environmental compliance

October 30, 2017

Discovering unexpected pockets of soft soils at the time of construction can delay your project and drive up costs for landfills, support features, and many other types of construction. If you don’t find them, building over them can result in unexpected settlement affecting a structure or building, or cause a slope stability problem for a berm or stockpile. You can avoid both of these scenarios with early investigation and appropriate construction planning.

While landfill development investigations typically require numerous soil borings within the proposed waste limits of the landfill, it’s common to overlook perimeter areas. Pockets of soft soil deposits can be associated with nearby existing wetlands, lakes, or rivers; with wind-blown silt or ancient lake deposits from periods of glaciation; or with fill placed during previous site uses.

The landfill perimeter areas may contain tanks for leachate or fuel, buildings, perimeter berms for screening or landscaping, stockpiles, and other features. A tank or building constructed over soft soils could experience unexpected settlement affecting the performance and value of the structure. The potential for a slope stability problem can increase for a large berm or stockpile built on soft soils.

The first step to avoid these problems and identify problem soils is to include perimeter areas in your subsurface investigation. Perform soil borings or test pit excavations at the locations of the proposed perimeter features such as tanks or berms. If you encounter soft soils, address them like this:

• If the deposits are relatively shallow, excavate the soft soils and replace them with compacted engineered fill.
• If the deposits are deeper and there is sufficient time in the project schedule, pre-load the soft soil area to reduce future settlement and increase soil strength before construction, and monitor the pre-loading with instrumentation such as vibrating wire piezometers and settlement platforms to confirm when the pre-loading design goals have been achieved. Preloading can be accomplished with temporary soil fill placement that is later removed when the pre-loading is completed or by staged placement of fill for a permanent fill feature such as a berm.
• If the project schedule doesn’t allow for pre-loading and the soft deposits are deep, consider a ground improvement method such as GeopiersTM to improve soil strength and stiffness in place. You can then proceed with constructing tanks, buildings, berms, or other structures over the improved soil area without special foundations. You may also use a deep foundation system such as piles or drilled piers to build over a soft soil area.

Contact SCS’s geotechnical engineers for more information on how to find and test soft soil areas early in a landfill’s project schedule, so you can effectively address associated construction issues in a way that considers cost and minimizes unexpected project delays.

Landfill Services

October 10, 2017

Additional handling of organics and other odorous wastes can make meeting regulatory requirements more challenging.

Pat Sullivan discusses two case studies that provide examples of two different approaches to odor management. The proactive approach resulted in a more positive outcome than the reactive approach. Although the odor issues never go away completely, the proactive facility has avoided lawsuits and regulatory enforcement and continues to have a positive working relationship with the community.

SCS Engineers freely shares our articles and white papers without imposing on your privacy.

Click to read Part I of this two part series. We’ll let you know when Part II is published soon.

September 27, 2017

Tuesday, October 10, 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm ET

This Air & Waste Management Association webinar covers the effective, sustainable operation of municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills in today’s changing environment.

The latest updates to EPA regulations in over two decades limiting air emissions from landfills will be reviewed in detail.

Participants will learn the available models for quantifying landfill gas generation emissions and which model to use in different situations as well as energy recovery from landfill gas, its emissions, and how control requirements can affect feasibility.

September 21, 2017

Christine H. Stokes, a New Jersey Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) and chemical engineer with 20 years of experience, is now supporting clients out of the SCS Engineers’ New York regional office. Ms. Stokes’ knowledge and experience will ensure a high-level of quality solutions for SCS clients in the New York and New Jersey area.

Ms. Stokes is highly respected by clients, attorneys, and regulatory agencies involved in the environmental industry. For SCS clientele, she will continue her track record of successful project management for environmental sites, including planning and executing remedial investigations for soil and groundwater in addition to vapor intrusion assessments.

She will be responsible for planning, permitting, and conducting remedial actions, including underground storage tank closures and media treatment utilizing in-situ chemical oxidation and bioremediation. In addition, she has expertise with conventional methods such as pump and treat, and soil excavation.

