SCS Engineers

April 29, 2019

The days of laying out ground control points and spending hours in front of a computer processing data have come and gone. Phil Carrillo of SCS Engineers and others discuss how to get a drone program started that will add real value to your landfill operations, and provide a good return on investment.

In addition to the expert tips, the article provides links to information and resources important to planning a program. Here are a few tips from the experts:

• Decide which area, or areas, you’re most interested in using a drone for such as methane monitoring or land surveying. This helps determine which equipment and software you need.
• Obtain the right certifications such as a Remote Pilot Certificate from the
  Federal Aviation Administration, which requires applicants to pass an initial aeronautical knowledge exam and license renewal every two years.
• Choose a drone that works well for your operations, considering its use, the size of your landfill and your budget. RTK and PPK drones come with GPS correction technology, minimizing the need for placing control points beforehand.
• Multirotors are optimal for most landfills less than 500 acres, while fixed-wings offer more battery life for larger landfills.
• The camera resolution is important when using drones for mapping, and the actual drone size and stability are factors if you plan to add extra sensors.
• An updated computer may also be needed to process the data, depending on the software you choose.
• Software is chosen based on your existing equipment, knowledge of analytics and customer service requirements. Cloud-computing software eliminates the need for major computer upgrades and programs are available that offer analyses functionality.
• Cities have airspace regulations; be sure you remain within legal parameters.
• Plan for human-made and natural conditions. Drones don’t like rain, and gusts over 15 mph can knock them off course. Drones and obstacles such as power lines or curious birds can be avoided with a plan.

Still sound daunting? It’s not for the professionals at SCS Engineers. Read the article on our website; we encourage sharing it with others too.

Contact us at

More landfill technology resources are here

April 24, 2019

These kids are among the more than 1,200 students and their families who took the pledge to recycle right at the 10th Annual Earth Day Event celebration hosted by Waste Management at Monarch Hill Renewable Energy Park. SCS Engineers professionals contributed their support and know-how to celebrate and educate at the environmental event.

For the past decade, the event has offered students hands-on recycling, renewable energy and environmental-related activities. One of the most popular activities at the anniversary celebration was a wind machine in which students hilariously tried to catch swirling “hurricane debris.” The most recent storm, Hurricane Irma, added 660,000 tons of debris into the landfill in just four months. Experts explained other inner workings of the Renewable Energy Park such as how landfill gas becomes electricity and “clean” renewable energy.

The day’s activities included stations where students target what can’t be recycled in a bow and suction cup arrow game; don WM vests and hardhats beside the CNG truck which reduces greenhouse gas emissions, make a landfill out of candy before taking a bus tour of the real landfill and use recycled materials to make art with Young at Art and musical instruments with the South Florida Junior Chamber Ensemble.

Proving that being good to the environment is a winning strategy, Miami Dolphins’ former wide receiver O.J. McDuffie and former cornerback Patrick Surtain were on hand to sign autographs and take photos, many of which were shared on social media at #greenbroward, a local initiative in Broward County by Waste Management designed to engage and educate the community on sustainability efforts.

As part of the Earth Day festivities, Waste Management also awarded funds to all participating schools. The Dumpster Art Contest featured the handiwork of 14 schools that all took home gift cards to Michaels for future art projects.

• Solid Waste Management
• Organics Management
• Renewable Energy

April 16, 2019

In a letter dated December 18, 2018, Patricia Overmeyer, Deputy Director, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization at the USEPA encouraged the IRS to clarify the proposed opportunity zone regulations (REG-115420-18). She reminded the IRS that investments in the assessment, remediation, and redevelopment of brownfields properties in qualified opportunity zones (QOZ) are included within the scope of qualified opportunity funds (QOF).

Her goal is to give Opportunity Fund investors confidence that QOF investments can be used to assess, remediate, and redevelop brownfields properties located in QOZs. Subsequently, these clarifications may lead to the economic revitalization of many of our nation’s disadvantaged communities.

The public comment period for these regulations expired on December 28, 2018. The public hearing was held on February 14, 2019; participants requested additional guidance on a wide variety of proposed regulations, with many suggesting improvements to the regulations allowing for more flexibility in regards to business investment.

