Meghan Benincasa, Author at Nobis Group

Nobis Group Finalizes Strategic Acquisition of Richard D. Bartlett & Associates, LLC

Posted on December 5, 2025

Richard D Bartlett A division of Nobis

Expanding In-House Services
Throughout New England

CONCORD, New Hampshire

Nobis is thrilled to report that we have completed the acquisition of Richard D. Bartlett & Associates, LLC, a small land surveying company in Concord, NH. The acquisition is part of a greater strategy for Nobis Group to enter new market sectors and add in-house land surveying services for current and future clients.

Established in 1973, Richard D. Bartlett & Associates is one of the leading land surveying firms in New Hampshire. Serving residential, commercial, and municipal clients alike, they play an integral part in the planning and permitting process, guiding clients through local, state, and federal government agency applications and approval requirements.

“Nobis Group has worked seamlessly with the Richard D. Bartlett Team to deliver projects to our clients,” says Nobis President and CEO Chris Adams, PE. “The two firms are aligned with our values and our focus on our clients and our employees. We’re enthusiastic about this partnership and the additional capabilities we can now bring to our clients in addition to the growth opportunities it will create for our team members.”

Richard D. Bartlett leadership, Mark Sargent and Daniel Mullen, will join Nobis’ leadership as the Director of Project Development and the Director of Survey Services, respectively. The two firms have a strong history of collaboration, working on 250+ projects together across each market sector. The amalgamation provides clients with a single source of comprehensive services and expertise to meet all their project needs.

Mark Sargent, LLS, owner and manager of Richard D. Bartlett comments, “We‘ve worked with Nobis for more than 30 years and felt that their culture and focus on employees and clients was a great fit for us. This partnership provides opportunities for the Richard D. Bartlett team members and for our clients. We are excited for what the future holds.”

Under the terms of the deal, Richard D. Bartlett & Associates will continue business for the first year under their existing name as a division of Nobis Group. Richard D. Bartlett & Associates will continue to operate out of Concord, NH, though they will relocate from 214 North State Street to Nobis Group headquarters at 18 Chenell Drive.

-->

The Future for Solar is Bright

Posted on May 6, 2025

The Future for Solar is Bright

Author: Tony Giunta, Director of Project Development

Benjamin Franklin once said, “There are only two things certain in life: death and taxes.” While I’m not here to challenge old Ben, I’ve lived long enough to confidently add one more certainty to his list: “There are only three things certain in life: death, taxes, and the sun will rise tomorrow.” With that third certainty comes the opportunity to harness a free source of energy to power our homes, businesses, and planet.

Although the ability to consistently capture an unlimited free power source sounds like a “no-lose” business proposition, the solar industry has always faced stiff headwinds. Its most formidable challenge has been to lower the cost of converting that free energy into a usable form that is competitive with fossil-fueled sources (brown power). This challenge is compounded by the need to navigate the continuously shifting support for politically imposed subsidies designed to “level the playing field” between the comparatively higher cost of green solar and cheaper brown power.

So, knowing that cost is the pivotal factor, can the solar industry ever achieve price equity with brown power? I believe the answer is a resounding yes!

As is typically the case, technology is revolutionizing the solar industry (I’m sure Ben Franklin would appreciate my choice of words here!). Solar photovoltaic panels are becoming more efficient at lower production costs. Five years ago, it cost nearly $4 per watt to produce solar power. Two years ago, that cost was halved to $2 per watt, and today it has halved again to just under $1 per watt.

In terms of cost per kilowatt-hour, ten years ago when Nobis started working with solar developers, the price needed to support a solar project was in the 12-15 cent per kilowatt-hour range compared to 6 cents per kilowatt-hour for brown power. Today, solar developers are building projects with a sale price of 8-10 cents per kilowatt-hour. As you can see (and what should be music to everyone’s ears), solar power is rapidly closing the price gap with its archrival, brown power.

The rapidly falling price of solar really “kills two birds with one stone.” As the price gap narrows, consumers generally choose greener resources. And with that all-important consumer choice, the need for unpredictable and controversial subsidies evaporates. Case in point: solar power is the leading source of renewable power installation in the nation. In 2023, the solar industry set a record by installing 32 gigawatts of solar energy. In 2024, that record was shattered with over 50 gigawatts of US solar installations. Considering each solar gigawatt of power is like building a nuclear-powered facility, the 2023 and 2024 solar installations are equivalent to having built nearly 75 new nuclear power plants, with the added benefit of not having to worry about nuclear waste.

Thanks to advanced technologies, lower equipment costs, and a diminishing reliance on subsidies, the future of solar looks bright (pun intended)!

-->

Nobis Group Expands Offices into Vermont

Posted on December 10, 2024

Nobis Group Expands Offices into Vermont

Nobis Group is excited to announce the opening of its new office in Montpelier, Vermont. Located at 27 State Street, this new office will provide space for Nobis Group’s Vermont-based engineers and scientists to collaborate on technical tasks, pursue new engineering projects, recruit new talent, and better serve their private and public customer base throughout the Green Mountain State.

-->

The Nuts and Bolts of Leadership: The Ownership Bond with Chris Adams

Posted on October 31, 2024

The Nuts and Bolts of Leadership: The Ownership Bond with Chris Adams

Nobis Group’s President & CEO, Chris Adams, PE, was a guest on this week’s Nuts and Bolts of Leadership podcast with Billy Duran and Hali G.! Chris dives into the core values of our “Nobis Bond,” showcasing our company’s commitment to continuous investment in our team. Tune into this episode linked below!

https://threadedfasteners.com/the-nuts-and-bolts-of-leadership-the-ownership-bond-chris-adams/

Also available on all major podcast platforms including Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

-->

Nobis Group Unveils New Office Location in Lowell

Posted on October 24, 2024

Nobis Group Unveils New Office Location in Lowell

Nobis Group is excited to announce the opening of its new office in Lowell, MA. The firm has moved from its previous location on Middlesex Street into a new building located at 55 Technology Drive, Suite 101 in Lowell, MA.

The new office will enhance Nobis Group’s ability to serve its clients in the region and will provide a more accessible location for employees to collaborate. This expansion reflects the company’s commitment to growth and its dedication to delivering high-quality engineering and environmental solutions.

“We are thrilled to announce our move to a new, modern office location at 55 Technology Drive in Lowell. Our new space will provide us with the means to grow and continue our journey towards success, while allowing us to remain in Lowell,” says Al Jones, Vice President of Engineering and Compliance. “This move wouldn’t have been possible without the dedication and hard work of our staff. Here’s to the future and continued success of Nobis Group. Let’s embrace this new chapter and the growth opportunities it brings!”

-->

Nobis Group Appoints New Director to Board

Posted on September 19, 2024

Nobis Group Appoints New Director to Board

Nobis Group is pleased to announce the appointment of Janet Riel, Vice President of Finance, to the company’s Board of Directors.

Riel recently celebrated her 35-year milestone at Nobis, and in her time at Nobis, Janet has brought a passion for optimizing financial and operational processes, which have resulted in the firm’s successful contract performance and growth. Janet works with the firm’s principals, directors, and project managers to focus on improving financial performance and achieving growth and profitability.

“As the first employee to ever be hired by Nobis, Janet has seen and done it all. We are lucky to have her a part of Team Nobis and appreciate her inspiration and leadership,” said Chris Adams, President & CEO.

-->

Achieving Greater Sustainability by Adopting More Energy-Efficient Cycles

Posted on September 12, 2024

Achieving Greater Sustainability by Adopting More Energy-Efficient Cycles

By Tony Giunta, Director of Project Development, The Nobis Group

It’s only natural to assume that humans would consume the earth’s natural resources in a sustainable manner. After all, if we fail to live sustainably our species will perish. New Englanders have long understood and practiced this.

In fact, New Englanders have for a long time inherited a reputation of being a very “frugal” bunch. Having been born and raised in this part of the country, I can attest to the fact that we “Yankees” can always find a way to stretch life’s necessities. I truly believe this comes from our early European settler history where one either learned how to sustain food, water, shelter, and even energy – or you didn’t survive the winter! Death, it appears, was an effective incentive for ingenuity when it came to preserving and sustaining resources.

Today, technology provides us with a near inexhaustible supply of life sustaining commodities. So much so, that we no longer give thought during our daily life that wasting our natural resources could result in our demise. So how do we become more sustainable? One way is to consume resources as close to their source location as possible. Although a simple, reasonable, and completely achievable concept, this solution is grossly ignored around the world.

As silly as it may seem, it’s commonplace for raw materials to be shipped thousands of miles only to see manufactured products made from these resources shipped right back to their original points of origin. As a result, enormous amounts of our limited energy supplies are consumed during transit alone.

One example close to home is liquified natural gas (LNG). Because of constrained pipeline capacity during times of heavy consumption, Boston receives LNG shipments from Tobago and Trinidad. At the same time, shipments of the same product are transported from Louisiana to Europe and Asia. The finite fossil fuel resources consumed to power those gigantic LNG transport ships only to deliver LNG are staggering. Enormous amounts of energy could be sustainably preserved if we globally prioritized utilizing energy sources and related raw materials based on their proximity to the user.

Our worldwide energy demands are continuing to rise and, ironically, adding to this is our commitment to build a new generation of renewable energy sources and networks globally. But we need to be just as committed to eliminating our wasteful energy practices at the same time.

At Nobis Group, we are committed to moving our world towards a more sustainable energy future. Over the past decade, remaining steadfast to this commitment has resulted in Nobis having permitted more solar projects than any other firm in New Hampshire. We strive to create a society more reliant on limitless energy supplies like solar and wind power and less reliant on finite energy sources such as crude oil, coal, and natural gas.

-->

Nobis Group’s Tim Andrews Appointed to ACEC-NH Board of Directors

Posted on September 10, 2024

Nobis Group’s Tim Andrews Appointed to ACEC-NH Board of Directors

(Concord, NH) Nobis Group, a 100% employee-owned consulting firm providing a wide variety of engineering and environmental solutions to clients throughout the Northeast and U.S., is excited to announce the appointment of Tim Andrews, PG, Director of State & Municipal Services at Nobis Group, to the American Council of Engineering Companies NH Chapter’s Board of Directors.