SCS Engineers is known for providing all-inclusive services for contaminated sites undergoing redevelopment. Coupled with Ms. Stokes’ environmental project expertise, she will provide the key strengths respected by clients who appreciate a firm who will meet their performance and technical objectives.

“I am excited to join the SCS team,” said Ms. Stokes. “I see opportunities to support many different clients in both the private and public sectors, including those who require environmental expertise to develop new infrastructure and remediate valuable properties.”

Welcome to SCS, Christine!

September 13, 2017

ERA Level 1 Status

Your facility will need a Qualified Industrial Stormwater Practioner (QISP) to perform an ERA Level 1 Assessment, on or before October 1, 2017, and follow up with an ERA Level 1 Technical Report by January 1, 2018, or as soon as is practicable.  We recommend that this assessment and report be performed prior to the wet season of the 2017-18 permit cycle year, to assist dischargers in reviewing their minimum required BMPs and if needed, implement additional BMPs.

ERA Level 2 Status

Review your ERA Level 1 Action Plan now. Is it correct given the additional NAL exceedances?  You should review all items needed for a successful ERA Level 2 Action Plan and Technical Report to successfully reduce and/or eliminate pollutants of concern in stormwater discharge.

Requirements, Actions, Deadlines

Your facility is required to submit an ERA Level 2 Action Plan, prepared by a QISP, which addresses each Level 2 NAL exceedance via SMARTs. This Action Plan must identify which of the three options below (or a combination thereof) of demonstration(s) the Discharger has selected to perform:

• Industrial Best Management Practice (BMP) Demonstration – Description/evaluation of relevant potential pollutant sources whereby additional Facility BMPs are implemented to comply with all applicable effluent limitations (BAT/BCT, ELGs and/or TMDLs) and to prevent future NAL exceedances (If this is not feasible to implement, you must provide estimated cost and rationale);

• Non-industrial Pollutant Source Demonstration (run-on from adjacent facilities, aerial deposition). This option allows for a Discharger to demonstrate that the pollutants causing the NAL exceedances are not related to industrial activities conducted at the facility, and additional BMPs at the facility will not contribute to the reduction of pollutant concentrations.  The determination that the sources are not from industrial activity or natural background must be done by a QISP; and

• Natural Background Pollutant Source Demonstration (e., iron in soils). This option takes its cue from the 2008 Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) whereby and if a Discharger can determine that the exceedance of a benchmark (NAL) is attributable to the presence of that pollutant in the natural background. A Site Plan(s) is very important in this regard which should include, but not limited be to facility locations, available land cover information, reference site and test site elevation, available geology, and soil information for reference and test sites, photographs showing site vegetation, site reconnaissance survey data, and records.

The State Water Board acknowledges that there may be cases where a combination of the demonstrations may be appropriate; therefore a Discharger may combine any of the three demonstration options in their Level 2 ERA Technical Report, when appropriate.

It is important to note that Level 2 is a serious situation under the IGP and you should start working immediately on your stormwater management goals for the ERA Level 2 Action Plan, which is due by January 1, 2018. For the BMP demonstration option, Dischargers may have to implement additional BMPs, which may include physical, structural, or mechanical devices that will reduce and/or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharge.

The ERA Level 2 Technical Report, which summarizes the option(s) chosen and all relevant technical information, including design storm standards for treatment control BMPs, must be overseen and signed by a California Professional Engineer (PE) and submitted by January 1^st, 2019.

Four important considerations in light of the ERA Level 2 exceedances:

• • Your facility Pollution Prevention Team (PPT) and/or consultant hopefully reviewed all the relevant 2016-17 storm water sampling analytical results during the annual report process. It is worth taking another look and reviewing each and every lab report, and look for j-flags, and potential issues during sampling to make sure it is truly an NAL exceedance. If this is an issue, training should also be done fairly soon to ensure proper sampling techniques during the 2017-18 stormwater season.

• • Budgetary: Capital expenditures can take time to get approved. The earlier the compliance-based BMP items are submitted for budgetary approval, the better. This will give the Discharger more flexibility and options for a tiered approach for implementation.

