a mix there?

Actually we are going to classify it for in these quarterly investor calls. We were going to classify it under international and so the drivers for commercial are mostly going to be U.S. domestics. So, this would be projects like the Fox River, the remaining wind projects that we have that are in backlog and some of these other large property remediation projects we have and so you will see the international work going from these past quarters at 1%, maybe 2% up to more than 5% and so that’s were it will be reflected. Within that international work, their clients are primarily commercial within Canada and other multinationals. Debra Coy – Janney: And kind of what sort of growth rate are they seeing or expecting to see over the next year or so?

About 10% Debra Coy – Janney: Okay. Last question we have been looking for and expecting a sizable international acquisition for a while. I am curious as to your thought on the acquisition outlook now. I mean at this it; is this big one you have been working on; is there more stuff in the pipeline? How are you thinking about your acquisition strategies for the rest of the year?

Well, I will start with the word more. Debra Coy – Janney: Mike is not going to get a break?

No, in fact, we told him that the negotiating part was his easy part because he got to stay home for the most part and just work long hours, but he didn’t seem to work long hours, our M&A department. First of all, Wardrop is a large acquisition for us at over a thousand technical staff, it’s big, but it’s not the only one. In fact we were looking for a firm that would serve as what we referred to as a platform acquisition that has the systems, the history, the maturity of this management team and systems, that would allow us to do additional tuck ins and additional expansion and a pen to that organization. We believe that firms in Canada and in particular Wardrop specifically have presence in other overseas locations. For example they do have an office in the UK with a fair number of staff; in India. They have start-up project locations in many different locations around the world, including China and so we are looking at all of these locations that would be either from a tuck-in acquisition to even another platform acquisition in another area of the world. So we are not done, but it has to be the right deal, at the right time, at the right price. So, if we find a firm that meets all those criteria’s like Wardrop did, we’ll take action again and there are opportunities out there. Debra Coy – Janney: Alright thank you.

Your next question comes from Michael Cox - Piper Jaffray.

My first question is on the projections that you outlined for your end market customers. The state and local, it seems that the projection for your area of decline is a little bit less than you’ve seen in the last couple of quarters. I was wondering if you could give the factors that are leading to perhaps a little bit better outlook on that side.

Yes, I don’t necessarily call this a silver lining, but a lot of the projects that we have with schools and transportation have been put on hold, so that’s one reason. So the sort of the low hanging fruit from our client standpoint have been taken off the table, so there’s less to be taken down, but note we had two projects on a year-on-year comparison. A communications project that we had a year ago was called Utopia. It was a fiber communication project for a number of municipalities in the State of Utah and that program has completely twilight for us and its over, it’s been completed. So, on a year-on-year comparison it is being gone, so sequentially there’s no more to go away. We also have some city work in the State of New York, in fact in the city that we’ve seen the reduction and the reduction in that program. While there is still some of it, the material portion has already been recognized. So, we see the areas that are soft, are getting close to hitting bed rock. The other programs that we have that are primarily water driven are much less volatile with respect to funding or requirement to get the work done.

Okay and on the wind component of your business, I believe entering the fiscal year you had said it was $200 million in the backlog; can you give us an update as to where that stands today?

We expended about half of that in the first quarter and so about $100 million of that was expended. That was really the single largest driver of that commercial growth in the first quarter and so we have about $100 million left that will expend over the remaining three quarter Q2, Q3 and Q4. Although I will note that the winter months of January, February and March is a lot less field work and so that wind work will be a bit more back loaded into Q3 and Q4 than in the second quarter.

Okay, that’s helpful. My last question on the cash flow statement, it looks like the provision for losses on contracts popped-up a bit in the quarter. Anything to read into there?

Nothing abnormal. We just increased our disciple, looking our projects and receivables and take some food and actions.

Your next question comes from Corey Greendale - First Analysis.

By any chance could you give us some sense of how creative you expect the Wardrop acquisition to be a full-year basis, like looking out to fiscal 2010?

Well, we think on a full year basis for 2010 as an example, we expect it to be approximately $0.04 to $0.05 after intangible, amortization and interest expense. We expect it to be somewhat nominal here for 2009 because of it coming in later in the year. Normally, we see reduced profitability in the first few months as people join the company and certainly we had expenses associated with the acquisition. Many of those were capitalized, but certainly there are expenses of our own staff and others supporting the acquisition that represent expense that we otherwise wouldn’t have had.

I know those expenses are included in the $0.02 for this year, correct?

That’s correct.

