By: Ann Boeholt and Camille Felkins, Atlas Senior Environmental Managers

Adaptive management is often described as a best practice, but its value is most evident when projects face conditions no plan can fully anticipate. This case study — shared at the — illustrates how flexibility, collaboration and observation helped guide a project in a complex wetland system on Tribal lands.

Salmon, Sovereignty and Fish Passage

Pacific salmon have long been central to the cultures, economies and lifeways of Pacific Northwest Tribes. Over time, however, state highway infrastructure contributed to fragmented aquatic systems, limiting access to historic spawning and rearing habitats.

Since the 1990s, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has worked with Tribes and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to identify and address fish passage barriers across the state highway system. This work accelerated significantly following a 2013 permanent injunction that established a 2030 deadline for replacing approximately 400 barriers — those expected to reconnect roughly 90 percent of the targeted habitat. Today, this ongoing, collaborative effort focuses on restoring connectivity within waterways that often intersect sensitive environmental and regulatory settings.

A Culvert, a Wetland and Changing Conditions

One such project along U.S. Highway 101 involved installing a fish‑passable culvert in 2025 to restore natural stream function. Adjacent to the site was a mosaic wetland system within the Quinault Indian Reservation.

Shortly after construction, a high‑flow event caused nearby Harlow Creek to overtop its banks. Water moved across the newly graded wetland, forming overflow channels and flow paths not anticipated in the original restoration design. While the culvert performed as intended, the surrounding wetland — newly planted and not fully stabilized — responded rapidly to these conditions.

These changes introduced challenges. Permit requirements included specific restoration and stabilization goals designed to meet water quality standards, while the wetland’s natural response made a rigid, prescriptive approach difficult to apply. In addition, the stream’s new flow path through the wetland meant that no in-stream work could occur until the following summer construction window. Any potential retrofit work within the wetland or stream would also require careful coordination, as these conditions coincided with the federal government shutdown in fall 2025.

Managing Complexity Through Collaboration

Responding effectively required close coordination among WSDOT, Tribal partners and multiple regulatory agencies. Additional constraints, including narrow in‑stream work windows and limited agency availability, reinforced the need for an approach that was both practical and adaptive.

Rather than attempting to force the system back to its original design assumptions, the project team proposed a flexible, adaptive path forward.

Letting the System Inform Solutions

In the near term, the team implemented minimal erosion‑control best management practices to protect the site while limiting additional disturbance. At the same time, they committed to ongoing monitoring to better understand how the wetland functions under post‑construction conditions.

Monitoring showed that the new overflow channels aligned with the wetland’s mosaic character. While the final design solution is still evolving, the longer‑term approach shifted toward stabilizing those channels within the floodplain — supporting ecological function and permit objectives while working with natural processes.

Together, these decisions reflect how adaptive management can support effective outcomes in dynamic environments by allowing real‑world conditions to inform design, permitting and long‑term performance.

Join Us at NAWM

We will share additional lessons learned from this case study during our presentation, “Implementing effective adaptive management to meet project goals in the face of unforeseen and changing conditions,” at the on Thursday, April 30, at 11 a.m.

If you are attending NAWM, we invite you to join the session and connect with us or continue the conversation on LinkedIn.

Brian McGowan understands that leadership is more than just a title. A true leader must be able to think outside the box and be willing to take risks, especially as markets shift and technologies evolve. With more than 25 years of leadership experience across the construction, transportation, environmental, engineering and infrastructure sectors, he has built a career focused on strategic growth, market expansion and organizational advancement.

Brian was recently promoted to a new role at Atlas as Director of Strategic Growth & Advanced Facilities. In this role, Brian is helping support Atlas’ enterprise-wide growth strategy by focusing on revenue acceleration, market expansion, strategic pursuits and the development of high-impact opportunities. We caught up with Brian to discuss how emerging technologies are helping reduce water dependency in the data center market and what trends he’s seeing across the industry.

In honor of , celebrated each year on March 22, Atlas recognizes the essential role water plays in our communities, industries and environment. As data center growth accelerates across the U.S., Brian answered a few questions regarding the topic of water availability becoming a critical factor in responsible development, as it relates to data centers and advanced facilities.

Q: Is water availability becoming a critical factor in responsible and sustainable data center development? Are our clients worried about water availability?