“As a developing professional and project geologist, I recall the importance of involvement with ACEC-NH that impressed me by the senior leadership of Nobis,“ says Andrews. “Since then, I’ve taken the opportunity to participate in numerous events that have helped shape my professional growth and learn more about the engineering/consulting industry. Over the years, I’ve been able to participate in multiple ACEC-NH Committees where I’ve met colleagues from various disciplines and been able to provide support and insight on numerous key topics. I’m honored and humbled for this opportunity to contribute as a Board member to ACEC-NH, alongside so many esteemed individuals in the New Hampshire engineering community and I hope to be a positive ambassador for all of our ACEC-NH member firms.”

About Nobis Group

Nobis Group, founded in 1988, is a leading engineering and science consulting firm providing expertise and solutions for public and private projects throughout the Northeast of the U.S. Nobis Group offers civil engineering, geotechnical engineering, and environmental remediation services. Nobis Group is a 100% employee-owned company with a legacy of collaboration, responsiveness, an employee-focused workplace culture, and community involvement.

-->

No Final Whistle: How Lessons in Teamwork Translate into Environmental Field Work

Posted on July 18, 2024

No Final Whistle: How Lessons in Teamwork Translate into Environmental Field Work

Author: Stephanie Stone, Staff Scientist

“Herons on three!”, I shouted, almost definitively. It was the last time I would ever say those words, on that field, with the people that I’ve grown the closest to. The end to my field hockey career stung like a heartbreak. Hanging up my jersey marked the end of a chapter I never was quite fully prepared to finish. When you play a sport in college, it becomes your identity, one of your descriptors. Everyone knew me as the field hockey goalie. For over a decade, it consumed my life, and once the final whistle blew, I felt like I was losing a piece of myself.

Sports to Career

Collegiate athletics instilled in me a work ethic that I transitioned into my professional life. They taught me a lot about myself and how to collaborate with those with differing personalities than mine. I created friendships that will last a lifetime. We worked well together on the field, but that did not happen overnight. It took time for us to trust in each other’s abilities, to understand people’s strengths, and to lift them up in times of weakness. The team became a close-knit group that was hard to say goodbye to. I cherish the memories we made and when I look back on my experience, it’s not the wins and losses I remember most, it’s how being a part of that team shaped me into the person I am today.

Challenges in Environmental Field Work

Transitioning into environmental consulting and field work brought its own set of challenges. I promptly learned that field work is demanding – physically, mentally, and technically challenging too. It is a dynamic, fast paced environment where you must anticipate and solve problems on the fly. Much like in sports, success is based on effective teamwork. For these reasons and many others, the work is undoubtedly fulfilling. Environmental field work is by no means a one-person job, even on a seemingly small sampling event. As field staff, we are responsible for interpreting and communicating ever-changing site conditions to our project team members and other stakeholders effectively and frequently.

There is rarely a perfect site, but there are some that are far less than perfect. Your monitoring wells don’t recharge. There are unexpected snow squalls. The equipment you rented loses functionality. Or, most unfortunately, a combination of the three. During these hardships, it is teamwork that will make for a successful field assignment. As field staff, we should be able to lift each other up when challenging situations arise and work together to navigate issues that occur on our job sites. I vividly recall one particularly difficult site last fall in a remote location. Cell service was minimal and the time of year was unforgiving in terms of daylight. Hazardous materials added an extra layer of complexity, requiring constant attention to safety. Yet, through teamwork and resourcefulness, my team managed to surpass every obstacle.

Carrying Sports Values Forward

When I picked up my first field hockey stick, it did not occur to me that the decision would come to shape the rest of my life. We don’t join sports expecting it to land us a job in STEM, but they do instill values that translate in the workforce when it comes time to enter it. Sports change who we are as a person. They teach discipline and cultivate a passion, both favorable qualities to carry into field work. Most importantly, they teach us how to work with others and become valuable members of a team. Fostering a sports team culture in the field can introduce a supportive environment to get a difficult job done. My time as a technical staff member thus far has shown me that, while I hung up my field hockey jersey in 2022, I picked up a new one when I became an environmental staff scientist. I’ve been accepted into a new team, and while I’ve traded in my goalie helmet for a hard hat, I strive to foster the same values that have gotten me this far, just with a different goal. When we work as a team, we win! And for me, there is no final whistle.

-->

EPA’s Superfund Program Turns 44 This Year: It’s Making a Difference

Posted on April 22, 2024

EPA’s Superfund Program Turns 44 This Year:

Authors: Pete Delano, PE, Director of Project Development & Scott Harding, PE, Vice President of Business Development

In the early 20^th century, industrial activities and improper waste disposal practices led to the accumulation of toxic substances in various locations across the United States, posing a threat to both the environment and public health. To counteract this and reduce future impacts, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set forth on a mission to identify and remediate contaminated sites and to hold accountable parties responsible for the costs associated with these clean-ups. Thus, in 1980, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) was born – more commonly known as the “Superfund”.

How does it work?

The Superfund has served as the primary Federal regulatory mechanism to address hazardous waste sites across the United States, responding to potential environmental human health risks from abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites in cooperation with States and Tribal Nations. It is a complex process that can be broken down into six primary steps:

Site Discovery and Assessment: Often, this phase begins with a notification to EPA by a local or State agency of a potential or actual spill, leak, or release, followed by EPA conducting a brief site inspection and some limited initial sampling to determine if regulated hazardous materials are present and to establish the severity of potential risks to human health and the environment.

Placement on the National Priorities List (NPL): During this phase, EPA will conduct a pre-CERCLA screening, more site sampling and investigation is completed to establish the nature and extent of contamination further, and the site is ranked and prioritized against other hazardous sites that qualify for Superfund resources and efforts.

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS): This stage involves an evaluation of the nature and extent of contamination at a site and assessing risk to human health and the environment. This stage of the process also includes evaluation of the potential performance and cost of the remedial options identified for a site.

Records of Decision (ROD): The ROD explains which cleanup alternatives will be used at NPL sites. Leading up to the issuance of the ROD, the EPA recommends a preferred remedy and presents the cleanup plan in a document called a Proposed Plan for public comment.

Remedial Design/Remedial Action: Detailed cleanup plans are developed and implemented during the remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA) stage. Remedial design includes development of engineering drawings and specifications for a site cleanup. Remedial action follows design and involves the actual construction or implementation phase of site cleanup.

Post Construction Completion: Activities undertaken during this phase help ensure that cleanup work at a site continues to protect human health and the environment. Work can include routine monitoring of a site; routine reviews of the site to ensure cleanup continues to be effective; and enforcing any long term site restrictions.

EPA’s goal is to make sure site cleanup is consistent with the likely future use of a site. Consideration of reuse at a site can occur at any point in the Superfund cleanup process, from site investigation activities to deletion from the NPL. EPA works with communities to make sure sites or portions of sites are used safely.

Throughout the CERCLA process, EPA relies on a pool of engineering and environmental firms to conduct this CERCLA work that have been deemed to be qualified as having the necessary engineers, geologists, scientists, chemists, toxicologists, and other related CERCLA expertise.

So, who funds the Superfund?

The EPA has had success seeking out responsible polluters to perform or fund their site cleanups – in 2023 alone, the EPA’s enforcement actions resulted in more than $900M in responsible party commitments, further helping to fund needed cleanups. But what happens when a responsible party can’t be identified or in situations like natural disasters where no one can be held responsible to foot the bill? In those cases, the EPA must rely on additional funding.

For instance, in 2021, the Bilateral Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) assigned $3.5B to the EPA’s Superfund program. On top of this, the long-discontinued Federal petroleum tax was reinstated. This is a reinstated Federal excise tax placed on every gallon of gasoline and diesel fuel sold in the US and is expected to generate more than $50B in revenue over the next 10 years, potentially allowing the Superfund program to accelerate many more site cleanups well into the future.

What does the future hold?

Over the years, the Superfund has made significant progress in cleaning up contaminated sites and protecting communities. Thousands of sites have been addressed and successful cleanups have led to the revitalization of once-polluted areas. The Superfund program has not only improved environmental quality, it has enhanced public health and safety.

Since 1980, 457 sites have successfully been deleted from the NPL. Today, about 1,335 sites remain and about 1,242 sites are considered substantially “Construction Complete”, according to data published by the EPA.

Moving forward, the EPA has stated that their plans and priorities to evolve the Superfund’s future priorities are as follows:

exploring the potential for beneficial reuse of rehabilitated sites to construct solar, wind, and other renewable energy projects;
adapting Superfund site cleanups to account for climate change;
establishing environmental justice criteria to prioritize selected site cleanups;
and continuing to focus on new and emerging contaminants including PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl) substances, microplastics, pesticides, pharmaceutical wastes, and other chemical-based products.

Since its inception, the EPA’s Superfund has certainly experienced ebbs and flows in its funding, progress, priorities, and political pressures. But overall, its primary mission remains the same today as it has for over forty years: protect human health and the environment, make responsible parties pay, involve communities in the process, and ultimately return Superfund sites to productive use. The work is complex and it can take many years to navigate the entire CERCLA process, but it’s a critically important effort towards improving the communities we live in now and for generations to come.

-->

Unlocking the Artistic Side of Engineering

Posted on April 11, 2024

Unlocking the Artistic Side of Engineering

Author: J. Christopher Nadeau, PE – Director of Commercial Services | Associate

Despite the stereotype of a typical engineer as being calculated and precise, most engineers have a creative side with an ability to cross the boundaries of mathematics and science.

Growing up with a parent who was an avid landscape artist, I have always had a passion for drawing and painting. I took art classes throughout my years of school and University, but never really considered myself good enough to pursue it further. My drive to pursue a career in engineering and raising a family caused that interest to take a back seat. Now that I’m getting on in my years, I think about revisiting that original passion.

I attended a national conference for engineering companies back in October where I heard a speaker talking about the advancement of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) by adding Arts to make STEAM. I never considered incorporating Arts into my engineering role, but it makes sense. There is an artistic side to what we do every day, from incorporating creative elements into writing reports to creating site designs. Harnessing your artistic side allows you to think outside the box and to look at something different than the standard, rigid rules of engineering.

Setting aside my own personal interests, I have been thinking about how Nobis Group and other companies can incorporate the arts into our workplace cultures because we all realize that recruitment and retention of engineers remains one of the top industry concerns post-COVID. A shortage of engineers will remain for many years and we are burning out our existing talent.

So, how can we set ourselves apart from other equally qualified engineering firms to recruit new talent? By incorporating Arts into our company values that support and encourage employees to pursue their passions in Music, Acting, Drama, Visual Art, Creative Writing, and more. This could entail taking a class, adding a weekly social to our schedule to celebrate co-workers’ artistic talents, having a company event at an art gallery, or even a musical concert.