FULL TEXT

December 18, 2018

Kirsten B. Wielobob
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-115420-18), Room 5203
Internal Revenue Service
PO Box 7604
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044

Subject: U.S. EPA Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization Seeks Regulatory Clarifications and Improvements to Proposed IRS Rule Regarding “Investing in Opportunity Funds,” REG-115420-18

Dear Ms. Wielobob:

On behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization (OBLR), thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Department of Treasury’s Proposed Regulations §1400Z-2(a)-1, 2(c)-1, 2(d)-1, 2(e)-1 and Revenue Ruling 2018-29, regarding “Investing in Opportunity Funds.” EPA’s OBLR encourages the IRS to clarify and improve the proposed rule to better foster investment in blighted and contaminated properties, or “brownfield sites,” in designated Opportunity Zones.

The “Investing in Opportunity Act” has the potential to spur investment in communities where neighborhoods have long been plagued by concentrated distress and those left behind by the economic recovery following the Recession. Many of these communities struggle with stagnation and lack of access to capital, in part due to the challenges of remediating and redeveloping their brownfield sites. A brownfield is a property where the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from the property’s former use complicates or inhibits the property’s expansion, redevelopment, or productive reuse. Brownfield sites often stigmatize neighborhoods and perpetuate blight and socio-economic distress.

EPA’s OBLR encourages the IRS to clarify in the final guidance that investments in the assessment, remediation, and redevelopment of brownfields properties located in Qualified Opportunity Zones (QOZs) are included within the scope of Qualified Opportunity Funds (QOFs). This clarification will provide an incentive to invest funds in the assessment, remediation, and reuse of brownfield properties. Assessing, remediating and redeveloping brownfield sites in QOZs is integral to the primary purpose of the Investing in Opportunity Act provisions¹ because:

• Brownfields remediation is often the first step to spurring revitalization within distressed communities. In low-income areas which have often suffered a long history of noxious land uses, illegal dumping, closed industry facilities, and lack of health and safety enforcement, federal incentives for revitalization should prioritize ensuring that areas with blighted, underutilized and/or contaminated properties are safe and prepared for redevelopment as the first step towards renewal.
• Public health and environmental protection are matters of primary concern to distressed communities. Hazardous materials and other contamination on brownfield sites are associated with poor health outcomes (e.g. cancer, respiratory disease, diabetes, stroke, heart disease, injury) and higher mortality rates among infants and adults. Creating incentives to invest in remediation of brownfields will promote economic development and better health outcomes, saving costs and enabling a more productive workforce.
• Brownfields properties are overwhelmingly concentrated in places of people of color, low-income populations, and otherwise marginalized communities, which are heavily represented among the QOZs. Recently, EPA’s OBLR conducted an analysis recently which found substantial overlap of known brownfield properties within designated QOZ census tracts. The IRS regulations should create incentives for investment in brownfield sites in order to help overcome stagnation, social inequity, and environmental justice concerns within the QOZs, as these factors create barriers to revitalization.
• Brownfield redevelopment can transform abandoned and underused sites into community and economic assets such as mixed-use developments, housing, and other productive reuses, without contributing to urban sprawl. Further, brownfield properties are often centrally located in areas where transportation and utility infrastructure are already available, which can make them valuable properties for development.
• Brownfields remediation and redevelopment can take significant time, beyond the development timeframes expected at greenfield projects or at properties with little or no contamination. A successful brownfields redevelopment usually involves environmental assessment and investigations, the development of remedial cleanup plans, coordination with neighborhood stakeholders to ensure that cleanup is protective of public health, and substantial involvement in regulatory approvals, often including approval and inspections of the remediation by state officials through what are typically called “Voluntary Cleanup Programs” established in state environmental agencies — all before the vertical development can occur. Thus, the time limitations proposed by IRS in the proposed regulations must be sensitive to the long timeframes often needed to address contamination issues at brownfield sites.

Clarification Requests and Comments:

EPA’s OBLR requests that the IRS make the following clarifications to the proposed guidelines. These clarifications will give Opportunity Fund investors confidence that QOF investment can be used to assess, clean up, and redevelop brownfields properties located in QOZs.

1. Brownfields Cleanup of Real Property Should Constitute “Original Use”

EPA’s OBLR requests that the IRS clarify the definition of “Original Use” so that the term applies to property that is a brownfield site as defined by section 101(39) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601), which is the law that establishes the U.S. EPA brownfields program and guides brownfields considerations by many other federal departments and agencies. The IRS has used this definition of “brownfield” as well, under 26 U.S.C. Section 198(c), which permitted certain treatment of expenditures on “qualified environmental remediation” at a “qualified remediation site”, which was defined as “any area . . . at or on which there has been a release (or threat of release) or disposal of any hazardous substance.”

