Martinez Couch & Associates, LLC’s Post

TALKING POINT | ‘Development on brownfield land requires a joined-up approach’ The Environmental Protection Group (EPG)’s Amy Juden on the geoenvironmental constraints that need to be considered in the development of complex brownfield sites. #brownfield #development #contamination #geoenvironmental #views

Thought provoking read today on developing brownfield sites with Ground Engineering Magazine written by Amy Juden from The Environmental Protection Group (EPG). Read more here about the challenges and opportunities faced on these sites: https://lnkd.in/e3ciUucM

In response to a hotline complaint and investigation request prepared by Planet A* Strategies (PA*S) for its community coalition client, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General today issued the below-linked report documenting ballooning cost increases and scheduling overruns in the construction of combined sewer overflow tanks (known as CSO) at New York City’s Gowanus Canal Superfund site. The audit confirmed the project cost is now estimated at over $1 billion (exceeding the original $78 million by over 1,300 percent), and project completion is six and a half years behind its original schedule. PA*S has exposed the continuing compliance implosion in Gowanus that has generated what EPA now admits is "the largest dollar-value Superfund unilateral order in the EPA's history." This cleanup cost estimate does not include separate costs to dredge and cap the canal bed. The OIG indicates additional costs and delays for the CSO tanks can't be ruled out. The investigation request is part of an ongoing effort by communities to limit low-income and luxury residential development on heavily contaminated land adjacent to the Canal that is part of the Superfund Site listing.

**Supreme Court Ruling on Wetland Permitting: Key Insights for Developers and Civil Engineers** In our latest video, Chris Cox, CEO of Cox Planning Solutions, offers an in-depth analysis of the recent Supreme Court ruling that significantly alters wetland permitting regulations. This discussion is crucial for property developers, water use attorneys, and civil engineers, providing clarity on the ruling's implications for development projects and environmental regulations. Key Highlights: -Changes to the Clean Water Act: The ruling modifies the definition of wetlands, affecting their classification under the Clean Water Act. This has substantial implications for developments near non-navigable waterways. -Benefits for Developers: The new definition could simplify the permitting process for many development projects, reducing regulatory hurdles. -Environmental Concerns: The ruling raises important environmental questions, particularly around water storage and local ecosystems. -Delays in Permits: Developers working in areas with federally listed species might face delays in obtaining incidental take permits due to the ruling. -State-Level Regulations: The video emphasizes the importance of understanding diverse state laws, as some states may still require wetland permits even when federal requirements are relaxed. At Cox Planning Solutions, we are dedicated to guiding our clients through these evolving regulatory landscapes. With our expertise in environmental policy and development, we ensure that your projects not only comply with the latest regulations but also contribute positively to environmental stewardship. For more detailed insights and professional guidance on navigating these changes in environmental regulations, we encourage you to visit coxplanningsolutions.com. Follow us on LinkedIn to stay updated with the latest in environmental planning and policy. #WetlandPermitting #EnvironmentalRegulations #SustainableDevelopment #CoxPlanningSolutions

Doing Phase 1 Environmental Assessments (EA) on sites with active construction is always a challenge. Remember to always follow the site safety rules, bring a safety vest, hard hat and steel toe boots, and try to be early or late in the day when less heavy equipment is working. Finally, always check for imported soil...if it's not clean fill it's a REC. #mcginnisandassociates #environmentalengineer #environmentalengineering #environmentalengineeringfirm #renonevada #renonv

I have sympathy for the Environmental Agency who operate between a rock and a hard place in both protecting the environment and enforcing statutory regulations, whilst within the context of being under resourced. However, they also seemingly lack understanding and trust in the Civil Engineering Industry who from my viewpoint, overall operate to protect the environment. This is not helped by the excessively long period of time it takes for the EA to process and issue abstraction and discharge licences for temporary groundwater control projects, which reasonable construction programmes cannot allow for, or can adapt quickly to changes in design as works progress. Unfortunately, the excessive permitting process is resulting in legal proceedings as in this case or clients having no alternative than to delay or cancel projects that ultimately improve the environment. Or Civil Engineering contractors using less environmentally friendly construction methods by installing more steel and concrete in the ground, which has a risk of permanently changing aquifers conditions. Unfortunately, you cannot see any improvement of this paradox in the near future. Recharging abstracted groundwater back to an aquifer as part of a #dewatering or groundwater control system on construction projects is in some cases a real option to protect an aquifer from depletion. But there is no incentive to do so it terms of the time to gain a licence. So we seemingly go around in circles of delay and overspend.

Has there been a spill of hazardous materials at your project site? Did you uncover an underground storage tank during construction? We answer common questions on what to do if you find yourself in an environmental snafu. #hazardousmaterials

Recently, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) published the NPDES Permits for Construction for the second time.  The first time they came out on August 1, 2023, they were quickly challenged by a lawsuit that prevented them from implementing it until the case was solved.  Well, the lawsuit was solved very recently, and the permits were not forced to change, which means that the GAR100001, GAR100002 and GAR100003 published for August 1, 2023 are the same as before, and will still expire July 31, 2028. Some changes are significant and others not so much.  Either way, every actively certified person in Georgia should take a sincere interest in these changes so all can be aware of the new and/or updated compliance & enforcement issues. Some states like Georgia are ON TOP of the NPDES permit program and work hard to keep their NPDES Permits active and reasonable to comply with. These permits have a HUGE IMPACT on our surface water quality! Thankfully, our state doesn't let much time go by before they issue updated permits as well as other documents related to erosion and sediment control. By the way, the Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission (GSWCC) is updating the Plan Review Checklists that will be published in the near future. By clicking the link below you can download Georgia’s new NPDES Permit Summary of Changes within each of the three permits.

Florida 404 Assumption Clarification: The recent ruling regarding the Federal FDEP 404 permitting, will affect those that are discharging of dredged or fill material (impacting a wetland) that is connected to another waterbody. It means that the permittees (developers) that need a Federal 404 Permit; will possibly no longer work with FDEP, and may have to go back to USACOE to get permitted for the Federal 404 permit. The intended assumption that took place in December 2020; main purpose was to streamline the permitting process. Only a few states such as Michigan proceeded with the 404 Assumption which was established in 1984. Therefore, FDEP will no longer issue federal 404 permits. Thus, I assume that USACOE will go back to the pre 2020 rules and continue to be the lead agency in Florida for administering the 404 Permit Program.

Florida 404 Assumption Clarification: The recent ruling regarding the Federal FDEP 404 permitting, will affect those that are discharging of dredged or fill material (impacting a wetland) that is connected to another waterbody. It means that the permittees (developers) that need a Federal 404 Permit; will possibly no longer work with FDEP, and may have to go back to USACOE to get permitted for the Federal 404 permit. The intended assumption that took place in December 2020; main purpose was to streamline the permitting process. Only a few states such as Michigan proceeded with the 404 Assumption which was established in 1984. Therefore, FDEP will no longer issue federal 404 permits. Thus, I assume that USACOE will go back to the pre 2020 rules and continue to be the lead agency in Florida for administering the 404 Permit Program.