While writing this article, I interviewed a potential mid-level engineering candidate (something we call a “unicorn”). I asked what their interests were outside of work and not surprisingly they said they were an avid musician prior to entering the engineering world. But, like many, decided that music would not pay the bills, so a career in engineering was much more practical. A familiar decision many of us have faced.

Where do we go next? Personally, I need to carve out time in my schedule to pursue some bucket list items: travel, learning a new language, and enrolling in drawing/painting classes. Next, I need to set goals and finally sign up for a class or two. From a company perspective, it is important to poll and listen to employees to understand the breadth of their interest in the Arts and creative opportunities to celebrate and encourage their interests. Let’s blend the worlds of STEM with the Arts to spark creativity and innovation within the engineering industry. Full STEAM ahead!

-->

Nobis Group 6th Annual STEM Scholarship

Posted on February 12, 2024

Nobis Group is pleased to announce the application process for our 2024 Nobis Group STEM Scholarship is open! Recognizing the potential of our next generation in helping to build a sustainable future, we are proud to offer scholarships to students who are passionate about Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. We’re looking for high school seniors in Massachusetts and New Hampshire who are pursuing post-secondary education in one of several STEM fields. Please see the application below for additional details and eligibility requirements.

Click here for Scholarship Application

-->

Nobis Group President & CEO Kenneth Koornneef Named CATCH Volunteer of the Year

Posted on April 6, 2023

Nobis Group President & CEO Kenneth Koornneef, PE was recently named Volunteer of the Year by CATCH Neighborhood Housing at the non-profit’s Annual Event, “Making Community Home”.

The Volunteer of the Year Award is presented to individuals who demonstrate a commitment to CATCH, a community-based organization focused on providing a full spectrum of much-needed housing and education services in Merrimack County.

“Ken understands how important affordable and workforce housing is to our community and is someone who is willing to devote his time and energy to the cause,” noted Tom Furtado, President & CEO of CATCH Neighborhood Housing. “For over 20 years, Ken has served as a key supporter for CATCH, including several years as a member of our Board of Directors. During his tenure, his expertise as an engineer has been invaluable to CATCH and our real estate development efforts.”

“Serving on the CATCH board these past seven years has truly been one of the highlights of my professional career,” stated Koornneef in his acceptance speech. “I have learned so much and have had the opportunity to serve with some fantastic people that have made my life richer. Rest assured that my involvement with CATCH will continue because I truly believe that it is so important that we continue to create communities where every person is confident of a safe, affordable home.”

-->

Nobis Group Announces New Associate

Posted on February 21, 2023

Nobis Group, a 100% employee-owned consulting firm providing engineering and environmental solutions to clients throughout the northeast, is pleased to announce that Jeffrey Brunelle, CPG has been named an Associate of the firm.

Brunelle, Director of Project Development and Senior Project Manager with Nobis Group, is a Certified Professional Geologist with over twenty years of experience leading hazardous materials investigations and environmental cleanups at industrial, institutional, military, municipal, and Superfund sites throughout the northeast.

“Since joining Nobis in 2009, Jeff has steadily developed and nurtured many client relationships while always problem solving and delivering the right environmental solution for every project and client. It’s been very rewarding to watch Jeff grow professionally over the years and I look forward to his continued leadership at Nobis,” stated Ken Koornneef, President and CEO at Nobis Group.

-->

Contaminated Soil Management in Massachusetts – Plan Ahead and Plan Carefully!

Posted on November 17, 2022

Contaminated Soil Management in Massachusetts – Plan Ahead and Plan Carefully!

Author: Jeffrey Brunelle, CPG – Director of Project Development

In Massachusetts, it’s becoming increasingly challenging to manage excess soil generated during construction that requires off-site disposal. Today, there are fewer facilities that will accept soil for disposal within the Commonwealth. Contaminated material exceeding the Reportable Concentrations as promulgated by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) typically must be disposed out of state.

Disposal restrictions and increasing costs often have big impacts on the overall project budget and schedule, so early soil management planning is imperative to the smooth execution of a construction project that includes earthwork and off-site soil disposal.

Plan for Soil Management

It’s important that consultants explain and educate their clients early on that soil disposal is complex and that contamination can be encountered even on supposedly clean sites. Often clients don’t include soil disposal in the budget, as they may assume sites with no evidence of historical contamination to be clean; however, even assumed clean sites may still have stringent disposal requirements.

It’s very rare to have soil, especially from urban sites, that is deemed to be acceptable for unrestricted use. Even marginally contaminated soil or soil with compound concentrations less than MassDEP reportable concentrations require some special handling and disposal to ensure that contamination is not inadvertently spread to a new location.

Soil characterization and disposal costs can very easily and quickly grow significantly, depending on the volume of soil and compounds encountered in the soil. And it’s through effective soil management planning that one can best avoid costly change orders or unplanned costs related to soil management and disposal.

Soil Testing

Soil to be moved off-site needs to be sampled for a robust analytical suite to identify reuse and disposal options. The number of samples to be collected depends on the volume of soil to be disposed and the permit requirements of the licensed disposal facility. In addition, facilities may also have specific acceptance criteria outside of analytical testing, such as requirements for soil field screening using an Photoionization Detector (PID) or observation of soil excavation by a certified environmental professional.

Analytical data will be compared to disposal facility acceptance criteria to establish available off-site disposal options. Facility acceptance criteria varies from facility to facility and is based on the facility’s operating permit. Permit requirements are often based on a facility’s processes and location.

There’s Liability with Testing

Whenever you collect analytical samples, results are subject to comparison to the MassDEP standards promulgated in the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP). Data that exceeds the MCP Reportable Concentrations requires MassDEP notification and contaminant remediation under the MCP.

Projects tracked by MassDEP under the MCP can be costly and time consuming. Be sure that your project plans warrant soil sampling prior to sample collection to limit potential cleanup liability under the MCP.

Think About Your Soil Management Options

Can soil be reused on-site? If so, soil sampling may not be warranted. Is in-situ soil characterization or stockpile profiling more appropriate for your project? Pre-characterization of in-situ soil can be helpful for budgeting purposes; however, this approach does not guarantee that pre-characterized soil is always representative of actual soil to be disposed. Characterization of stockpiled soil that has been excavated is always more representative, but unknown costs, schedule, and facility selection implications may be unknown until the time of sampling. Also, there’s not always adequate physical space on a jobsite to store and manage stockpiled soil.

These soil assessment management implications should be discussed with the project team early in the job process to find which method will work best for your project. Soil management plans should be documented within the project specifications and in a Soil Management Plan for unregulated sites or a Release Abatement Measure Plan (RAM Plan) if the Site is tracked under the MCP.

Acceptance for Disposal Takes Time

Analytical turnaround times are typically around two weeks due to the robust analytical suite mentioned above and due to the time required for sample analysis. Often analytical results cannot be rushed since some of the analytical processes take a set amount of time (such as extraction for Polychlorinated Biphenyls or metals).

Disposal facility selection may be dictated by the project schedule. There may not always be an earthwork contractor under contract to select disposal locations during the early project phase when soil management decisions are made, so it’s key to make clear upfront who is responsible for this task. Typically, it is the responsibility of the earthwork contractor to select disposal locations, and they are not always present in the project planning phase.

Typically, it is the responsibility of the earthwork contractor to select soil disposal locations; however, the contractor may not be under contract during the early project phase when soil management decisions are made. Facility selection may be dictated by the project schedule, so it’s key to decide upfront who is responsible for this task.

Soil profiles are required by each proposed disposal facility. As mentioned above, acceptance criteria vary from facility to facility. Because of this, facility evaluation can be complicated and take time. Also, the time needed for the disposal facility to review the soil profiles has to be taken into consideration. Often a disposal facility contracts with an environmental firm to review their disposal applications. Understandably, this further adds to the acceptance timeline. Also, if your site is regulated by the MassDEP and is subject to requirements of the MCP, a Licensed Site Professional (LSP) is required to complete the soil profiles and transportation paperwork.

Plan for a month or more for facility acceptance.

Disposal Options

Do some “what if” scenario planning, but always work toward the best disposal option and, again, start this effort early on. Have a contingency plan and back-up facilities for soil disposal. Obviously, as soil volumes and contamination increases, so do the associated disposal costs.

Soil with concentrations consistent with background levels (as defined in 310 CMR 40.0006) typically do not have reuse restrictions since contaminant concentrations are non-detect or extremely low. This type of soil may not generate a disposal cost, but may carry a liability due to potential human health concern risks, as reuse locations could include a school, daycare, or backyard.

Soil classified as hazardous waste carries a high cost of disposal due to the potentially toxic characteristics of this material and the specialized handling and disposal requirements. No in-state facilities are available for hazardous waste disposal, and transport to an applicable disposal facility could be as far as Ohio or Canada.

Unrestricted use and hazardous waste classifications “book end” the wide spectrum of soil management classification. Typically, soil is classified as either impacted soil or contaminated soil. Impacted soil contains compound concentrations greater than background levels, but less than the MCP release notification thresholds. Contaminated soil contains concentrations of contaminants that exceed in-state acceptance criteria and are not classified as a Hazardous Waste.

Impacted soils may be reused at in-state locations such as a MassDEP-permitted reclamation soil project under MassDEP Policy COMM-15-01 or reused as daily cover, intermediate cover, or pre-cap contouring material at in-state unlined or lined landfills under the MassDEP COMM 97 Policy.

COMM-15 facilities require scrutiny for acceptance since acceptance criteria is not universal. COMM-97 acceptance evaluations are easier because the acceptance criteria are universal, as published in the policy documents. Disposal at these in-state facilities can be problematic, as quantities to be accepted may be capped yearly and these facilities do not always operate on a fixed schedule. With varying schedules for operations, these facilities commonly stop accepting waste as they reach their established annual capacity, rendering these disposal options unreliable.

There are no longer any in-state options for disposal of contaminated material, making hauling and disposal costly under this soil category. Also, impacted soil may be managed as contaminated soil (and carry a higher premium as such) as disposal options for impacted soil become no longer available.

Consider Soil Reuse On-Site

Another option is to reuse soil that is not grossly contaminated on-site. MassDEP permits on-site soil reuse typically when contaminant concentrations do not pose a significant risk to human health and the environment and reuse of soil will not degrade the soil quality at the site.

The Similar Soils provision prohibits contaminated soil from being moved to a portion of the site that has lesser contaminant concentrations (i.e., a cleaner area of the site), so some site investigation may be necessary to document site conditions for reuse.