• • Non-government Organizations (NGOs) and Environmental Groups (EGs) are a “de facto” regulatory mechanism, and there has been a proliferation of citizen suits under the Clean Water Act recently. ERA Level 2 Dischargers could be on a short list for non-compliance and have greater exposure.

• Remember, if you return to Baseline status under the IGP and breach the former ERA Level 2 NALs with a yearly average or instantaneous maximum exceedance(s), your facility returns directly to ERA Level 2. Make sure your BMPs are implemented for the long-term to prevent returning to Level 2 status.

Get help now by contacting an SCS Stormwater Professional near you.

June 22, 2017

On your next development project considering other options for disposing of contaminated soil could save you a significant amount of money on environmental compliance.

Circumstances sometimes dictate that a licensed landfill is your only option, but Wisconsin’s solid waste laws allow you to dispose of some types of contaminated soil at other locations if the soil qualifies as low risk. Alternative options are available through an exemption process outlined in Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 718.

Who Can Apply for an NR 718 Exemption?

• Contractors and developers on construction and utility projects
• People cleaning up contaminated properties as an environmental remediation

Except for required actions when contamination is first discovered, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) must pre-approve exemptions.

Know the Rules Before You Apply

• Complete testing to characterize the soil contaminants.
• The WDNR must approve your plan for handling the soil unless the contaminant concentrations are less than the regulatory soil standards.
• Submit documentation to the WDNR after completing the disposal.
• Soils may be managed on or off site, but the locations must meet the minimum setbacks from wetlands, streams, rivers, private water supply wells, and other features.
• Contaminated soil may be used as backfill at gravel pits or quarries, but the disposal of contaminated soil must be specifically allowed in the facility’s reclamation plan.
• The WDNR publishes an online list of properties where contaminated soil is placed.
• A barrier (cap) over the soil may be required depending on the disposal site and level of contamination in the soil. Other long-term obligations may apply.
• The person who disposes of the soil; the owner of the property where the soil was disposed; and, in limited situations, the hauler; may be responsible for any future contamination resulting from the disposal of the contaminated soil on a property.
• An NR 718 exemption is available for safely replacing other solid wastes such as contaminated sediments, fly ash, debris, or foundry sand on the same site from which they were removed, rather than taking them to a licensed landfill. These other solid wastes can not be disposed offsite under the NR 718 exemption but may be eligible for another type of exemption under the Waste & Materials Management Program.

Additional information and answers to your compliance questions are available by contacting an SCS professional. In Wisconsin, contact Ray Tierney or Betty Socha. Are you ready to take control of your environmental compliance costs? Contact me or Betty Socha to learn more about how you can save money on soil disposal at your next project.

To learn more about compliance options for contaminated dirt disposal, remediation, and construction options in other states contact or visit the SCS website services page.

Related Services and Compliance:

Brownfields and Voluntary Remediation
Environmental Due Diligence and All Appropriate Inquiries

May 17, 2017

Oil and gas processing facilities, federal and local governments, landfills, land developers, contractors, industries with industrial hygiene plans can spend too much money for too little information if they don’t have an understanding of the limits and capabilities of their equipment and methods before the development of their Air Monitoring Plan (AMP) . That’s before considering the risk to their employees and to public health.

Even if you can’t afford a dedicated air monitoring group, you can eliminate the health risks, overwriting a plan, or overburdening your budget. A cost-benefit analysis and integrating stakeholders’ goals can help provide the guidance you need to develop a balanced air monitoring plan.

Start with this list of considerations when developing an Air Monitoring Plan (AMP). The list is followed by tips and suggestions which are helpful under specific circumstances.