Yes, water availability is becoming a real constraint in many U.S. markets, especially as Artificial Intelligence or AI-driven hyperscale growth accelerates. Multiple independent analyses show U.S. data centers consume billions of gallons of water annually both directly for cooling and indirectly through power generation.

In water‑stressed regions, like Texas, Arizona, and parts of California, water availability now directly influences site selection, cooling strategies and permitting timelines. In water‑abundant regions, such as the Midwest and Great Lakes, it’s less about absolute supply and more about community perception and expectations.

Clients are typically addressing it in three ways: designing water out of the cooling equation (zero‑water or near‑zero‑water cooling); using reclaimed or non‑potable water where evaporative systems remain and engaging municipalities early to address cumulative impacts and avoid late‑stage permitting resistance.

PQ: What trends are you seeing in reducing water usage at new or existing data center sites?

A few consistent trends show up across both new builds and retrofits. There’s been a clear shift away from evaporative cooling. Traditional evaporative cooling can consume hundreds of thousands of gallons per day per hyperscale facility, so operators are increasingly avoiding these systems in favor of mechanical or liquid cooling solutions that drastically reduce or eliminate water use.

Secondly, Water Usage Effectiveness (WUE) is becoming a Key Performance Indicator (KPI), alongside Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE). For many owners, WUE is now tracked alongside PUE, and leading operators report measurable improvements in WUE over time, driven by design standardization and tighter operational controls.��

Additionally, we’ve seen a preference for “future-proofed” designs that can operate without potable water if requirements tighten. Even in regions with ample water today, developers are designing facilities that can operate without potable water if regulations or community expectations tighten over time.

Finally, we’re also seeing more retrofitting of existing facilities to reduce ongoing water draw, most often through hybrid retrofits like dry coolers plus limited liquid cooling, improved controls and leak detection, as well as seasonal switching between cooling modes to minimize water draw during peak demand.

Q: What technologies are being implemented to reduce water usage?

Several technologies are moving from pilot to mainstream deployment:

• Closed-loop liquid cooling (chip-level) — uses a sealed system that recirculates coolant without evaporation. Once filled during construction, it typically requires little to no ongoing water input.��
• Air-cooled and dry-cooler systems — can consume zero water, typically with higher energy tradeoffs. They are becoming increasingly viable when paired with advanced controls and when regional climate conditions are favorable.
• Immersion cooling — servers are submerged in engineered fluids, which can be extremely efficient for high‑density AI racks. It’s still an emerging technology, but it is gaining traction where water and space constraints are severe.��
• Smart water-management platforms — enable real‑time monitoring of WUE, leaks and cooling performance and support continuous optimization rather than static design assumptions.

Q: From a development and permitting standpoint, how is water stewardship becoming critical?

Water stewardship has become central to entitlement risk management. Municipalities and utilities increasingly require disclosure of projected water use and contingency plans. In some jurisdictions, approvals are being conditioned on measures such as use of reclaimed water, zero‑water cooling commitments and long‑term monitoring and reporting.

Community scrutiny has also intensified. High‑profile cases where data centers consumed a material share of local water supply have made transparency non‑negotiable in many markets. This has led to some hyperscalers to issue a community data center pledge reinforcing their commitment to protecting watersheds and water supply.

From a practical standpoint, projects that address water early move faster, while projects that treat water reactively face delays, opposition or redesign.

Q: Looking ahead, what’s one emerging technology that will define water-efficient data center development in the next five years — and what will be transformative over the next decade?

Over the next five years, I’d point to closed-loop, chip-level liquid cooling. This technology is the near‑term inflection point because it eliminates evaporative water use, scales effectively with AI rack densities and is already being standardized by hyperscalers.��

The biggest transformation won’t be a single device; it will be systems thinking: water‑free cooling paired with low‑water power generation, AI‑driven optimization of cooling, energy and water simultaneously, as well as facilities designed to be net‑neutral or net‑positive in local water impact through reuse and watershed investment.

Q: What’s the bottom line you want stakeholders to remember?

Water has moved from a supporting utility to a strategic constraint and a differentiator in data center development. Owners who can demonstrate credible, technically sound water stewardship are earning faster approvals, stronger community trust and more resilient assets.

As we recognize World Water Day, it’s clear that water stewardship is no longer optional — it’s foundational to sustainable, future‑ready data‑center development. Brian’s insights highlight not only the challenges ahead but also the promising innovations shaping a more resilient and resource‑efficient digital infrastructure.