While most new investments assume that a property already meets applicable health and safety standards, brownfields properties are different in that they are complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.

• Investment to assess and remediate environmental conditions at brownfield properties are required to make these properties financeable and developable.
• Essentially, all lenders and investors require environmental investigation and cleanup for properties which are brownfields to ensure they are safe for redevelopment.
  • Brownfields remediation can make previously unsuitable properties ready for investment by making them meet basic safety standards and safe for human health and the environment.
  • Making previously unsuitable properties located in QOZs ready for investment enables properties to “commence use” within the QOZ.

Defining “Original Use” to incorporate brownfields properties located in QOZs creates the best solution to enabling QOF investments in brownfields remediation and redevelopment. This clarification will address the concern that the 30-month window for substantial improvement is unrealistic for brownfields properties, which take longer than traditional vertical development projects due to the added challenges of contamination.

Example: A brownfields remediation firm purchases a contaminated brownfields property in a QOZ, where a former factory was once located, to remediate the land and sell the property for new use. This brownfield property should qualify as QOZ property under “original use.

2. Cleanup or Reuse of Vacant or Underutilized Property Should Constitute an “Original Use”: EPA’s OBLR requests that the IRS clarify the definition of “Original Use” so that the term applies to property that is vacant or underutilized for a period of one year or more. For purposes of Section 1400Z-2(d)(2)(D)(i), if property is vacant or underutilized for at least a one-year period, use prior to that period should be disregarded for purposes of determining original use. This borrows from the commonsense definition of “original use” for Enterprise Zone facility bonds in 26 CFR 1.1394-1 (h) and adds “underutilized.”

“Underutilized” could be defined as it is in other federal statute, such as the definition of “underutilized” in 45 CFR 12a.1 (which defines underutilized as it relates to property owned by federal agencies), stating that ” underutilized” should mean an entire property or portion thereof, with or without improvements which is used only at irregular periods or intermittently by the owner or operator for purposes of that owner or operator, or which is used for current purposes that can be satisfied with only a portion of the property.

The definition of original use should also permit QOZ investment in properties that contribute to blight or create barriers to economic vibrancy due to prolonged vacancy or underutilization. Defining original use to include new use of properties that are contributing to decay within distressed communities is clearly in line with the purpose of the incentive

Example: A developer purchases a property to rehabilitate for new use. The property has a factory on it that has been vacant for more than one year. Regardless of whether that property is reused for a similar manufacturing purpose, a new manufacturing purpose, or a different kind of development (such as commercial or residential), this property should qualify as QOZ Property under “original use.” The same should apply for a property that has a 5-acre factory on it where only 0.5 acres of space are currently in use.

3. Foreclosed and Tax-Reverted Properties Held by Local Units of Government Should be Treated as “Underutilized or Abandoned Property”:EPA’ s OBLR requests that the IRS clarify that any property that has been foreclosed upon and reverted to a local unit of government or land bank should qualify as “vacant and underutilized” regardless of how long it has been vacant, abandoned or underutilized.

Local units of government often acquire brownfields and other blighted properties through tax delinquency, abandonment, bankruptcy, etc. A bright line test around the status of ownership for properties in foreclosure, receivership, or involuntary transfer may be easier to determine than the historical use of the property and expedite investment in assembled properties, particularly in distressed urban areas.

4. Brownfield Investments Should Count Toward Substantial Improvement: EPA’s OBLR requests that the IRS clarify that improvements to land, including brownfields assessment, cleanup and other site preparation costs, are included as expenses that will meet the “Substantial Improvement” test for a QOZ Property. This aligns with the standard definition of “tangible property” (“land plus improvements”).

Without this clarification, it is unclear how improvements to the land itself factor into a calculation of substantial improvement, given that the adjusted basis in the example outlined in Rev. Rule 2018-29 pertains only to improvements to a building. While Rev. Rule 20 18-29 indicates that the cost of the land on which the building is located is not included in the adjusted basis for the substantial improvement calculation, it is unclear what the calculation would be on a brownfields project for which the primary or sole improvements are improvements to the land itself, when vertical development expected later.

Environmental assessment and remediation activities can make a property ready for redevelopment where it would otherwise be unsafe for reuse due to the presence or potential presence of environmental contamination. Unless the land is assessed, remediated to appropriate contaminant levels and exposures controlled (based on reuse of the property), any building and business investment will not occur on the property.