Okay. Second question I had is how are you looking at the stimulus bill? Are you looking at this as kind of incremental to what you’ve gotten otherwise or are you looking at it as more re-enforcing your ability to take advantage of contracts that you were thinking you had a pretty good chance of getting a decent amount out of away.

Incremental, I see it is incremental. We see that many projects that would not move forward otherwise because of funding or prioritization, will in fact be mobilized by the clients and so see them as incrementally an addition to what we would otherwise compete for both in our forecast that we provided.

So, with that in mind and given the strong backlog growth, do you think that the guidance you’ve been giving of 7% to 8% organic growths that’s probably conservative and it should be above that now?

Well, in the last summer I certainly had some of my associates and competitors, peers saying that the stimulus was going to be in place in August and I had others saying it was going to happen before the end of the election and then we others say that certainly Bush would mobilize it prior to the inauguration and transfer and now we’re hearing perhaps President’s Day mid-February. Until it happens and I said this before, I would really want to stay away from speculation on the stimulus package. I go back to the statement I made earlier; until it’s been passed by the House, the Senate and the President, it’s just not clear to what’s exactly, what contribution on incremental or any other basis it will be. So, I’m not trying to dodge the question, but anytime I would come out and say that we are being conservative and it should be a higher number on something that hasn’t past, I think it’s just very speculative and we’re trying to stay away from that.

Okay and then if I could just follow-up on some questions that Debra was asking before this. I understand conservative and based on just the general economic outlook. As I’m calculating it, the guidance, it looks like it calls for a pretty meaningful slowing in organic growth in the March quarter once you backed in Wardrop. So, I’m getting like at the high-end of the guidance range, maybe 7% organic growth and I understand Iraq also, but I think that was already gone this quarter, so that shouldn’t be changing. So, is there anything in specific that you would point to that is slowing or is going away or is it just overall conservatism given the economic the state of affairs?

We don’t use the word conservative here; we think we’re judicious, but let me give you an example, the two that are moving, two of the bigger pieces. Number one, we touched on this on our earlier question, wind. We have a $200 million forecast for the year. We still believe that that is achievable, but half of that was in the first quarter and as I indicated earlier, the remaining $100 million will be mostly or more heavily weighted to Q3 and Q4. So, that would be one reason, why you’ll see a reduction in organic growth, so wind is a big one. On Iraq I gave examples of the unexported ordinance and there is reconstruction work we’ve done there also that is slowing materially and essentially it is going to move to zero here. We believe in the latter quarters Q2 will be a major reduction. So, those are two programs that are reducing in the 10’s of millions of dollars and that are what’s going to account for organic growth moving down to 7% or 8% as you indicated. So, those are two very specific examples.

Your next question comes from Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Correct me if I’m wrong, it doesn’t appear that you gained any new wind project orders this quarter, is that correct? And could you more broadly discuss the current landscape in terms of interest in new wind projects given the lower cost of oil and gas?

Well, let me answer the first question. Wind projects; if you look on our presentation on page six significant new wins, we did book approximately $20 million worth of new wind projects during the quarter. Now, I’ll acknowledge that’s not as nearly as larger of a number as we have in previous quarters, but we still did see new work come in for the quarter and so this still has some steady initial evaluation. We are however seeing a substantial number of projects be pushed out. We’ve been told by our clients that they are not cancelled, but they are delayed. So, new projects we are seeing and the number of opportunities declined materially. We have been contacted by our clients and we are following very closely the production tax credits and certainly if that passes and is put in place, we expect that to have a material impact on the number of opportunities coming out, but certainly the number of opportunities for our clients are down, but we still are booking work. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay, and then just a follow-up question regarding the acquisition. It looks like the $75 million increase in net revenue guidance you suggested in your release, does that represent about low double digits growth; am I looking at it correctly there year-on-year?

Yes, that’s correct. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay, and then if you look at the subcontractor costs at Wardrop they are much lower than yours on a relative basis obviously given their mix of business. Is this likely to change post acquisition? I guess what I’m getting at is, do you have opportunities for cross selling some of the business that you do which has higher subcontractor costs?

That’s a really good question Alan and it’s one of the key synergies that Wardrop looked to Tetra Tech. They have just excellent relationships with their clients and are anxious to offer them full turnkey services that Tetra Tech’s model. So your answer is, yes. If the synergies are successful and we believe they will be, we will see the subcontractor component go up with Wardrop, but that would only be directly associated with substantial increases in the revenue and a much higher growth rate than even the 10% we’d indicated. So, when I said we are up and out the door within 24 hours, a lot it is going right to these clients with the capability that we have on the large scale remediation and construction management and self performance model, that we can now take these projects a 100% within the Tetra Tech Wardrop organization. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay interesting and then last question just regarding the guidance you gave, again the impact of Wardrop I guess really. Am I reading this correctly that you expect $0.11 of accretion on the cash basis, but after netting out $0.09 of amortization costs that works out to $0.02 on the GAAP basis for the rest of the year, is that right?