Atlas’ Mike Filmyer reflects on his 40‑year engineering journey in water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure. Mike highlights some of the memorable projects he has been involved in and offers advice to up and coming engineers who are interested in making a difference to protect public health, preserve natural resources and help communities flourish and thrive.

For more than four decades, I have had the privilege of contributing to the design, management and improvement of water, wastewater and stormwater systems that millions of people rely on every day.

These essential yet often unseen systems form the backbone of healthy, sustainable and resilient communities. My journey in engineering has been shaped by a deep belief that infrastructure is more than pipes, pumps, tanks and treatment processes — it is about protecting public health, preserving natural resources and ensuring that communities can thrive.

A Dual Foundation in Biology and Engineering

My path into engineering began with a strong grounding in biology from St. Joseph’s University, followed by a second degree in Environmental Engineering Technology from Temple University.

The combination of biological insight and engineering rigor helped me understand not only how infrastructure works, but why it matters — especially when dealing with water quality, ecological health and regulatory compliance. Early in my career, this interdisciplinary knowledge proved invaluable as I began working in Baltimore before returning to my hometown of Glenside, Pennsylvania, where my roots and career both continued to grow.

Engineering in Service of Communities

Across my career, I’ve worked on hundreds of projects spanning water treatment plants, wastewater facilities, stormwater systems, pump stations, force mains, storage tanks and complex regulatory programs.

Each project brought its own unique challenges, but the most rewarding aspect has always been the impact on the communities we serve. Some of the highlights that continue to make me proud include:��

• An Anaerobic Digestion & Cogeneration Facility, where waste biogas was transformed into renewable energy for the community.
• An 18-inch force main installed via Horizontal Directional Drilling under the Lehigh River, a technically complex project that protected both infrastructure and the river ecosystem.
• A 3.4-million-gallon underground Combined Sewer Overflow storage facility, which eliminated millions of gallons of polluted discharges into local waterways. This tank was placed under a local university’s tennis courts, which were replaced as part of the project.

These projects, and many others like them, illustrate the critical role engineers play in public safety and environmental stewardship.

Technology as a Transformational Force

Over the past 40 years, technology has continually reshaped how we design and operate infrastructure. I’ve seen firsthand how advanced SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems, new materials, better treatment technologies and improved hydraulic modeling have expanded what’s possible. My work on SCADA upgrades for regional authorities brought real‑time system visibility and operational reliability to facilities that previously operated with limited monitoring.

Technology has enabled us to make systems smarter, safer and more sustainable, and it will continue to drive the future of engineering.

Sustainability and Environmental Responsibility

Sustainability has been a thread running through my entire career, long before it was a buzzword. Whether designing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce pollutant loads, preparing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit renewals or implementing stormwater reduction plans, I have seen how thoughtful engineering can dramatically improve environmental outcomes.

Projects such as stormwater BMPs, streambank restoration efforts or regenerative stormwater conveyance systems illustrate how engineered solutions can harmonize with natural systems.

Our responsibility as engineers is not only to solve today’s problems, but to protect ecosystems for generations to come.

Advice to the Next Generation of Engineers

One unique aspect of my career is the long-standing relationships I’ve built with my colleagues, many of whom I’ve worked with for decades. That continuity of people, knowledge and a shared mission has allowed us to take on increasingly complex challenges with confidence and collaboration.

To those entering the profession, or early in your careers, I offer a few guiding principles:

• Stay curious. Engineering changes constantly; lifelong learning is essential.
• Remember who you serve. Infrastructure exists for people and the environment, so keep communities at the center of every design.
• Embrace the details. In our field, precision saves money, prevents risk and protects lives.
• Seek mentors and be a mentor. Much of what I know came from generous colleagues who shared their expertise.
• Stand proudly in the impact you make. Engineers often work behind the scenes, but our work shapes the world.

A Career Built on Purpose

From wastewater treatment plants to pump stations, SCADA systems to stormwater BMPs, my career has been shaped by the belief that engineering is a public trust. Every design, every calculation and every decision carries with it the responsibility to safeguard communities and the environment.

As I reflect on more than 40 years in this profession, I am grateful for the opportunities I’ve had, the people I’ve worked with and the communities our work has contributed to. And as new generations begin to lead, I am confident the future of engineering will continue to bring innovative, resilient and sustainable solutions to the challenges ahead.

The proposal would establish maximum contaminant levels for PFOA and PFOS, and a hazard index approach for four other PFAS compounds.