The following environmental assessment and remediation activities commonly occur at brownfield properties because they are necessary to enable safe reuse:

• Removing underground storage tanks when excavating for basement or parking
• Environmental site assessments (Phase I/II) to investigate potential contamination for due diligence purposes and admission into a state or tribal voluntary cleanup program
• Contamination cleanup of soil and groundwater on site
• Engineering controls/barriers that prevent exposure of environmental contamination
• Abating asbestos or lead paint when rehabilitating an existing building

Example: A developer purchases Property X, which is located in a QOZ, for $1 million. Property X consists of a building previously used as a factory erected prior to 20 18 and land on which the factory building is located. Sixty percent ($600k) of the $1 million purchase price for Property X is attributable to the value of the land and forty percent ($400k) is attributable to the value of the building. QOF A intends to convert the factory building to residential rental property. The transformation will require $800k in environmental remediation costs. Within 29 months after the date of QOF A’s acquisition of Property X, QOF A invests $800k in remediating the property and $500k in additions to the building. Clarification is necessary to ensure that the expenses associated with remediating the land will count toward the substantial improvement calculation. The same is true for a similar scenario common at complex brownfield sites in which at the close of the 30-month period the only expenditures have been for remediation of the land.

5. Gains from QOF Investment in Brownfield Improvements to Land Should Be Permitted to be Carried Over into Other QOZ Investments:EPA’s Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program requests that the IRS enable gains realized from the sale or exchange of QOZ Property to be deferred if they are reinvested in replacement QOZ Property within a 12-month period beginning on the date of the sale or exchange, with the QOF’s basis in the replacement Property being equal to the QOF’s basis in the QOZ Property at the time it was sold or exchanged. This carryover basis will preserve any gains not recognized in the event that a subsequent sale is not followed by the reinvestment in replacement QOZ Property within a 12-month period.

Clarification on this issue is particularly pertinent to facilitating the ability for QOZ Businesses to remediate brownfields properties with QOF funds to sell to a vertical developer and still access the benefits of the step-up in basis. Without this clarification, using QOF funding for brownfields remediation and property improvement as the primary business activity might require the owners of the site to sit on the site for the duration of the ten years after remediation is complete in order to access the benefits of the Opportunity Zone incentive.

Example: On January 1, 2019, T, a calendar-year taxpayer, invested $1 million of gain in B, an QOF partnership dedicated to brownfields cleanup that remediates properties to sell for future vertical development by other parties. B immediately makes a $1 million investment in remediation and land improvements to a brownfields site that qualifies as QOZ Property. On January 1, 2023 (after four years), B sells the remediated QOZ Property to a vertical developer for $1.5 million and reinvests all of the proceeds in replacement QOZ Property within 12 months. Clarification is necessary that if the entire $1.5 million from the sale of QOZ Property is reinvested into replacement QOZ Property: 1) the deferral and reduction in basis timeclocks on the original $1 million investment would not reset, and 2) the 10-year timeclock on would not reset for the $500,000 in gain.

6. Allow QOF Investments to be Stacked for Brownfield Properties that Require Remediation: EPA’s OBLR requests that the IRS clarify that the 30-month window to demonstrate substantial improvement to the land via remediation and other site preparation activities is a separate 30-month window from follow-on vertical development.

Brownfields remediation and redevelopment often includes separate land improvement (horizontal development) and vertical development phases, and investors face regulatory risk of effectuating cleanup which enables the property to be financed. These factors make the substantial improvement 30-month window extremely difficult time frame in which to complete a redevelopment which involves remediation of environmental contamination.

Large redevelopment projects such as auto manufacturing site or former hospitals may require extensive demolition of existing buildings, excavation, cleanup and grading as early site preparations for the construction of the new structure. It is common to spend several years on existing structural demolition, earthmoving, and environmental cleanup on large sites, which almost guarantees that the finished building will not be completely operational by the end of the 30-month period for substantial improvement. Many “ground up” construction projects in cold weather climates will also face greater challenges in achieving occupancy within 30 months and will likely be a work in progress. Clarity is needed so that significant — and transformative — redevelopment projects can be pursued.