Another consideration for site reuse would be geotechnical suitability to ensure the material to be reused on-site meets construction requirements. This brings up a key point – soil contamination is not the only factor that may require off-site disposal. Soil with high debris components may be unusable in construction and therefore would require off-site characterization and disposal.

Conclusion

Soil management considerations as an afterthought are often costly to the project. Disposal costs may vary from as little as $22 per ton for COMM-15 soil to more than $450 per ton for hazardous waste. Remember that economic variables such as cost of fuel, personnel shortages, and supply chain issues each can adversely impact your disposal costs.

Ignoring or delaying soil management planning may result in hefty project change orders and significant project delays. Carry a monetary contingency for soil management evaluations and off-site soil disposal to avoid surprises. Also – your site is never as clean as you think it is. It’s likely going to cost something for off-site disposal of soil you can’t reuse on-site. So, plan ahead and plan carefully!

-->

Using Ground Improvements to Engineer Safer Solutions for Urban Development

Posted on October 26, 2022

Using Ground Improvements to Engineer Safer Solutions for Urban Development

Author: Sarah Kurtzer, EIT – Project Engineer

With the rise in construction activity and demand for additional and improved transportation services, the need to utilize sites with unsuitable soil conditions for new construction has increased substantially in the past few decades. Building on these unsuitable soils can result in bearing capacity failures, excessive settlement, liquefaction of soils, sinkholes in roadways, and landslides, to name a few. Previously, very few (and usually costly) methods were available to solve the issues associated with unsuitable soil conditions like uncontrolled fill, soft clays, loose coarse-grained soils, and collapsible soils.

Ground improvement, or ground modification, is the process of using mechanical means to improve the engineering properties of on-site soils. Ground improvement comes in many forms including densification of existing on-site soils, drainage and dewatering, preloading, reinforcement, chemical stabilization, and thermal and biological treatment. Selection of a ground improvement method should consider structural, geotechnical, environmental, and construction conditions, as well as reliability and durability. Some of the more common types of ground improvements are traditional compacting, deep dynamic compaction, rapid impact compaction, aggregate piers, and rigid inclusions.

Ground improvements have become a favorable option as technology has advanced. In many situations, improving the ground is a more economic and more efficient means of making a site suitable for construction. Ground improvements may eliminate the need for costly deep foundation systems such as driven piles, drilled shafts, and micropiles. Disposal costs may also be reduced as most ground improvement methods produce little to no waste, which is extremely advantageous on environmentally impacted sites.

The geotechnical industry is always developing and implementing new ways to work with difficult geotechnical conditions. Ground improvements provide alternative solutions to urban development that can be tailored to each specific site and project.

-->

When Safety and Quality are Critical, Take a Cue from the Nuclear Power Industry

Posted on October 10, 2022

When Safety and Quality are Critical, Take a Cue from the Nuclear Power Industry

Author: Zachary R. Reed, ASP, CHST – Health & Safety Manager

Human Performance Tools

Do you remember playing “telephone” when you were younger? In a game of telephone, one person begins by whispering a secret phrase into the closest player’s ear. In sequence, each recipient relays the message – as well as they can – to the next person. In the end, the last person exclaims the message they think they heard, and of course it is invariably revealed that the message was horribly confused throughout the chain of players! How could the simple act of repeating a sentence get so badly muddled?

While communication errors may be a reliable way to entertain a classroom full of children, when the stakes are higher, matters of clear communication, and reducing human error generally, can be serious. One does not have to think hard to imagine settings and occupations where human error could lead to disaster – nuclear energy production, manufacturing, railroad transportation, and military applications to name a few. The US Department of Energy claims that about 80% of adverse events are the result of human error. As a safety professional, I am always interested in learning about ways to weed out mistakes – those human errors that can seem so elusive and hard to control – but can result in injury, property damage, and environmental damage just the same as mechanical failures, maintenance problems, and other causes which may seem easier to detect before they become an issue. The game of telephone is an exaggerated example for certain – but any time we undertake tasks with others, the risk of human error from unclear communication or imperfect instruction is a factor. Given such a large percentage of errors may be related to human performance, isn’t it reasonable that we should seek to do whatever we can to reduce their incidence?

One resource that doesn’t get much attention outside of the industries like the ones mentioned above is the concept of Human Performance Tools (HPT). Essentially HPT are a group of behaviors that can be employed – by anyone, whether they be plant personnel, construction workers, or engineers – to reduce the likelihood of undesirable human error events. Sounds good right? When it really matters, any business or organization can use HPT to reduce human error and help critical outcomes succeed. Widely used by the nuclear energy industry, the U.S. Department of Energy has published for public release a two part manual for understanding and employing HPT titled DOE-HDBK-1028-2009, Human Performance Improvement Handbook. In this article we will look at three of the easiest to use and widely applicable tools, that you can use to improve safety, quality, productivity in your organization’s critical endeavors.

Pre-Job Briefings

It may seem simple but taking the time to write a plan – tailored to your activity – – and then discussing it with your team is probably the most impactful thing you can do to reduce human error. In the rush to begin a task or project, this crucial step is often skipped – leading to dangerous or time-consuming mistakes. When conducting your pre-job briefing, include the scope of work, team roles and responsibilities, the sequence of steps, hazards associated with each step, means of controlling each hazard or risk, criteria for when to stop and re-evaluate, and inspection requirements for your tools and equipment. Having a pre-job brief every time you start a task will help all involved better understand the task, and their role. It will help to ensure that needed supplies and equipment are staged and ready to go before the work starts. It will give everyone a chance to ask questions and gain a better understanding of the task which not only improves safety outcomes, but also efficiency, improving your organization’s bottom line.

Consistently conducting pre-job briefings will help prevent complacency, improve efficiency, and combat dangerous or misguided assumptions. Though it may seem obvious, there is good reason that pre-job briefings are a big part of HPT in safety-critical environments. As the adage goes, “those who fail to plan, should plan to fail”.

Three-Way Communication

Remember our game of telephone? Three-way communication is essentially the opposite of that. Three-way communication consists of using three steps to communicate a message (usually instructions) between a sender and receiver, while minimizing the chance of error or misinterpretation. It is equally useful in face-to-face communication as it is in remote communication, where static, lag, or other technological limitations may interfere with clear communication. The three steps to be used are:

1. The sender states their message clearly to the receiver.

2. The receiver repeats the message back to the sender in their own words, however repeating names and labels word-for-word. Paraphrasing in this step allows the sender to evaluate whether the receiver truly understands the message, as opposed to merely repeating what was heard.

3. The sender informs the receiver whether the message was properly understood. When communicating other than face-to-face, using phonetically dissimilar sounding phrases, for example “Yes, that is correct” and “No, that is wrong” as opposed to saying “incorrect” will ensure that the message will be heard correctly even if fragments are lost in telecommunication. If the receiver demonstrates incorrect understanding of the sender’s message, the sender restates the message until proper understanding is confirmed.

Using three-way communication, much like pre-job briefings, is a great way to know if your team knows exactly who, what, when and where must be done, while nipping assumptions and misunderstandings in the bud.

The NATO Phonetic Alphabet

In the early 20th Century, as voice telecommunications becoming commonplace around the world, it became apparent that miscommunication of the spoken names of letters of the alphabet was a new source of human error. When spoken through, for instance radio, it was common for phonetically similar sounding letter names to be confused by the listener. Consider how similar “B”, “D” and “V” sound, or worse yet, “M” and “N”. Various phonetic alphabets, also known as speaking alphabets, were developed by organizations around the world to eliminate these errors by giving each letter a phonetically distinct sounding name.

It wasn’t until 1956 that the NATO phonetic alphabet was adopted in its current form (see sidebar), but it has been the closest thing to a universal standard for many organizations ever since. Taking a little time to memorize the NATO alphabet and use it when spelling or communicating letter names will make your telecommunications more effective and accurate (even if you only use it to spell your email address over the phone). Using agreed upon standards rather than improvised solutions is a theme in HPT. For phonetic alphabet selection, the NATO phonetic alphabet represents the most widely adopted choice.

The NATO Phonetic Alphabet – note the spellings of “Alfa” and “Juliett” are intended to reduce mispronunciation errors across a variety of language users.

Over and Out

This article only described three of the many HPT adopted by the DOE and other safety-sensitive organizations. Much more information regarding strategies for groups and individuals to reduce human error is available in DOE-HDBK-1028-2009, Human Performance Improvement Handbook. The fact is, these and other tools work.

If you aren’t used to them, using HPT can perhaps seem silly or overly serious. Famously, foreign tourists visiting Tokyo, Japan are often perplexed by railroad workers’ constant pointing and calling out seemingly mundane things in and around trains. What tourists may not realize is that these railroad workers are using their industry’s own form of HPT to ensure that routine actions are completed properly and safely. Since its adoption, the system, known as shisa kanko (point and call) has reduced targeted human errors by about 85%. Though shisa kanko may not be useful to your organization, if you accept that human error is widespread, you may find that using some of these tools as well as others found in the DOE handbook, may be worth putting self-conscious feelings aside and implementing in your workplace to mitigate costly human errors.

Human Performance Tools have been developed to eliminate human error where it simply isn’t acceptable. True, there are few things as critical as safely operating a nuclear power plant or operating a commuter railroad. It is up to you and your specific goals with respect to safety and quality in your operations to determine how much risk of error you can tolerate. For those operations where there is simply no room for error, or simply to take a bite out of 80% of your organization’s errors, consider using Human Performance Tools to reduce mistakes.

-->

I Hear a Train a Comin’

Posted on August 3, 2022

I Hear a Train a Comin’

Author: Tony Giunta, PG – Director of Project Development

As most of the world is basking in hellish heat and the President contemplates enacting an “Emergency Climate Declaration” to combat global warming, Nobis Group can proudly proclaim that, for the past six years, we have been working with solar developers to permit dozens of clean, zero-emission, renewable energy projects. And although I’m thrilled to be part of a more sustainable energy future, experience has provided me with a disturbing glimpse into the future, and I can’t help but recall some old lyrics by the immortal Johnny Cash:

I hear a train a comin’,

It’s rolling ‘round the bend…

And, from how I see it, just on the other side of that bend are all our renewable energy projects, precariously strewn across the tracks, waiting to be smashed by that ever-approaching train. The train is a euphemism here, of course, and it represents the growing chorus of opposition from those vehemently against renewable energy projects – whenever and wherever proposed. It doesn’t matter whether the community has committed to carbon reduction goals, and it doesn’t matter if these projects are proposed in areas populated by majority Republicans or Democrats, environmentalists or capitalists, global warming believers or deniers. Wherever I go, the message is clear: “Your renewable energy project isn’t welcome here!”.