On March 14, 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a federal action to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water, the first in over a decade. If approved, these new National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) will add six contaminants to the list of over 90 existing chemical compounds that are federally regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).

PFAS compounds were once widely used as water repellants, non-stick surface treatments, and firefighting foams. This EPA ruling would regulate perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), which according to Science Reporter, Bella Isaacs-Thomas, are “two well-studied legacy chemicals that have largely been phased out of use in the United States but linger in the environment and are��still used in manufacturing abroad.”

These regulations aim to cap PFOA and PFOS contamination at four parts per trillion (ppt), the lowest level at which they can be reliably measured. It’s worth noting that meeting this standard wasn’t possible in 2016, when the health advisory level was 70 ppt. However, as laboratory technology continues to evolve, water practitioners can detect, measure, and remove contaminants from drinking water better than ever.

The other four PFAS — perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS), and hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (GenX Chemicals) — would be regulated as a mixture, by testing for each one individually and assessing their risk in combination with one another.

Federal estimates place the number of public drinking water systems requiring treatment upgrades to meet new PFAS maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) between 3,300 and 6,600. That’s nearly 5-10% of the estimated 66,000 public drinking water systems that will need to treat their water to remove PFAS compounds to comply with new SDWA regulations for the six PFAS chemicals.

The EPA anticipates plans to be finalized by the end of 2023, but agencies will have additional time to adjust to these stringent changes. Officials will go through the usual proposal approval process, opening a public comment window after regulations are published to the Federal Register. Regulations won’t take full effect until year three.

As for public water systems in communities with limited resources, the EPA’s increasing involvement in PFAS regulation begs the question, how will they manage compliance costs?

Federal aid funding programs will help small and disadvantage communities redress contaminated drinking water. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allocates $9 billion towards underserved regions impacted by PFAS and other emerging contaminants. The EPA will direct that money toward water utilities and communities that are on the front lines and are resource-constrained the most.

And as the current administration advocates for EPA’s new budget this year, more resources will be required to combat this pervasive issue.

Local agencies can also access an approximate $12 billion in Drinking Water State Revolving Funds (DWSRF), dedicated to making drinking water safer, and billions more that the federal government has annually provided to fund DWSRF loans — all of which can help communities make important investments in solutions to remove PFAS from drinking water.

Treating the Cause, Not the Effect

The best available technologies to treat for PFAS are Granular Activated Carbon (GAC), Anion Exchange (AIX), Reverse Osmosis (RO), and Nano-filtration (NF). While all of these technologies have shown to be effective in achieving 99% removal and to specifically meet the four ppt proposed MCLs, they are removal technologies that result in contaminant transfer from one media to another rather than complete destruction.

This can be problematic as the EPA has also proposed regulating PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, which may ultimately affect the disposal costs associated with treatment residuals (i.e., spent carbon media, and concentrated waste streams). EPA estimates that disposing of spent treatment media would cost an additional 3-6%.

The EPA provided a cost-benefit evaluation, comparing the cost of treating the health effects associated with PFAS consumption in drinking water versus the treatment costs, and found that the costs were roughly the same, approximately $1 billion annually. Note that the treatment cost does not consider potential treatment residuals disposal cost increases associated with a change from non-hazardous to hazardous waste.

Although the cost of treating the PFAS in drinking water before it causes health effects is roughly comparable to the costs of treating the health effects themselves, EPA’s proposed regulation is effectively seeking to treat the cause rather than the effect to improve the overall health of the U.S. population served by public water systems.

Key Takeaways

1. The proposal sets numerical standards of four ppt for PFOA and PFOS, a hazard index of one for four GenX Chemicals, and non-enforceable Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) for all six PFAS.

*above table from

2. The new PFAS regulations will require additional testing at about 66,000 public water systems, and 5-10% of these systems are expected to require additional treatment to remove PFAS.

3. The Hazard Index considers the different toxicities of GenX Chemicals, PFBS, PFNA, and PFHxS. Water systems would use a hazard index calculation to determine if the combined levels of these PFAS in the drinking water at that system pose a potential risk.

*above table from

4. The MCLs were set at the levels that can “reliably be measured,” but the MCLG is zero, leaving potential for them to get even lower as analytical precision improves.

Authors:

Dawn E. Bockoras | National Director – Environmental Investigation & Remediation | ����԰

Rik Lantz, P.G., LEED-AP | Senior Consultant, Federal Programs | ����԰