Thank you for considering our requests for clarifications. The clarifications we are requesting will give Opportunity Fund investors confidence that QOF investments can be used to assess, remediate, and redevelop brownfields properties located in QOZs. Subsequently, these clarifications may lead to the economic revitalization of many of our nation’s disadvantaged communities. Should you want to discuss our comments and requests for clarification, please feel free to contact me at 202-566-2774 or .

Sincerely,

Patricia Overmeyer
Deputy Director
Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

¹See H.R. Rept. 115-466, 537, which describes the intent to attract an influx of capital to designated low-income communities with impacts and outcomes in those areas including job creation, poverty reduction, and other metrics.

Learn More:

• Brownfields and Remediation
• Opportunity Zone Grant Programs
• Proposed Guidance

April 15, 2019

Jeffrey Reed, P.E. is now leading SCS Engineers business operations in Texas, including all environmental consulting, landfill, landfill gas, and solid waste business. He commences his responsibilities immediately, under the title Business Unit Director, and is managing the staff and business operations of four offices. His primary office is located in Houston, Texas.

Jeff, a Professional Engineer, licensed in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas has a broad range of environmental expertise. He has provided design and consulting services for projects in 26 states across the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.

Jeff is a Vice President of SCS Engineers and a National Expert on Landfill Design and Construction Quality Assurance for the firm. He has over 30 years of experience working in the solid waste industry. His project experience includes stormwater management, liquids management and leachate control, erosion control, hydrogeological/hydraulic analysis, landfill design and permitting, geosynthetic lining and cover systems, stability analysis, and construction quality assurance. He is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Solid Waste Association of North America.

Kevin Yard, PE, BCEE, SCS’s former Texas Business Unit Director, will continue to support key projects in Texas while he manages clients nationwide that are investing in new infrastructure and processes compatible with their firms’ environmental climate goals.

“Over his ten+ years with SCS, Jeff has demonstrated his leadership and capabilities resolving complex environmental challenges,” said Kevin Yard. “Jeff provides the standard of quality and services to our clients who rely on SCS to support their business operations while meeting rapidly-changing air, water, and soil compliance standards.”

April 12, 2019

Depika (Depi) Vidyarthi joins the SCS team with a proven track record of planning and implementing successful marketing and business development programs for firms in the A/E/C industry. She will oversee SCS’s West Coast regional marketing team by writing winning proposals, creating marketing collateral, managing marketing staff, conducting market research and other promotional initiatives.

Depi holds a BA from UC Irvine and is active in the Society of Marketing Professional Services, Association of Proposal Management Professionals and the Business Development Association of Orange County. She is also a former member of the Professional Environmental Management Association.

Jed Douglas, a senior project advisor, brings more than 20 years of experience in project management, health and safety, air quality and more. He will direct and develop SCS’s industrial hygiene practice in the Southwest region leading business development and client service, managing projects, and managing staff. Jed is a certified industrial hygienist and safety professional, and an accredited U.S. Green Building Council LEED Professional.

In the community, Jed has served on the board of the Big Brothers and Big Sisters of the North Coast, the board of the Humboldt Area Saltwater Anglers, and as Editor of the Humboldt Bay Mycological Society newsletter.

Welcome to the SCS team – driven by client success!

April 4, 2019

A Facility’s Perspective into a Modeled PSD Increment Violation

Midwest Environmental Compliance Conference – MECC 2019

In 2005, dispersion modeling was conducted in Nebraska  Bluff Road Landfill as part of the construction permitting process for the Lincoln Electric System Salt Valley Generating Station. The modeling results identified a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) increment violation at the Bluff Road Landfill resulting from activities associated with landfill operations.  The model results predicted an increment violation for particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM₁₀) at the landfill boundary, specifically for the short term 24-hour standard for PM₁₀.

This SCS Engineers’ presentation by Tia Jeter, focuses on the experience of Bluff Road Landfill and the City of Lincoln, as the entities responded to the modeled violation, and provides highlights of the process required to ultimately resolve the increment violation and bring the facility into modeled compliance with the increment.

Resolving the modeled increment violation required coordination with multiple entities, including the local air permitting authority, the Lincoln Lancaster County Health Department (LLCHD), the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (NDEQ) and US EPA Region 7.  To resolve the violation, facility emission processes, operational limitations, emission controls, model setup, and the compliance boundary was evaluated and revised numerous times.  Initial modeling efforts conducted as part of the response utilized the Industrial Source Complex 3 Short Term (ISC3ST) model, which was the EPA-approved dispersion model at the outset of the project.  Due to the prolonged timeline of the project, the final compliance modeling scenario submitted to the regulatory agency was completed using AERMOD which is now the EPA-approved dispersion model.

