Town of Mashpee
Environmental Oversight Committee
Minutes of Meeting
October 16, 2008
Present: Chair-Don Myers, Beverly Kane, Ed Baker, Ralph Marcelli, Rick York
Also Present: Board of Health Members-Lucy Burton and Glenn Harrington, Town Manager-Joyce Mason
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order with a quorum at 7:00 p.m. by Don Myers, Chairman.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES:
Motion made by Mr. Baker to approve the minutes of September 18, 2008. Motion seconded by Ms. Kane. All voted unanimously.
COMMUNICATIONS
No public comment at this time.
NEW BUSINESS
Board of Health-Recycling
Lucy Burton and Glenn Harrington attended the meeting to discuss further the status of private haulers offering recycling in Mashpee. There are currently eight private haulers licensed in Mashpee. The Chair inquired as to the current regulations requiring permitted trash haulers to offer recycling and whether the private haulers are complying with the regulations. Mr. Harrington responded that the regulations do require haulers to offer trash and recycling pick up but that they are not compliant. The greatest challenge to the Board of Health has been enforcing the regulation without any evidence to prove that the recyclables are being recycled and not placed in the trash. Mr. Harrington and Ms. Burton confirmed that some of the haulers have suggested that they can not offer recycling due to
the trucking costs and it is not cost effective to take them to a recycling center. Mr. Baker added that he is aware of a private hauler who has been able to offer recycling at an additional $2 charge, so the other private haulers should be able to make accommodations.
The Chair inquired about the experience of other towns with private haulers. Ms. Burton indicated that some towns offer curbside pick up with separate trucks. The private haulers in Mashpee do not have the vehicles to offer trash and recycling within one vehicle, so they would have to send out two trucks. The option to utilize the town transfer station for recyclables has been offered to the smaller private haulers, but the haulers do not have the man power to separate the recyclables from the trash. The town does not have the space to offer to the larger private haulers. Casella Waste, located in Sandwich, is the only operation with “co-mingle separators,” and has offered their facility to private haulers.
Ms. Kane asked for clarification as to how a private hauler can receive a license without being compliant with the Board of Health regulations. Mr. Harrington indicated that the haulers are made aware of the requirement to offer recycling but that the Board of Health does not know who is not in compliance. The Board of Health knows that Casella and Macumber are compliant with the regulation.
The Chair inquired if there is follow up to substantiate whether or not a private hauler is providing recycling. Mr. Harrington responded that if the hauler is not recycling they will be brought in for a show cause hearing and if there is strong evidence to indicate they are not recycling, the hauler’s license will be revoked. Private haulers are required to submit monthly weight slips. At the end of the year, private haulers will be up for renewal of their licenses. The Board of Health is working on changes to their regulations to coincide with the DPW solid waste changes, but will not make any changes to the process. Ms. Mason suggested that, as part of the renewal process, private haulers be required to submit weight slips from the previous year. Mr. Baker asked if haulers had
been required to do so in 2007 in order to have their licenses renewed for 2008. Mr. Harrington responded that weight slips were required resulting in 2 haulers submitting the slips. The remaining haulers did not submit the weight slips stating that there was no recycling enforcement. The Chair asked if the private haulers are notified in advance of the necessity of providing the weight slips to have their licenses renewed, in addition to completing the application and submitting their fee. Mr. Harrington stated that the Board of Health has done that in the past. Mr. Baker added that the town offers a fixed price for waste and recycling and is required to report its numbers to the state and the private haulers should be held to the same standard.
Mr. Harrington questioned whether there was a viable process or option to enforce the regulation and voiced concern that the recyclables are going back into the waste stream. Mr. Baker suggested that recyclables should be going to the tipping floor at the Mass Military Reservation, and that there must be a way to monitor that the haulers are utilizing the facility. Ms. Kane questioned why a hauler would choose to dump recyclables in the trash if it is worth money to them. Mr. Harrington responded that if haulers do not have the ability to handle the bulk of it, it may be more cost effective to dump it in the trash.
The Chair asked what would happen if the Board of Health said no to private haulers requesting renewal who have not complied with the recycling regulation. Mr. Harrington responded that it may limit the number of haulers in Mashpee and some haulers could continue to haul illegally unless the town commits to enforcing the regulation. The Chair inquired about the fine for non-compliance. Mr. Harrington indicated that according to state law 1131A the fine is $1000 per offense as well as license revocation. Mr. Harrington announced that Catherine Laurent will be in attendance at the next Board of Health meeting on October 22 to discuss recycling and the Chair encourages EOC members to consider attending.
Textron Funds-Joyce Mason, Town Manager
Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs is overseeing a process by which communities will be able to apply for grants that will come from an environmental settlement. Ms. Mason attended the informational meeting to learn more about the application process. The Board of Selectmen has charged the Environmental Oversight Committee with the task of recommending environmental projects in Mashpee to be considered for the application process, such as the Santuit Pond project.