The “clear and present danger” is to placate such ubiquitous opposition, planning and zoning boards have reluctantly approved these projects with their greatest attention placed on conditions that require renewable energy systems to be completely decommissioned upon exhaustion of their useful life (20-25 years). In addition, decommissioning agreements include returning the property to its “original condition”, with no further development of the property in perpetuity.

Often, I’ve seen more time spent discussing how and when these sustainable energy systems will be dismantled than how they’ll be constructed! In addition, and in complete defiance of State Statutes, many communities then pass ordinances or warrant articles that significantly restrict future renewable energy projects from being constructed in their communities. Talk about hypocrisy!

So, I ask, if all these renewable energy projects have decommissioning plans firmly in place, how are we to meet our federal, state, and local zero carbon emission goals by 2050? Just when we’d start making progress on achieving these goals, decommissioning provisions will kick in and cause massive amounts of renewable power to be taken off-line. Further, with provisions in place that restrict new energy projects from being rebuilt on these sites and land regulations that significantly restrict areas of new development, where are we to turn for additional renewable energy production?

I’ve been sounding the alarm to this paradox, but it often seems to fall on deaf ears. Maybe I’ll get more attention if I break into my own song next time…

I hear a train a comin’,

It’s rolling ‘round the bend.

That train’s headin’ straight for us,

and I don’t like how this ends…”

-->

Sand & Gravel vs Bedrock – Understanding Aquifer Solutions for Your Water Supply

Posted on July 19, 2022

Sand & Gravel vs Bedrock – Understanding Aquifer Solutions for Your Water Supply

Author: Jennifer Lambert, PG – Director of Environmental Services NH

A good water supply needs both sufficient quality and quantity – which can be complicated in New England. The first choice for water supply wells is overburden material, particularly sand and gravel. A “clean” (minimal finer-grained material) sand and gravel aquifer is a great source for large quantities of water. However, here in New England, we frequently encounter deposits that include finer material, which fills in the smaller pore spaces and reduces the amount of water that can be stored in a given volume and also the speed at which groundwater can move.

A sand and gravel aquifer can also be highly sensitive to contamination, however, because the same properties that allow for high flow for a drinking water well also allow contaminants to migrate with groundwater to that drinking water well. In addition to point sources of contamination (such as gas stations with potential fuel spills or hazardous waste sites), agriculture and densely populated residential areas with leach fields also have the potential to impact water supply with microbial contamination and excess fertilizer (the Walkerton, Ontario E. coli outbreak is an extreme example of this). Another issue for wells drawing from sand and gravel aquifers is the potential for them to tap into and deplete water from local wetlands and surface water bodies, causing potential damage to sensitive habitats.

Because a sand and gravel aquifer is both an excellent water source in terms of water production and may be impacted by (or may impact) near-surface conditions, these materials have been studied and identified. New Hampshire’s Granit geographic information system (GIS) has a layer identifying stratified drift (sand and gravel) aquifers, and Massachusetts’ Oliver GIS system identifies high yield and medium yield aquifers. These can be used as a starting point for determining if a sand and gravel water supply well should be considered.

Bedrock water supplies are more complicated, as most of the water will flow through specific fractures or fracture networks. Here in New England, our bedrock is frequently “mashed up” (you can see this on many of the road cuts, particularly southern portions of I-93 in New Hampshire), and therefore major water-bearing fractures are difficult to predict. Hydrogeologists use signs of fractures in the landscape (photolineaments) and surface geophysics to try and identify likely fracture zones, but the only way to confirm that a fracture or fracture zone will actually produce sufficient water is to drill test wells. Many of the residential wells in New England are bedrock wells because of the relative scarcity of sufficiently thick sand and gravel deposits; in this case, the driller will keep going until sufficient water is reached because there is not enough room to move to another area. This means that residential bedrock wells can be hundreds of feet deep.

Bedrock wells are generally well insulated from surface contaminants (although this is not true for all wells; shallow contamination can short-circuit the overburden and occur at surprising depths via near-vertical fractures) compared to sand and gravel wells. However, the bedrock itself can cause other issues: radon and naturally occurring metals such as iron, arsenic, and manganese that can both impact health and foul plumbing.

As our population increases and more people move into formerly rural areas, we will need to find additional water sources. Groundwater from both overburden (sand and gravel) and bedrock will likely need to be part of the solution, so it is important to consider both resources and their advantages and disadvantages in future planning.

-->

Four “Musts” When Evaluating PFAS at Your Site

Posted on May 16, 2022

Four “Musts” When Evaluating PFAS at Your Site

Author: Krystina Lincoln, GIT – Project Geologist

Deciding to begin a Site Investigation for Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) can be a worrisome proposition for any property owner or facility manager. Frequently referred to as “forever chemicals”, PFAS compounds are man-made compounds found in many consumer products, manufacturing processes, and aqueous film forming foams (AFFF) for firefighting. These compounds have been widely used since the 1950s and, while their gradual (and ongoing) phaseout has been underway for the last few decades, their presence and impact is far reaching. Further information on the background of PFAS compounds can be found in this ITRC Fact Sheet. This guide provides four “musts” when evaluating PFAS at your site.

Conduct a “Deep Dive” Into Historical Site Use

As PFAS compounds can have many sources, a good starting point is to conduct a “deep dive” into historical uses at the site and surrounding area. State/municipal records should be reviewed early on, including available Sanborn maps, to identify any past manufacturers, including metal finishing, textiles, carpeting, leather, paper products, automotive, industrial surfactants, and more that existed on the site. Dry cleaners may have processed PFAS-containing clothing, as well as any manufacturer of consumer products that applied stain or water repellants. AFFF could have been deployed during training or emergency response at fire stations, airports, military bases, or even at the location of a past building fire or vehicle accident. If the presence of PFAS is suspected at the site, potentially impacted areas of the site should be contained and identified. For instance, was fire training conducted in the rear parking lot? Is there a leach field that received discharge from a floor drain on the production floor?

Carefully Consider Your Analytical Methods

Given the low required reporting limits and complex nature of PFAS analyses available, commit sufficient time to read the regulations and to fully understand the analytical methodologies. At this stage, a great deal of proactive communication and planning with the analytical laboratory as well as other project stakeholders is critical. There are currently two widely available EPA approved methods for the analysis of PFAS compounds in drinking water (Methods 533 and 537.1), along with a third recently finalized method intended for non-drinking water matrices (SW-846 Method 8327). As SW-846 Method 8327 was only finalized in June 2021, many labs still do not have their Method 8327 certifications, but offering a Method 537 “Modified” approach for non-drinking water matrices. It’s important understand that each analytical method offers different, but overlapping, lists of PFAS compounds, so care must be taken to comply with the methods accepted by each State regulatory agency.

Must Avoid Cross-Contamination Risks In the Field

When conducting a PFAS-focused investigation at your site, it’s critical that any PFAS reported in the samples accurately represents the concentrations in site soil, groundwater, and/or surface water. Cross-contamination introduced during sampling will produce inaccurate results. PFAS compounds have been detected in many common products used during an environmental investigation including new clothing, rain gear, some sunscreens, water-proof field notebooks, and Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-based materials. While great care must be taken to prevent cross-contamination when collecting traditional environmental samples, an additional level of caution needs to be utilized when sampling for PFAS due to the presence of PFAS in many everyday items. PFAS containers should be collected before any others in a sampling suite, to minimize cross contamination. Frequent changes of nitrile gloves are necessary when handling any down well equipment and sample containers. Any suspected PFAS containing products should be kept far from the sampling area, or off-site if possible.

Off-site PFAS Sources Must Be Considered

After the sample results come in, a valuable exercise is to carefully evaluate potential offsite sources – if PFAS are found at your site. While not always conclusive, individual PFAS sources generate a different “signature”, or balance, of PFAS compounds. For example, AFFF use can create a PFAS signature with significant Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and Perfluorohexanesulphonic acid (PFHxS), compared to other analyzed compounds. Even at the same AFFF impacted site, PFAS signatures may differ based on the “generation” of AFFF deployed in certain areas at the site. Older foams may contain higher relative amounts of PFOS when compared to PFOA. Metal plating facilities may generate PFOS heavy signatures. Signature evaluation may prove important when developing a conceptual site model in an industrialized area where multiple potential sources of PFAS are present. PFAS plumes can be longer than other contaminants like MtBE, BTEX, and chlorinated compounds, so the upgradient survey must keep this in mind.

-->

Why Don’t We Build Solar Arrays on All of New Hampshire’s Closed Landfills?

Posted on March 22, 2022

Why Don’t We Build Solar Arrays on All of New Hampshire’s Closed Landfills?

Author: Chris Nadeau, PE – Director of Commercial Services

Installing solar arrays on closed landfills sounds like a great idea, right? Introducing a beneficial reuse for an environmentally impacted property, especially a municipally owned abandoned lot for which there are few other valuable reuse options, seems like a practical solution all around.

However, as is often the case in life, what sounds great in theory is not always as sensible in practice.

Landfills are designed to minimize land area and maximize the ability to accept trash. To accomplish this, landfills fill vertically, which results in steep slopes and very little “flat” area on top. Most landfills are constructed with very steep slopes of 25-33%. Comparatively, if you’ve ever driven the Kancamagus Highway, its steepest slope is only 7%. This presents the first issue with constructing solar on landfill sites: solar panels need to be installed on surfaces with less than 10% slope.

In addition to slope requirements, the most efficient layout for solar arrays is placing them in long rows. These long rows of solar panels consist of table assemblies supported by steel racks or “legs” that are driven into the ground to prevent uplift from wind and downward pressure from the weight of the solar panel system and snow loads. When a landfill reaches its design capacity and is closed, an impermeable protective cap made up of soil and/or synthetic plastic lining is placed over its surface to shed precipitation. This impermeable layer would be perforated by the installation of traditional solar foundation legs, and therefore solar panel foundations on landfills must be constructed using specialized ballast – like concrete or rock filled baskets – that lay on the ground’s surface. These “landfill foundations” are significantly more complex and costlier to construct.

Furthermore, since most landfill caps are permitted by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) Solid Waste Bureau, in order to make any modifications to a landfill, solar developers must file a “Modification Permit” which requires a complete analysis of the foundation loads on the cap. This analysis is required to prevent differential settlement of the cap system and to demonstrate that the arrays will not slide off the side of the landfill. Additionally, solar developers need to demonstrate that the application of impervious solar panels will not adversely affect the landfill cap by introducing higher stormwater runoff rates that would cause erosion of the landfill surface. In short, these analyses often reveal that steep landfill slopes will not adequately support solar arrays.