Along the path to compliance there were multiple challenges, including negotiations on emission point modeling methods, clarification on the definition of ambient air as it relates to leased property, the requirement to create federally enforceable compliance requirements, the slow response and feedback from the regulatory authority (ies), and the bureaucratic “hold-up” of other facility projects until resolution of the violation was attained.

Tia’s presentation will provide an overview of the road to compliance for the Bluff Road Landfill from the beginning of the project to the resolution of the increment violation. Her presentation provides an insight into what other facilities may experience in the future as compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD increment for PM₁₀ and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM_2.5) becomes increasingly more scrutinized.

March 26, 2019

The American Academy of Environmental Engineers and Scientists (AAEES) recently nominated and confirmed Robert Gardner as the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA), Trustee to the Board. His term began January 1, 2019, and extends until December 31, 2021.

Mr. Gardner is a Senior Vice President of SCS Engineers and leads SCS’s solid waste management practice, including landfill engineering, landfill gas management, solid waste studies, landfill environmental systems, liquids management, operation and maintenance, and construction.

Mr. Gardner is also SCS’s National Expert on Solid Waste Collection and Routing, supporting municipalities and businesses nationwide to continue or expand their sustainable recycling-reuse programs despite international export restrictions and market fluctuation.

AAEES, a not-for-profit organization serves to protect public health and the environment by recognizing leadership and excellence through accredited Board Certification of Environmental Engineers and Scientists and with professional development opportunities. Mr. Gardner’s expertise supports multiple programs in the solid waste management industry, which have a profound positive impact on the environment, climate change, and human health.

Mr. Gardner is a Professional Engineer in thirteen states and Puerto Rico. He is an AAEES Board Certified Environmental Engineer (BCEE) in Solid Waste Management. In addition to serving the AAEES, Gardner is an active member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Solid Waste Association of North America, National Society of Professional Engineers, National Waste and Recycling Association, and the Environmental Education and Research Foundation.

March 25, 2019

The City of Olathe, Kansas is the fastest growing municipality in the Kansas City metro area, and the Solid Waste Division Manager recognized that increasing population; new, single and multi-family home developments; and growth in commercial establishments would require additional services, resources, and infrastructure to continue the same excellent level of service. The City determined that a long-term, solid waste management plan (Plan) was necessary to address future waste management needs of the City, as well as optimize the performance and efficiency of existing waste management services and facilities.

Olathe’s long-term solid waste plan was a first for the City and resulted in creating tangible pathways to environmental and financial sustainability for the next several decades despite the cost of recycling programs. Customers and elected officials support the City’s approach, surpassing another sometimes-prickly hurdle.

In their recent APWA Reporter article, Karen Luken and Anastasia Welch of SCS Engineers describe how the Olathe Solid Waste Division now has a strategic approach and schedule for adding collection routes, increasing recycling, purchasing equipment, and expanding facilities.

This informative article, Strategic planning for sustainable and stakeholder-supported waste systems is available online at APWA.

Solid Waste Management Planning

March 18, 2019

Speakers include Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discussing regulatory policy about the environment, energy, and resources.  SCS a proud sponsor looks forward to seeing you there!

A few of the topics of this year’s conference will include water law, brownfields, public service, fracking, enforcement, grid resiliency, PFAS, mineral exploration, and more, even the environmental implications of the new cannabis industry.

March 14, 2019

Dan Sola, a Hydrogeologist and Project Director at SCS Engineers, chats with attorney Shell Bleiweiss on expert witness testimony. In a rare article, Mr. Sola, an expert witness for environmental issues, tells his story of what it took to become a successful and sought after witness, while Mr. Bleiweiss answers from the attorney’s perspective.

… That’s expert testimony, and that’s why I love it. Everything you have ever said or written is on the line. It is a battle of intellect and wits. The rules of the game are hundreds of years old and amount to a philosophical discourse on the nature of truth. It is a language where everyday meanings overlap with esoteric jargon. It is a highly civilized conversation among oath-bound professionals wanting nothing more than for the other to fail. – Dan Sola. EWRG 2019 article.

Witness the article here.

Sola’s areas of expertise include soil and groundwater cleanup, hydrogeological evaluation, computer modeling, hazardous waste regulations, human and ecological risk assessment, expert witness and public testimony, and environmental review.