Ms. Mason indicated that $960,000 will be available along with an additional $150,000 from DOD as settlement from the plumes. There are criteria for applying and preference is being made for the upper Cape towns. In particular, a regional proposal encompassing the four upper Cape towns would carry the most weight when being considered. Among the criteria, applications should address groundwater resources, ecosystem, protection of drinking water supplies, protection of quantity of drinking water, wastewater treatment although these are not the only reasons to apply. The Board of Selectmen felt that a study of all lakes and ponds in Mashpee, not just Santuit, may be a consideration for an application. Sandwich is currently looking into the UMASS watershed and the Committee might consider that
project as an appropriate joint proposal.
The RFP will be out November 8 with a 90-day turnaround time, so proposals will need to be considered and created very quickly, on or about February 8. It will be an open bid process through state bidding laws. The Massachusetts bidding website will be hosting the information but the information will also be distributed through the town managers. The Environmental Oversight Committee will need to come up with recommendations to provide to the Board of Selectmen and the Town Manager’s office will put together the proposals. The Water Collaborative will also be considering recommendations. The Chair requested that the Committee consider recommendations in preparation for the November 13 meeting, communicating ideas via email, to be prepared to forward 2-3 recommendations to the Board of
Selectmen. Ms. Mason will scan the document electronically and forward it to the Committee. Additionally, should Ms. Mason be made aware of any regional project suggestions she will forward the information.
OLD BUSINESS
ENSR Bid Review-Dave Mitchell, Senior Ecologist
Mr. Mitchell offered the Committee a presentation on the Santuit Pond Diagnostic Study (see attached document). Mr. Mitchell’s presentation was created as a response to the RFP and included ideas based on the questions he received from members of the Committee. Mr. Mitchell is familiar with the area since assisting with Ashumet Pond, and has been certified in lake management for 25 years. ENSR is in the process of becoming AECOM Global Environment and will soon grow from 15,000 employees to 42,000 employees. ENSR currently has eight offices in the New England region and has had a presence in the area for 20 years, conducting studies ranging from one day to two years. The company has been active in Massachusetts working with the DCR and has worked on a number of projects on the
Cape, including a current project on Mystic Lake. [slides 1-5]
Mr. Mitchell described ENSR’s expertise in lake diagnostic/feasibility studies noting the many aspects in which they are involved. Involvement will also include assistance with identifying appropriate funding such as Section 319. Mr. Mitchell also discussed their TMDL work which has occurred throughout the U.S. [slides 6-8]
Regarding the project team, Mr. Mitchell would serve as the Project Manager and would not hand it off to someone else. Mr. Mitchell listed the other main members of the team, Sarah MacDougall, Wendy Gendron and Ken Wagoner, who would be active in this project. [slide 9]
Mr. Mitchell detailed the characteristics of Santuit Pond and the watershed, noting that the pond is very shallow with a 9’ maximum depth. Although the pond is not a true kettlehole pond, it does exhibit some similar characteristics such as a low flushing rate and only small increments over a period of time which can eventually lead to a big change. Mr. Mitchell continued with a description of eutrophication and its effects to the pond such as impaired water quality resulting in lowered property values. Mr. Mitchell addressed the issues and concerns of the pond, noting that during his visit in July he observed evidence of blue-green algae (BGA). In terms of gaining support for the project, it may be noted that the herring population could be negatively affected by these changes.
[slides10-14]
The Santuit Pond objectives involve identifying where the nutrients are coming and going in order to determine what is happening with the pond. The goal would be to reduce the frequency of algae bloom to increase recreational use and enable oxygen to get to the bottom of the pond. A closer look needs to be taken at the watershed and stormwater as well as the cranberry bogs, and how they may be impacting the pond. [slide 15]
Mr. Mitchell presented the proposed Scope of Work for Santuit Pond. In Task 1, Mr. Mitchell will consider previous studies and host an initial meeting to gain a better sense of what people hope to gain from improving the condition of the pond. [slide 16-17]
In Task 2, Mr. Mitchell will develop a Quality Assurance Work Plan (QAWP) that will support the many field surveys such as surface water chemistry and depth profiles, groundwater surveys and sediment surveys. Mr. Mitchell addressed the question regarding how ENSR proposes to address the three potential sources of nutrient input, Lantern Ln. runoff and the two cranberry bogs. Within the process, Mr. Mitchell has included 4 surface water source samples, also known as “at large samples.” In order to best assess the source of nutrient input, Mr. Mitchell recommends at least two rounds of wet weather sampling. In order to better assess the runoff from cranberry bogs, Mr. Mitchell’s team may need to rely on local help since they would have a better sense of the farming schedule of the
bogs and when the nutrients would be released into the pond. Mr. Mitchell also addressed the question about the usefulness of monitoring the oxygen levels during low/no sunlight periods. Mr. Mitchell agrees that it would be useful and recommends use of a water quality monitoring system for weeks at a time. Mr. York announced that a system was installed today in order to begin taking measurements around the year, located just north of Bryant’s neck. Groundwater surveys will be conducted by locating seepage meters where groundwater is coming in and out and groundwater quality samples will also be taken. Sediment samples will also be collected and analyzed. Mr. Mitchell responded to the Committee’s question about an added analysis for seepage meter bag contents which will measure the quantity of water. Regarding video sediment characterization, the survey would be conducted in April when there is better visibility. In