If slope and foundation hurdles aren’t enough to deter a solar developer from pursuing a landfill location, further requirements for the actual construction just might. Developers must analyze and ensure that the weight of construction equipment driving over the landfill cap during installation of solar arrays does not adversely impact the impervious cap material. If that can’t be assured, then it’s “lights out” (quite literally) for construction of the solar array. Even the wiring between panels poses an issue: it must be run above ground instead of buried like a typical array, in order to avoid penetrations into the cap liner system. This specialized wiring adds additional costs and complexity to overall maintenance of the system after it is built.

Speaking of wiring, all solar projects – regardless of whether or not they are located on a landfill – must be located in close proximity to a 3-phase electrical distribution line. This allows the solar panel system to be connected to an electrical substation that has the capacity to allow additional load. Many of our municipal landfills are located in more rural areas that lack available nearby utility infrastructure required to connect solar arrays to the electrical grid.

Recognizing that a solar project has to produce enough power to offset all of these additional costs for engineering, construction, and interconnection, it easy to see how, although placing solar on our landfills may seem like a great concept, the multitude of constraints can (and often do) kill these highly specialized projects.

-->

Manganese and Arsenic in New Hampshire’s Drinking Water Supplies – What You Need To Know

Posted on October 7, 2021

Manganese and Arsenic in New Hampshire’s Drinking Water Supplies – What You Need To Know

Author: Jim Vernon, PhD, PG, CG – Director of Water Supply Services

Manganese and arsenic are metals that are commonly found in New Hampshire’s drinking water wells. Commonly referred to as “contaminants”, these metals typically derive from natural sources. (Manganese and arsenic that are elevated due to human-caused contamination or treatment for other contaminants is a subject for a future article.)

Concentrations of both manganese and arsenic in New Hampshire groundwater vary greatly, depending on many factors including the type of underlying bedrock and other water chemistry factors, such as the pH (measure of water’s acidity) and oxidation/reduction potential. Elevated levels of one metal does not necessarily indicate elevated levels of the other. Both metals can be found in bedrock wells, while manganese is also found in some dug wells and screened wells tapping overburden groundwater. Shallow wells near swamps have a greater likelihood of elevated manganese than wells not located near swamps or wetlands, but there are many exceptions.

Long considered an aesthetic parameter (possibly staining bathroom fixtures or laundry), manganese is now known to present health risks at higher concentrations, including neurotoxic effects on infants and children. Manganese concentrations in drinking water are subject to a series of standards that can be measured in micrograms per liter (ug/L), which is equivalent to parts per billion (ppb). Here are the current New Hampshire standards for manganese:

Secondary (aesthetic) drinking water standard = 50 ug/L; not a health standard; established by EPA in 1974
EPA Health Advisory for Infants = 300 ug/L
NH ambient groundwater quality standard (AGQS) = 300 ug/L as of December 2020 (formerly 840 ug/L). This is a health-based standard for both drinking water and water that is discharged to the ground.

Depending on the groundwater chemistry in a well, manganese can either be dissolved in the water or suspended as particles or colloids. The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) advises testing for both dissolved manganese and total manganese before selecting a water treatment option. For more information, consult NHDES Fact Sheets on manganese and on water treatment, available on the NHDES website.

Arsenic is potentially more dangerous at lower concentrations in groundwater than manganese. Arsenic concentrations are higher in some parts of NH than others, depending on bedrock type and other factors. Arsenic can occur in two forms in well water: As-III (Arsenite) or As-V (Arsenate). Long-term consumption of water with elevated arsenic increases the risk of certain cancers and other disorders; additional risks are found in infants who consume water with elevated arsenic. For additional information, consult NHDES Fact Sheet DWGB-3-2, available on the NHDES website.

Research has determined that lower concentrations of arsenic can produce health risks, so standards have progressively lowered (become more stringent) over the years:

1975 – 2001: 50 ug/L; EPA standard for Public Water Systems
2001 – 2021: 10 ug/L; still the EPA standard in many states for Public Water Systems
July 2021 – present: 5 ug/L; new standard passed by NH Legislature for Public Water Systems

Water tests are recommended for private wells, particularly bedrock wells. If the result is greater than 5 ug/L NHDES recommends testing for the specific types of arsenic (As-III vs As-V) because treatment methods vary depending on which type of arsenic is present. For more information, see NHDES Fact Sheet DGWB-3-2.

-->

Written Safety Programs – Does Your Business Need One?

Posted on September 21, 2021

Written Safety Programs – Does Your Business Need One?

Author: Jeremy Wherren, CSP, CHMM, CMQ/OE – EHS Management Practice Leader

With all of the responsibilities required to run a business, it can be difficult to think about (let alone implement) a written health and safety program that addresses all of the applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements relevant to your industry. Or, worse yet, an employee filed a complaint and an OSHA inspector has just shown up in the lobby requesting to conduct an inspection of your facility. Are you ready? Do you know what’s required of you to maintain compliance?

Even if your company checks all of the boxes when it comes to performing work safely and conducting training for your employees, do you have the necessary written programs in place to help maintain compliance? OSHA regulations are ever-changing: whether by revision of existing requirements or publication of brand-new regulations, and it can be difficult and overwhelming to both understand and keep up with exactly what’s required for your business.

The OSHA website summarizes the following standards requiring a written program, which are commonly applicable to businesses depending on their operation. Does your company meet any of these standards?

Hazard Communication – If employees may have exposure to chemicals in the workplace – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.1200
Emergency Action Plan – If your facility has more than 10 employees – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.38
Fire Prevention Plan – If your facility has more than 10 employees – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.39
Control of Hazardous Energy (Lock Out-Tag Out) – If your employees service or maintain machines or equipment that could start up unexpectedly or release hazardous energy – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.147
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) – Employers must perform an assessment of each operation in their workplace to determine if their employees are required to wear PPE – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.132
Respiratory Protection – If employees are required under the regulation to wear a respirator – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.134
Hearing Conservation – If employees are exposed to excessive noise > 85 decibels (rule of thumb: conditions that make normal conversation difficult) – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.95
Bloodborne Pathogens – If employees may be exposed to blood or bodily fluids as part of their assigned duties – OSHA 29 CFR General Industry Regulation 1910.1030

This list is by no means all-inclusive, and some industries have additional written program requirements, such as construction under 29 CFR 1926. And it’s not just federal OSHA regulations that need to be verified for business – there are 22 states with their own OSHA-approved plans that cover both private and local government workers, and another 6 states with plans that cover just local government workers (the remaining states are covered by federal OSHA).

Several states also have their own specific requirements for health and safety related programs, which may or may not be under an OSHA-approved plan. For example, the New Hampshire Department of Labor requires a Joint Loss Management Committee or “safety committee” in a workplace with more than 15 employees, as well as a written safety program with specific elements.

Employee safety is a genuine priority for any business leader worth their salt, but even the most well-intentioned owners and professionals may not know what they don’t know. A qualified Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) consultant can provide guidance and understanding to businesses considering the applicability of EHS programs within their operations. An investment in a written health and safety plan is an investment in your employees, your clients, and your business. And often, as the saying goes, “what gets written down, gets done”.

-->

An Owner’s (or Developer’s) Checklist for Choosing the Right Site to Develop

Posted on September 7, 2021

Author: Chris Nadeau, PE – Director of Commercial Services

How many times have you heard “All the good land has been developed and now we’re just left with the difficult stuff!” or “If it was easy, it would have already been developed!”? Oftentimes that’s the case, but consider this: as our appetite for different types of development and expanding municipal growth boundaries change, so does the possibility of finding land that is appropriate and relevant for the type of development you’re pursuing.

The first step in deciding whether a piece of land is worth your time and money to develop is to establish your goals. What are you trying to accomplish? What will your ideal site layout look like (size of buildings, open space, parking, etc.)? Do you need high visibility, or can you work with something off the beaten path? Not only should you set your goals, but you need to be able to communicate your goals clearly with others. Know exactly what you want, but be flexible enough to allow for modifications.

The next step is to find some properties that will meet some or most of your goals. Once you find something, you need to go through a series of due diligence steps (“kicking the tires”) to determine whether a property is worth pursuing further before you start investing large sums of money. Following are some common steps to take while in the due-diligence phase.

Review available Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping. Many municipalities have on-line GIS mapping – find out who owns the property, look at topography, find out abutting uses, zoning, critical habitat, and natural resources.
Review Municipal Land Use Regulations including zoning ordinance, site plan regulations, master plan, and subdivision ordinances. Is your desired use allowed? What are the dimensional constraints for a particular zone? Are there architectural and landscaping standards? Most, if not all, of this information can be found on the municipality’s website.
Before you jump in the car, review current and historical aerial photos on Google Earth. Pay particular attention to ground cover, past development, whether there are municipal utilities (sewer, water, gas, storm drainage, electrical and telecommunications infrastructure), and what abutting land is being used for. Hint: if the ground cover is brown year-round, it might be a wetland!
Review the State environmental databases to determine whether the property has any past or current environmental concerns.
Perform a query with the State Division of Historical Resources to find out whether there are records of archaeological or culturally significant sensitive areas in proximity to your project.
Perform a query with the State department responsible for overseeing critical animal and plant habitat to see if there are records of threatened or endangered species or critical habitat in the vicinity of your project.
Contact the Department of Transportation (if the site is on a State Highway) or the local Highway Department (if it is on a local roadway, or within an urban compact zone). Will they grant an access permit? Will you be required to make roadway improvements for the use you are proposing? Are there any long-range plans to reconstruct or rehabilitate the roadway? Is the roadway under a pavement moratorium?
Talk to a local. It could be a local real estate agent, a surveyor, an engineer, or just a friend who lives in the town. This way, you can get a sense for local flavor – whether the Town is in favor of development or whether they will fight you. Be specific about the use (retail, office, residential, etc.). Less than 5 years ago, residential development was often met with strong resistance, while commercial development was welcomed with open arms. Today, the resistance is very different. The most attractive development for municipalities is “mixed use” where you have commercial and residential usage within the same development. Today, denser is often better, but again, it depends on the municipality. It pays to ask around and get a feeling for your community’s preferences.
Jump in your car and drive around. Perform a windshield inspection of the property to look at site access; natural features including topography, soils, and vegetation; obvious environmental issues; proximity to municipal services; and overall “curbside appeal” of the property.