The development of an AMP requires the following:

• Understanding the monitoring objective(s).
  • Compliance Monitoring for Specific Compound(s)
  • Employee Health and Safety
  • Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Monitoring
  • Fence-line Job Site Monitoring
  • Active Dust Control
  • Source Related or Regional Monitoring
  • Determination of highest concentrations expected to occur

• Identifying the spatial scale most appropriate for the monitoring objective(s).
  • Sampling Site Density
  • Upwind and Downwind Monitoring
  • Background Monitoring

• Determination of the required temporal scale of the monitoring objectives:
  • Time-averaged Sampling and/or Real Time Monitoring
  • Desired Averaging Periods
  • Grab Samples

• Determination of most appropriate monitoring equipment to be utilized.
  • Desired Detection Limits
  • Data Logging Required
  • Site Access Limitations
  • Power Availability
  • Real-Time Alarms if Needed
  • Meteorological Parameters

The information required for selecting the number of samples (5) and the sample locations include isopleth maps, population density maps, and source locations. The following are suggested guidelines:

• The priority area is the zone of highest pollution concentration expected to occur in the area covered by the network; one or more stations should be located in this area;
• Close attention should be given to densely populated areas within the region, especially when they are in the vicinity of heavy pollution;
• The quality of air entering the region should be assessed by stations situated on the periphery of the region; meteorological factors (e.g., frequencies of wind directions) are of primary importance in locating these stations;
• Sampling should be undertaken in areas of projected growth to determine the effects of future development on the environment;
• A major objective of compliance monitoring is the evaluation of progress made in attaining the desired air quality; for this purpose, sampling stations should be strategically situated to facilitate evaluation of the implemented control strategies; and
• Some information of air quality should be available to represent all portions of the region of concern.

The primary monitoring objectives should be determined before any data is collected.

Location of the monitoring site is initially dependent on the monitoring objective. For example, once it is known that there is a requirement to monitor for peak ambient H2S at a microscale site, it reduces the monitoring site location to specific areas. Hence, the first task when evaluating a possible site location is to determine the scale for which a candidate location can qualify by considering the following:

1. Location and emissions strengths of nearby sources, especially major source;
2. Prevailing wind direction in the area;
3. Nearby uniformity of land use;
4. Nearby population density.

To select locations according to these criteria, it is necessary to have detailed information on the location of emission sources, the geographical variability of ambient pollutant concentrations, meteorological conditions, and population density. Therefore, selection of the number, locations, and types of sampling stations is a complex process. The variability of sources and their intensities of emissions, terrains, meteorological conditions and demographic features require that each network is developed individually. Thus, selection of the network will be based on the best available evidence and on the experience of the decision team.

Developing an Air Monitoring Plan (AMP) can be a daunting task. There are many decisions to make that have downwind ramifications relative to budget, logistical constraints, and labor requirements. In addition, there may be competing goals in regards to the project stakeholders. SCS has the experience developing and implementing air monitoring plans and systems to meet these challenges; including developing site specific and network-wide AMPs for various monitoring objectives. SCS also understands the costs and demands of the implementation of AMPs on industry and government.

Performing a cost-benefit analysis is a crucial step in the AMP development in order to assure that the required data is attainable within the budget constraints.

If you need to perform Air Monitoring or are in the initial steps of developing an AMP please contact for expert advice and guidance specific to your region and industry. We have robust programs and experts nationwide. We can also incorporate the use of remote monitoring controls and monitoring by our FCC authorized drones.

Author: Paul Schafer, SCS’ National Expert Ambient Air Monitoring

May 3, 2017

When tackling a real estate development project, discovering contaminated historic fill is an unwelcome surprise, but with the proper due diligence, you can avoid project delays and cost increases.

Historic fill is common on properties that were once rural and have become prime redevelopment sites as communities expanded. The fill may include contaminated materials like foundry sand, ash, demo and construction debris, and even municipal waste. In the past, these materials were used to fill wetlands or change the grade of the property before initial development. Today regulations have evolved, and state agencies require property owners to manage these materials appropriately during redevelopment. Also, particular types of historic fill are often not robust enough to structurally support your new building.

There are many different kinds of fill materials – each with different physical properties and different potential contaminants. Knowing what is on your property before you start designing the site layout, and certainly, before you start digging, will help you plan your project to save time and money, and to receive state agency approval.