We expect $0.09 to $0.10 cash accretion not $0.11 and so amortization probably will be $0.03 and interest cost and everything, at least a $0.04 of amortization. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay and where does the $0.09 come from that you have on the slides there?

Cash. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay and then in terms of the second quarter guidance of $0.24 to $0.26, are there one time costs included in that?

There are some internal costs, opportunity costs lost, that those people are chargeable otherwise and couldn’t be charging as part of the due diligence process will be factoring in our guidance. Alan Robinson – Royal Bank of Canada: Okay, but there are no specific onetime GAAP charges in the $0.24 to $0.26 guidance?

No, there is not.

Your next question comes from Richard Padgett - Morgan Joseph.

You’ve mentioned this on the wind projects, that you saw some clients delaying a little bit. Have you seen that in other projects, in other of your end markets which might explain maybe disconnect between some of your backlog growth and expectations for growth? Some people maybe sitting on their hands waiting to see what the stimulus package is going to mean for them and just the holding pattern for some of the work to be done?

Well, certainly we have in our state and local numbers of transports that we would normally expect and again for us we’ve seen it mostly in our schools work in the Northeast, in transportation projects broadly across the entire organization, we’ve seen those slowdown. With respect to task orders we’re kind of existing vehicles and that accounts for our forecast with our state and local business. That is one location. We have seen some of our industrial commercial clients slowdown certain expansion projects they have and we’ve seen for instance, automobile industry and some of the larger mining companies with capital expenditure budgets slowdown certain projects. We’ve also seen a counter effect where we’ve seen some of these firms reduced their internal staffing and actually outsourced that work to us. So, we’ve seen things moving in an opposite directions. Capital projects are slowing down, but our staffing request to support their business going up. So, there’s a lot of moving pieces certainly in the commercial side. So, we’ve not seen any project at the federal level cancelled or slowed down, that we haven’t seen. State and local we haven't seen any projects cancelled, although the pipeline of new opportunities we’ve seen slow a bit. Commercial is really a mixed bag, some areas were up, some are down and then we’ve talked about wind already.

With the new sub-segments, could you maybe give us an example per different segment just to help us fully better understand exactly? The pyramid, maybe if you give us some project examples just to help to better understand?

Absolutely. To us internally this is just so logical. This is how we follow our project. So, let me start at the beginning where we start with science. Our ECS, our environmental consulting services group, consulting up-front research, work we would do for the United States Environmental Protection Agency for watershed management, modeling, evaluation of freight and transport, for contaminants across all of the watersheds across United States would be a contract that we have in hand that would be in that group. Work that we did for Fox River up-front for evaluation of sediment dispersion, volume calculations, the science would be in that group. Typically higher margins, we would have something to 10% to 12% margins with that group, higher barrier to entry and very few competitors at on the national level that would enter and that would be our ECS group. In fact that’s the origins of Tetra Tech. That’s where it all started for us, upfront science. The second group and that usually we would prefer that to be our entry point to a client. We want to start right at the beginning before even a solution has been identified. The second group TSS, technical support services. Our projects like USAID, where they would like us to mobilize hundreds of staff to work in country, in places like Afghanistan, Columbia and Nepal, a number of other countries, this would be our technical support services, where we have staff in the government location for instance and this will defense agency, if we’re working in their facilities along with them on a support staff basis, that would be in this group. Our EPA emergency response work on the Katrina or other disaster where we need to mobilize a large number of support staff on a large dedicated program, it…

Your next question comes from Jeff Beach - Stifel Nicholas.

Wardrop, just a little bit more description of the company offices in Canada, UK, India, can you give us an idea of the business in these various locations? A little bit of that let’s say longer term revenue growth such as over the last five years and just a general comment about the relative profitability of the company? Then finally it sounds like you are looking for growth this year, but you are serving international markets such as the U.K. where they don’t necessarily have our stimulus package. Are you looking out at tougher times to fund projects ahead past what’s in your backlog?