addition to checking the sediment, ENSR will also check vegetation and identify freshwater mussels. [slides 18-27]
The TMDL Analysis will be completed in Task 3 by creating a spreadsheet that will include the results of Task 1 and Task 2. ENSR will then watch for any big trends that appear in the analysis to determine what is driving the pond and make recommendations as to how to proceed based on what the town is seeking from the pond. ENSR will use a formula to compare to the numbers being found in Santuit. Mr. Mitchell suggests that a good target number/”reality check” of 15-20 ppb. Responding to the Committees questions, Mr. Mitchell responded that yes, the calculations will be used for the modeling and phosphate budget. He also suggested that the 300’ septic contribution tends to be a rule of thumb on some parts of Cape Cod, dependent upon the type of soil. Regarding phosphorus
flux, ENSR will look at phosphorus in the sediment or obtain a phosphorus content sample with incubation. ENSR will likely use an estimate within a conceptual model. [slides 28-31]
When ENSR proceeds to recommending pond restoration, the usage of the pond will be considered to determine at what level the pond will be cleaned up. In proceeding to restoration, a major consideration will be the cost. Tasks 4 and Tasks 5 will comprise the Diagnostic Summary Report which will summarize the study results, document the conditions, identify nutrient sources and evaluate possible restoration options. The format of the report will be conducive to the development of a TMDL. Responding to additional Committee questions, the final report would be suitable to use to create the TMDL, but there may be additional information needed, particularly regarding cranberry bogs. ENSR would have fairly detailed analyses available for meetings with the Committee and the public. In reference
to bioremediation, Mr. Mitchell stated that there are no good case studies supporting it. [slides 32-35]
The projected total for the project is $51,000 although the request for additional surveys may add an additional $5000-$10,000. As the study commences, and the information is pulled together, it will be supplemented with industrial data. The Committee had questioned scheduling meetings during the June to September 2009 timeframe, ENSR would like to begin sampling in April and feels it would be difficult to condense the schedule because the seasonal aspect is needed. ENSR could offer interim meetings to share the information with seasonal residents. It was also discussed that the information could be distributed, or taped, on local television or online at the town’s website. [slides 33-38]
ENSR wishes to begin the project in April to obtain seasonal variation sampling, but it is possible to make adjustments should it be necessary to accommodate a town meeting. Surface water, ground water and viewing the watershed area before the leaves open up make April an ideal month for beginning the study. The Committee discussed the possibility of initiating parts of the study should they be able to access grants to fund it. Mr. Mitchell will let the Committee know what the initial costs would be. The Chair asked if it would be possible to break down the tasks and costs by month.
The Chair asked for more information regarding the Committee’s goals to acquire a TMDL or mitigation plans for the pond. Mr. Mitchell responded that the nutrient levels will be looked at more closely, such as in stormwater, and address what can be done to rectify it or what the cost will be to correct it. The Chair asked for specific recommendations which may be needed for Town Meeting. Mr. Mitchell indicated that ENSR will spit up the report between data analyses and feasibility. ENSR will then take a look at the information to determine what treatment would make the most sense for this particular pond. ENSR would then include all of the costs of any alternatives that would be associated with any necessary implementation plan.
Mr. Baker inquired whether or not the raw data would be shared with the town and would ideas be suggested as to how to fund the project. Mr. Mitchell responded that all of the raw data would be shared and owned by the Town of Mashpee, and funding strategies will also be included in the final report. The Chair inquired about the $51,000 initial cost and whether or not that amount is based on the current proposed schedule and if there would be additional costs for additional sampling discussed during the presentation. Mr. Mitchell agrees that wet weather sampling should be added, along with sampling from cranberry bog discharge and phosphorus measurement.
Beverly Kane -Stormwater Primer
Ms. Kane shared with the Committee a summary of the “Orleans Blue Pages.” The Orleans Action Plan suggested that it took an estimated two years to produce the book. Ms. Kane requested that each member take the time to review the book and make a determination about pursuing the project for Mashpee. Additionally, Ms. Kane suggested that the book would be a strong candidate for the grant money. Mr. Marcelli suggested that students in Mashpee schools be considered as a source for drawings to be included in the book. It was suggested that the addition of student drawings may be an added incentive for parents to review the text. The Chair encouraged all members to consider what else the Committee may wish to add to the text to make the book unique to Mashpee. Ms. Kane
indicated a steering committee would be needed to keep the project organized and flowing.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
MEETING ADJOURNMENT
Motion made by Mr. Baker to adjourn the meeting at 9:42 p.m. Motion seconded by Ms. Kane. All voted unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer M. Clifford
Board Secretary
| 