At this point, you haven’t spent a dime (except for some gas money). If everything passes “the straight face test”, it might be time to hire an expert to verify or clarify your findings. If you do nothing else, spend a few hundred dollars to have a wetland scientist or land use expert perform a site reconnaissance and look for “show-stopper” issues like wetlands. You won’t regret this because nothing can be more detrimental to the development of your property than the presence of wetlands. Trust me, after 30 years in this business, I still get surprised.

For a very reasonable few thousand dollars, you can hire a land consultant or engineer to do much of this work on your behalf. Often, this low fee carrot is a promise to the expert of an actual project with more substantial fees and the establishment of a long-term relationship with you as their client. The end product can be as simple as an email summary, or a more in-depth “fatal flaw” report with a conceptual site plan that you can take to the local Town officials or Land Use Board to get their feedback on what you are proposing.

Contrary to the naysayers, there is still good land out there ready to be developed. It’s just waiting for you to make that call. By following this checklist, you’ll find the right site for the right development.

-->

Understanding (and Mitigating) Environmental Risk in Redevelopment Projects

Posted on August 31, 2021

Author: Tim Andrews, PG – Senior Project Manager

Redevelopment of a previously developed property or a Brownfields site requires a lot of planning and investment. It’s easy to focus on tangible considerations, such as the planning for the redevelopment, construction permitting requirements, and the cost for construction. But what about the less obvious considerations that can pose a significant environmental risk to you, as the future owner of the property, and to your investment? A good redevelopment plan includes completion of appropriate due diligence up front to assure the less obvious environmental risks and concerns are identified and included in the big picture for the developer and all stakeholders.

UNDERSTANDING THE RISKS

Good due diligence starts with an American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM)-compliant Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA); however, this Phase I ESA may be only one piece of a larger story when it comes to understanding liabilities related to environmental issues. To best position your redevelopment plans for success, it’s important to understand what kind of risks you face up front, as a prospective purchaser or developer. The majority of environmental due diligence considerations typically include three basic areas of risk:

Environmental/Regulatory Risk
Financial Risk
Human Health Risk

While there are other areas of risk or concern, as determined by the type of site and project, your environmental due diligence should take these three risk categories into consideration. Let’s run through a brief explanation of these three risk categories and how proper due diligence can identify them.

Environmental and Regulatory Risk

When acquiring any property or considering a redevelopment, there’s always the possibility of buying the responsibility for any environmental impacts or regulatory compliance issues with it. A thorough Phase I ESA completed in accordance with the ASTM standards provides a defensible means of gathering available information to identify potential environmental regulatory risks that come with the property you’re considering purchasing. Environmental risks consider the existence or likely existence of environmental conditions that can result in a liability and regulatory responsibility for the property owner, regardless of whether the owner caused the conditions. For this reason, it is important to identify and document environmental risks prior to purchase of a property to avoid future regulatory liability and possible enforcement actions.

Financial Risk

The cost considerations for a purchase and redevelopment should also include evaluation of costs driven by environmental conditions as part of due diligence. A Phase I ESA can identify some areas of concern, but not all of them, and it does not provide information about financial implications. For example, the presence of urban fill materials at a developed site containing low levels of contaminants may be regulatorily acceptable under certain conditions, but may still require management during construction. Impacted soils in an area proposed for future redevelopment may need to be removed from the property and disposed at a licensed facility due to the presence of contaminants. Depending on the contaminants, the volume of soil, and analytical/laboratory requirements, the costs involved could be a significant challenge if not considered in advance. Similarly, consideration for hazardous compounds (asbestos, lead-based paint, and PCB-containing materials) used in building materials are excluded from a standard Phase I ESA scope; however, these represent a potentially significant remedial cost when renovation or demolition is part of the redevelopment plan.

Human Health Risk

Risk to human health and the environment is the basis for the environmental regulatory drivers inherent with a given property; however, health risks that may apply to a specific property or condition can vary depending on the contamination present, the redevelopment planned, and the human population anticipated. For example, an apple orchard where pesticides have been legally applied may be completely compliant and may not be regulated as an environmental condition by state regulators; however, if the property is redeveloped for residential housing with yard space where children are present, the makeup of the population and the frequency of use of areas potentially impacted by pesticides changes from the original use. While this may not result in a regulatory risk depending on applicability to state regulations, this can still present a potential health risk to human receptors not previously considered.

IDENTIFYING AND MITIGATING THE RISKS

The three areas of risk outlined above frequently overlap with each other. The path to mitigation begins with properly identifying the risks and planning ahead. No project or site is the same, but in general, following are some of the steps you should consider:

Partner with an environmental consultant conversant in state and federal environmental regulatory frameworks as part of your team and communicate your plans for redevelopment and investment with them. Sharing your plans can assist a professional in adequately communicating the findings, risks, and paths to mitigation so you can make informed decisions in planning your redevelopment. For improved efficiency, identify a multidisciplinary firm that can provide both environmental and engineering/civil site design services.
Have an understanding of the potential support or anticipated push-back from the local community. Have the town/city administrators been through a similar development scenario or is this brand new to them? If new, that will require some time and energy to communicate and build trust with the community.
Know your risk tolerance. Are you looking for a risk-free property or are you willing to purchase a property with ongoing regulatory obligations for the right price, with a potential beneficial return on your investment? Your consultant can assist you in weighing the options available, but ultimately, it’s up to you to define what kind of risk is acceptable.
Have a Phase I ESA completed in accordance with the ASTM Standard (the current standard is E1527-13, but is expected to be revised later in 2021). A compliant Phase I ESA provides a baseline of environmental conditions for the property and provides some liability protections to a prospective purchaser.
Work with your consultant to have a Phase II ESA designed to address findings of the Phase I ESA, with your redevelopment plans in mind. This could mean expanding an area of subsurface investigation to quantify impacted soil volumes for soil management, conducting a soil gas survey if vapor intrusion is a concern for your redevelopment, or conducting a hazardous building materials survey to plan for demolition/renovation of existing buildings. Phase II ESA costs can vary depending on the investigations needed, the contaminants involved, and the types of subcontractors required. It’s tempting to try to cut costs by reducing scope; however, cutting scope can lead to missing critical data that can come back to haunt you in the future.
Your redevelopment plan needs to address any risk of exposure to future inhabitants of the property if environmental hazards do exist. This may mean the need for engineered controls to manage contaminated media, operations and maintenance plans, routine sampling of groundwater or indoor air, and state regulatory permits and approvals. Your plans for redevelopment should include considerations for these needs and how they can impact your planned use, your construction schedule, and your overall cost of the project.
Weigh the costs associated with identified environmental impacts in comparison with the sale price of the property to assure issues that hinder development are fairly accounted for in the final value agreed upon with the seller.

Mitigating risks related to environmental concerns for your redevelopment project can be challenging and intimidating, but with the right team in place and a proactive approach to your planning, redeveloping an environmentally impacted site can be a beneficial investment that comes with positive impacts to local communities.

-->

We Need Less Regulation for Renewable Energy Projects

Posted on August 22, 2021

Author: Tony Giunta, PG – Director of Project Development

I don’t think I’ve ever seen or heard the words, “federal law requires” more than during a recent flight to New Hampshire. From the moment I purchased my ticket “on-line” to finally boarding the plane, I had to check, confirm, attest, swear and show identification to satisfy my full compliance with “federal regulations”. And if I had to do all of that simply to fly in an airplane, imagine the mind-boggling amount of government regulations one must satisfy when it comes to building and operating something as complicated as a renewable energy project!

If history is any indication of our future, renewable energy plants large enough to make a difference in addressing climate change will take 5 to 10 years to get through the mandatory regulatory red tape of our federal, state, and local bureaucracies. Assuming your project survives this scrutiny and timeline, you next still have to build the thing! That could take just as long as achieving your regulatory approvals.

The bottom line is that if you believe the scientists and their predictions on our limited window of opportunity to slow down climate change, then factoring in the time it takes to comply with regulations alone means we may have already missed the boat. Now it’s all about minimizing the devastating aftermath of our regulatory paralysis.

How bad will things get? Well, that depends on how quickly we remove barriers to achieving net zero carbon emissions. To do so, the federal government must pass legislation prohibiting frivolous lawsuits and minimizing bureaucratic red tape from hindering the construction of renewable energy projects.

For those who believe this is impossible, precedence shows federal laws can be passed that move us past regulatory paralysis and create a real path to progress. For example, telecommunication towers were as much despised and opposed as today’s wind turbines and solar fields. But the Federal Communications Commission recognized the strategic importance of this technology and unanimously adopted a “shot clock” order pre-empting all local zoning when it comes to locating and constructing cell towers. This bold, but necessary, move did and continues to enable developers to build-out this incredibly important infrastructure.

The window of opportunity to stop global warming is gone. The hard reality is that temperatures are going to continue to rise. The question now is: how fast and how high?

With a concerted effort by our lawmakers and regulators to remove impediments to renewable energy development, we may be able to minimize the most devastating effects of a rapidly warming planet. This effort must be focused on quickly passing federal renewable energy legislation like the FCC “shot clock” order. Might I even suggest the new legislation be issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and dubbed the “short fuse” order!

-->

New Emergency OSHA Standard For Healthcare Facilities

Posted on June 16, 2021

Author: Jeremy Wherren CSP, CHMM, CMQ/OE, Corporate Health and Safety Officer

OSHA announced it will issue an emergency temporary standard (ETS) to protect healthcare workers from contracting COVID-19. The standard focuses only on the healthcare industry with workers at highest risk to have contact with someone infected with the virus. The standard also exempts various health care facility settings. For non-exempt facilities, the standard includes the following requirements:

A hazard assessment must be done and a written plan to mitigate virus spread. For employers with more than 10 employees the plans must be written.
In settings where direct patient care is provided, health screening a control of points of entry must be applied for patients.
With some listed exceptions, health care employees may be required to wear face masks, and/or respiratory PPE where required (hazard assessment or during aerosol-generating procedures).
Subsection 1910.504 of the standard allows for implementation of a “mini-respiratory program” for respirators only used for exposure to people with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. Respirators used for protection against other hazards must be used and maintained in accordance with full OSHA respirator protection standard.
Use of other PPE (gloves, face shields, gowns etc.) as deemed necessary from hazard assessment of the workplace or task.
Provisions for physical distancing and barrier protection.
Provisions for cleaning and disinfection including cleaning high touch surfaces at least once per day or manufacturers instruction.
Employers who own or control structures with HVAC must ensure it is optimized for proper ventilation and filtration.
Employees must be health screened daily, there are options how to implement screening in the standard. Special notification procedures for symptoms or exposure must be implemented.
Provisions for medical removal from the workplace for infected/potentially infected employees.
Health care employers must support COVID-19 vaccination by providing reasonable time and paid leave to receive a vaccination.
Provision for employee training on COVID-19, and facility protocols.
Implementation of anti-retaliation measures for employees
Record keeping of COVID-19 positive cases on a COVID-19 log in addition to recordkeeping in accordance with 29 CFR 1904 that meet confirmed case criteria.
Non-exempted employers must comply with some provisions within 14 days and with the remaining provisions within 30 days of publication in the Federal Register.