So there’s a lot of area, so let me start the beginning. 1,200 staff; they have about 15 offices, 13 in Canada. Their largest concentration of offices and staff are in the Greater Toronto area, but they have staff from Toronto through the oil producing areas of Calgary and out to a very large office out in the West and Vancouver. So, really across Canada they have excellent coverage. That does represent the locations of about 95% of their staff. They do have locations in both India, and in the U.K. and those offices in the U.K. about 25 to give you an idea, so it’s not a single startup. It’s actually some significant presence, similar in India. The work that they do and again I’d indicated that their clients are largely commercial. The categories of their work or about 50% of their work is what we’ve referred to in resource management and a lot of that is in mining and other natural resources that exist in Canada. So, they work for many of the large multinational firms. For instance Chemical is the worlds largest uranium mining firm and they are a major support firm for consulting engineering work for Chemical and so the uranium even with the commodity volatility continues to be very strong. They work for a number of the major gold producing mining firms which also has been very strong and it takes them both in Canada and around the world on projects and about again 50% of their work is in this resource management category. About 40% of the work is in energy and they do a lot of work on the nuclear side of energy on balance plant, a lot of it is for Ontario Power, Hydro One, also in Canada for hydroelectric power. So…

In the sense of the longer-term revenue growth over many years?

Certainly they’ve grown very, very fast; they’ve grown well in excess of 10% here in the past few years. We have identified 10% as a number that we’d expect even through the economic volatile period, but if in fact we can leverage this full service capability on these projects, the number will be materially higher. I don’t want to forecast on how large those numbers are. Some of our people are positively euphoric and I will share that with all of you as soon as it transpires. Now, the profitability is inline with the growth, it’s about 10%.

The second thing on wind energy prospects; if the current house bill would move ahead; I haven't seen any changes yet to add investment tax credits. If what you are seeing now moves ahead is there sufficient stimulus in the current plan to really jump start and boost wind energy and bring back more of a relative profitability compared to other energy sources? Is this plan as it’s proposed right now going to do the job?

Well, we certainly are watching this very closely and we are looking for those types of responses from our clients, because they are the ones who will openly make that determination. We’ve had early indications, the answer is yes, but we want to be the cautious about speculating that being converted from a bill as it exists today in the house and you’re right, we haven’t seen this multiyear production tax credit. Specifically in that version, we understand there are different aspects of it in the senate and so it may be changed materially to incorporate that. So I would put it all under speculation at this time, but there is no doubt that everyone from utilities who are the developers are being very hopeful that they’ll be aspects here that’ll allow them to get back in the game quickly.

Your final question comes from John Rodgers - D.A. Davidson.

I know you haven’t given the terms of the Wardrop acquisition, but can you give us a sense of what the combination does your balance sheet in terms of leverage level.

I briefly mentioned that in the net as live, but here we will be borrowing against our credit line to fund part of the acquisition costs. At the peak, at the end of Q2 I expect to be about 30% debt-to-equity ratio and soft from that point out.

That’s when you’re referring a deed. You’d expected that your current rate had that paid off over what two years, is that what you said?

About 12 to 18 months.

Secondly in terms of just acquisition opportunities that you’re seen in the market, has pricing come down substantially? I am thinking more on the private side?

We have seen pricing coming down and we’ve actually seen it on construction commodities. So projects that we had that were in place we’ve seen that come down, but we’ve not seen pricing pressure with respect to the rates that are being bid.

Sorry Dan, I was wondering about potential acquisitions.

We have seen it come down, but I will say that we have seen more while there are plenty of opportunities, what it appears to be is that the private companies are taking a bit longer to recognize what the street delivers to us everyday, adjustment or value. Many of them have seven side lines. So, we are seeing I would less overall opportunities; although there still a good number of them, but the ones out there have actually tempered their expectations materially. So, we consider it to be an attractive, I hate the word attractive, I think it’s a fair market for acquisitions. I think before it was unfair to the acquirer. So now, I think it is fair, there are opportunities out here and I can’t think a better example than the one we just completed. With wardrobe there is a $100 million a year, 1000 personnel organization that is really the highest quality that exists anywhere in the market, there is out here looking for the right partner. So, it exists and there is the proof.

By the way, was this an auction situation or negotiation? Do you have many competitors for wardrobe?

Negotiation. They certainly did have their choices and they did have their alternative. So, it wasn’t just Tetra Tech and so I feel very good about this also, but we’re not the only multi billion dollars consulting and engineering firm out there. So they did have choices and out of all of those that were available, it was Tetra Tech that they choose.

This will complete the Q-and-A session. I will now turn the conference back over to Dan Batrack to conclude.

Great, thank you very much Dennis and thank you all for your questions. I now there are a lot of different aspects taking place in the market today and cover both our earnings growth and stimulus package acquisitions and our outlook and I though they were all excellent questions. With that I look forward to talking to you next quarter. Thank you very much and talk to you then.

Ladies and gentlemen this concludes our conference for today. Thank you all for participating and have a nice day. All parties may now disconnect.