Before You Buy

The more you know about the property and the earlier you know it, the better prepared you will be to make decisions about how best to protect yourself from potential environmental liabilities and prepare for the environmental and geotechnical issues that historic fill can cause. Since every property is unique, the first thing you need to do is gain a thorough understanding of the property’s history and past use. Invest in a comprehensive Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA). Consider it a starting point for clues about the possible types and amounts of historic fill which may be present on the property.

If the results of the Phase 1 ESA warrant it, conduct a Phase 2 ESA and geotechnical study to collect soil, fill, groundwater, and soil vapor samples. The Phase 2 ESA and geotechnical studies will help you understand if fill and contaminants are present and the best options for addressing them during the development planning stage.

Historic fill on a property is no longer the impediment to development that it once was. Take these steps to get ahead of potentially contaminated historic fill, and keep your project on time and budget.

You may be able to reduce or eliminate the need for costly landfill disposal by incorporating some of these concepts into your project:

• Put surface parking lots or green spaces over areas with historic fill.

• Move buildings with deep foundations or underground parking to areas of the property where the historic fill is not present.

• Use dynamic compaction or Geopiers™ to stabilize the historic fill in place before constructing slab-on-grade buildings or parking lots above it.

• Surgically remove minimal amounts of the historic fill and replace it with new compacted fill.

• Use a deep foundation system such as piles or drilled piers to build over the historic fill without the need for excavation.

• Install inexpensive sub-slab venting systems in the new buildings.

By testing early, performing a proper geotechnical evaluation, and incorporating design adaptations where needed, you can successfully develop projects with historic fill within your schedule and without breaking your budget.

SCS professionals are available to answer questions or concerns you may have pertaining to commercial, residential, or private development on brownfields – we provide remediation, brownfields, and  Environmental Due Diligence services nationwide. Contact  or one of our experts.

About the author: Ray Tierney

Ray Tierney, PG, is a Vice President of SCS Engineers and one of our National Experts on Sustainability. He has 30 years of experience in environmental and sustainability engineering and has helped a wide range of organizations control and reduce their legacy environmental impacts and liabilities, lower their costs, obtain grants and permits to expand, and implement cost-saving practices. Ray serves the Midwest region and projects throughout the U.S.

JohnTabella, PG, LEED AP®, is SCS Engineers’ National Expert for Environmental Due Diligence and for Federal Services. In this capacity, he oversees all aspects of environmental services opportunities and projects primarily throughout the eastern seaboard and supports on opportunities and projects throughout the U.S.

Floyd Cotter specializes in solid waste management projects. His project work involves all areas of solid waste management including planning, permitting, transportation, landfill design, construction, and monitoring. Floyd is also experienced in general civil engineering, construction oversight, environmental site assessments, closure and post-closure plans, and permit and contract document preparation. Floyd is located in the Central region.

Randy Bauer has nearly 3 decades of experience conducting environmental site assessments, subsurface investigations, groundwater monitoring programs, soil and groundwater remediation, and geotechnical investigations at industrial hazardous waste and solid waste facilities. Randy is available to answer questions on the western seaboard.

April 26, 2017

Imagine that one of your employees comes and tells you that a 100-gallon spill just took place at your facility and it is flowing swiftly toward a storm sewer on your property.

Suddenly all eyes are on you. What you do next will show your leadership and skill at addressing the issue and limiting the company’s liability. Are you ready to be the hero, or is spill preparedness the one item that just keeps slipping down your to-do list?

Use the techniques recommended in Chris Jimieson’s latest article to make your spill response training engaging and interactive for staff handling oil. Spill preparedness becomes part of your routine and you’re ready to be the hero if a spill occurs.

Improve Your Spill Preparedness

About Chris Jimieson

March 29, 2017

By Chris Jimieson, PE and Jared Omernik, PE

Do you know how much oil and fuel you store in aboveground containers at your facility?  If you have more than 1,320 gallons, you may need an SPCC Plan.  What is an SPCC Plan?  SPCC stands for Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure, and it is a federal rule (40 CFR 112 in the Federal Register) designed to prevent oil-based products from entering navigable waterways of the U.S.  But it’s about more than just compliance. It’s an important tool to help you limit your liability.