For more information on the ETS see here: https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/ets

For all other industries, OSHA also announced new general industry guidance, which is aligned with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidance. The guidance is not mandatory and is provided here: https://www.osha.gov/coronavirus/safework

-->

Top Five Reasons to Hire a Civil Engineer Early for Your Renewable Energy Project

Posted on June 2, 2021

Author: Tony Giunta, PG – Director of Project Development

Throughout the United States, and particularly in New England, developing renewable energy projects can be a challenge. If you’re a renewable energy developer you must be thinking, “But we just elected a pro-renewable energy administration, government incentives abound, and there’s plenty of low-cost investment capital available for the taking”. In other words, it looks like a very favorable time to go hog-wild with development. May I suggest that, before treading too far down the development path, one considers these top 5 reasons to team up with a Civil Engineer early into a renewable energy project.

Reason #5: Although they sometimes catch a bad rap as a seemingly pessimistic and persnickety group (as opposed to developers who are among the most optimistic people on the planet), Civil Engineers bring a pragmatic voice to the table and their presence – or lack thereof – can make or break your project. A Civil Engineer will compare the goals of the developer against cold hard reality. They’ll often perform a “Fatal Flaw” analysis that looks at wetlands, elevation changes, subsurface conditions, potential environmental concerns, and other factors that could seriously derail future development goals. The cost for these services is generally “chump change” compared to avoiding the tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars in costs related to unforeseen problems arising from having overlooked any site constraints early on.

Reason #4: Everyone wants renewable energy until a project is proposed in “their” community. Then it’s “Sorry, love your idea, but we don’t want it near us!” Experienced Civil Engineers know the lay of the land and can tell you in which communities you’re most likely to succeed and, more importantly, where you’re most likely to get run out of town on a rail! Knowing this information will save you time, cash, and boatloads of agita.

Reason #3: To achieve a successful project, you’ll need federal, state, and local permits. Having worked with the regulators who review these permits is critically important. We’re all human and, as such, are wired in unique ways. An experienced Civil Engineer will often know these regulators and their idiosyncrasies, providing an advantage when it comes time to submit permit applications. Not only will your Civil Engineer guide you in supplying the requested information, they will also help you tailor it in a way that caters to that individual regulator’s review style. Whereas most permits have statutory response deadlines, those deadlines often “reset” each time the agency requires more information. Getting your permit application filled out right the first time can save months of back-and-forth, costly paper shuffling. Done incorrectly, these delays can set your project back an entire construction season.

Reason #2: Like regulators, local land management boards (think planning and zoning boards) also have their own “pet peeves” when it comes to satisfying local ordinances. An experienced Civil Engineer will have both presented to and learned (under fire!) what these boards look for in an approvable application. Getting them the right material early can again save time and money obtaining your needed local approvals.

Reason #1: And finally, we all know that a project lives or dies based on abutter acceptance or opposition to a project. I’ve witnessed first-hand the abutters, not the landowner, having way more sway with local land-management boards on deciding what’s allowed and not allowed on a landowner’s property. Again, an experienced Civil Engineer will work very early and very closely with project abutters to explain exactly what’s proposed. If there are abutter concerns, the Civil Engineer will work to address those concerns before they are entered into the public record at what are often very heated and emotionally-driven public hearings. Allaying fears before they become publicly pronounced crises can be THE single most important step towards being able to successfully bring your project to realization.

So there you have it, five key and crucial reasons to hire a Civil Engineer early on in the process of planning your renewable energy project. With this understanding of their incredible importance in getting projects approved and built, I suggest you go out and hug a Civil Engineer the next time you meet one (abiding by CDC guidelines, of course)!

-->

Nobis Group Receives EPA’s Award for Outstanding Accomplishments by a Small Business Contractor

Posted on May 25, 2021

Nobis Group is excited to announce that the firm has received an Award for Outstanding Accomplishments by a Small Business Contractor from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU). Awarded to businesses that exemplify the best attributes of a small business attempting to enter America’s economic mainstream, this award recognizes Nobis Group’s notable work at the Elizabeth Mine site – one of the largest and most intact historic mining sites in New England.

The award was presented at the EPA’s 31^st Annual Administrator’s Small Business Program Awards Ceremony, for which Chris Adams, Vice President of Operations at Nobis Group, served as the Keynote Speaker. “As a small business, to have been afforded the opportunity to work on such an exceptional and complex project is truly tremendous,” stated Adams in his keynote speech. “We cannot thank EPA and the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization enough for continuing to advocate for small business utilization and set-aside opportunities. These opportunities have, by far, been the single most important factor to Nobis’ long-term growth and success.”

Denise Sirmons, Director of the EPA’s Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, noted that Adams’ inspiring remarks as keynote speaker “illustrated perfectly the valued partnership of small businesses in helping to pave the way for EPA’s human health and environmental protection efforts.”

-->

Progress and Preservation Can Coexist: Spearheading Redevelopment in Downtown Franklin

Posted on May 18, 2021

By Chris Nadeau, PE, Director of Commercial Services

For those of us who live in New England, driving by blighted mill buildings and vacant downtowns is an all-too-common experience. Of course, it wasn’t always that way. During the Industrial Revolution, New England’s abundant rivers and streams powered those once mighty mills which, during their heyday, led our country and the world in industrial output.

Then, beginning in the 1970s and continuing into the early 21st century, cheap labor and fewer regulations drove New England manufacturers overseas, leaving those quintessential rural mill towns with a lot of open lots, empty buildings, and broken hearts.

Franklin is located in central New Hampshire and is very much a “mill City”. Like others, this once industrial powerhouse was staggered by the closing of its iconic mills and has since struggled to seize upon the next great opportunity that would again restore the vibrancy and opportunities those once bustling mills provided. Tony Giunta, the City’s former Mayor said, “We were struggling to seize upon something to provide a spark that would lead to revitalization of our downtown.” That opportunity finally came knocking via the CATCH Neighborhood Housing project.”

In 2015, CATCH purchased the dilapidated River Bend Mill in downtown Franklin with the intention of redeveloping the former industrial mill into a new affordable workforce housing complex. The River Bend Mill is located within the Franklin Falls Historic District: a 75-acre area that encompasses most of the civic and industrial heart of the City. If revitalization were to occur, it had to begin in this District. As Giunta noted, “For decades, the City of Franklin had worked to encourage outside developers to invest in our downtown. Many projects were proposed, but all failed to make it to completion. We all knew a successful CATCH project would be the spark we needed to start that revitalization fire.”

In the years leading up to this project, the City worked with the nonprofit organization Plan NH to complete a design charrette for the redevelopment of the Franklin Falls Historic District. The City was able to receive feedback from the community about their needs and concerns regarding redevelopment. Among the items discussed was the community’s desire to see progress while retaining the historic appearance of its iconic historical buildings.

To satisfy the communities desires at Riverbend Mill, Nobis Group’s engineers were able to salvage the buildings infrastructure, eliminating the need for building demolition and new construction. Additionally, Nobis’s site design was able to achieve the community’s goals of improving roadways and parking as well as creating green space for recreation and access to the riverfront.

During the early 20th century, a portion of the river was infilled and an addition to the building was constructed on the created surface. Nobis’s geotechnical engineers determined that in these areas of the mill the subsurface conditions were not suitable for construction. Nobis was able to provide recommendations and alternatives to support renovation and construction in these areas using underpinning techniques.

Nobis completed the environmental assessment and hazardous materials abatement achieving the due diligence requirements needed for CATCH to secure the necessary financing. Nobis also successfully completed site engineering and design to meet the objectives of the client including providing solutions to areas of the building where foundations needed improvement.

The successful River Bend Mill redevelopment was beneficial in many ways. The project also achieved many additional goals that the citizens of Franklin hoped to realize as downtown was redeveloped. These goals included attracting people to live in their downtown, improving roadways and traffic, connecting neighborhoods to downtown areas, encouraging uses that relate to the river, and, most importantly, improving downtown Franklin while retaining the history of its buildings and industrial heritage. Mayor Giunta summed it up this way, “The primary benefit of restoring this former mill was to provide badly needed affordable workforce housing options for the community. But, on a grander scale, tens of thousands of people witnessed a cold lifeless building coming back to life. It went from eyesore to grandeur. It was a very visible reminder that our City had turned a significant corner and like this CATCH project, our downtown was coming back to life.”

Subsequently, the restoration of River Bend Mill (now renamed the Franklin Light and Power Building) has inspired stakeholders to evaluate other underutilized industrial complexes within the City for their redevelopment potential. Currently, a major developer is revitalizing the abutting Stanley Mill – Franklin’s largest downtown mill. This project is a mixed-use, multifaceted rehabilitation and will be the largest single investment in a downtown redevelopment in Franklin’s history. This, along with other on-going restoration projects, will encourage business and industry development, job growth, increased tax base, and population growth. “Clearly the City of Franklin is experiencing a renaissance,” notes Giunta, “but that renaissance can all be traced back to CATCH – the one developer who took a chance and invested in a City with great potential. I don’t know if they ever realized their investment “spark” would lead to our redevelopment fire!”

The members of the CATCH River Bend Mill revitalization project team included:

Warrenstreet Architects, Architect and Landscape Architect

Nobis Group, Civil, Environmental, and Geotechnical Engineer

TF Moran, Structural Engineer

Bonnette, Page, and Stone, General Contractor

New Hampshire Housing Finance Authority and USDA Rural Development, Funding Agencies

-->

Expanding In-House Services Throughout New England

CONCORD, New Hampshire

Nobis Group Expands Offices into Vermont

The Nuts and Bolts of Leadership: The Ownership Bond with Chris Adams

Nobis Group Unveils New Office Location in Lowell

Nobis Group Appoints New Director to Board

Nobis Group’s Tim Andrews Appointed to ACEC-NH Board of Directors

Categories

Archives

Expanding In-House Services
Throughout New England