Facilities covered under the SPCC rule are subject to agency inspections and potential enforcement actions if the facility’s practices are found to be out of compliance.

Does the SPCC rule apply to me?

The 1,320-gallon threshold isn’t the only trigger for an SPCC Plan.  One of the keys to take away from the SPCC rule is that it does not count oil/fuel storage in containers less than 55-gallons in size.  Another trigger is that a facility must reasonably be expected to discharge oil into navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of the U.S.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not define what “reasonably be expected” means.  Rather, the responsibility is on the facility owner or operator to determine the potential for discharge.  In reality, it’s usually easy to think of a scenario where spilled oil could reach a waterway.  Even if you think a spill would never reach the stream, what if there was a significant rain event that washed away spilled oil on the ground through a storm sewer?  Often the “reasonably to be expected” is not challenged, so it is best to err on the side of caution.

The SPCC rule applies to my facility, now what?

There are three options:  1) Prepare the plan yourself.  2) Use a third party provider to prepare your plan, or 3) Have a licensed professional engineer develop your plan.  The option you choose depends on how much oil you store at your facility and your working knowledge of the SPCC rule.

If you have less than 10,000 gallons of oil and no single aboveground oil storage container with a capacity greater than 5,000 U.S. gallons, you may be able to prepare your own SPCC Plan, following the EPA’s Tier I qualified facility template.

You can download the EPA’s Tier I qualified facility template here: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-05/documents/tier1template.pdf.  The template is the least expensive way to comply with the SPCC rule. However, some users feel it is a little confusing.

If you have less than 10,000 gallons of oil and have a single aboveground oil storage container with a capacity greater than 5,000 U.S. gallons, you could qualify under the EPA’s Tier 2 qualified facility category.  The EPA does not provide a plan template for a Tier II qualified facility.  You can still prepare the plan yourself, or you may hire a third party or professional engineer to develop the plan for you.

If your facility has greater than 10,000 gallons of oil storage, you must have a licensed professional engineer prepare your facility’s SPCC Plan.

Working on an SPCC Plan with a Third Party Provider

If you decide to work with a third party provider, here are some things you can expect as part of the process.  The provider will conduct a facility site visit to review the oil storage.  Prepare to have a staff member familiar with the oil storage escort the provider to each of the sources.  The provider will ask questions about spill prevention features at each source location, including secondary containment, overfill protection, and interstitial monitoring, if applicable.

After visiting the oil sources, the provider may ask to see any available tank data such as specifications, current inspection protocol, and tank repair or integrity testing documentation.  You can eliminate follow-ups and help keep costs down by having this data available for review.

Following the site visit, the provider will prepare an SPCC Plan that you should review for accuracy before implementation.

The Value of an SPCC Plan for Your Facility

An SPCC Plan is about more than just compliance.  An SPCC Plan contains inspection forms and protocols that can help to prevent a spill at your facility.  It identifies the single point of contact, an “SPCC Coordinator” for the facility.  If there is a spill, the Plan contains steps necessary to contain the spill initially and control the discharge, and the proper contacts to notify internally and externally.

The SPCC rule requires all oil-handling personnel receive annual training to respond appropriately to spills in their work areas.  The annual training requirement is another key element to spill prevention, but also covers aspects on how to properly take control and countermeasure actions in the event of an oil spill.

Work with your staff to determine if the SPCC rule applies to you.  An SPCC Plan is a required document for certain facilities to help you comply with the SPCC rule and gain the benefits of having a plan in place.  However, more than that, it is a practical document that’s designed to assist with training and inspections and to help prevent spills from occurring.  Moreover, if spills do occur, an SPCC Plan provides the guidance to help control the spill and limit your liability.

Chris Jimieson and Jared Omernik have more than 26 years’ combined experience helping various types of clients with environmental compliance.  Chris and Jared have extensive experience helping customers build and review SPCC and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) projects. For questions about the SPCC rule or how to comply, Contact Chris at

For questions about the SPCC rule or how to comply, Contact Chris at or 608-216-7367, or contact Jared at  or 608-216-7348 in the Upper Midwest.

To find an office near you click here.