[Music] We're ready. Yes. Let's bring this meeting of the Fmouth Board of Health to order. September 29th, 2025. Someone like to read the mission statement? Sure, I can read it. The mission of the
Felmouth Board of Health is to protect and promote the health, safety, and well-being of the residents and visitors to the town of Felmouth. Primary functions of the board of health to achieve our mission are to prevent and control disease, enforce state and local
regulations, promulgate local health regulations, identify and protect from environmental hazards, and advocate for a healthy community. Thanks, George. Um, and is anyone recording where the FCTV is recording
and the recording secretary is as well as the health agent? Um, okay. And a brief statement on uh rules of behavior. Thank you to the members of the public for attending the meeting of uh this meeting of the board
of health. Uh public comments will be allowed at discretion of the chair as time allows and will be limited to two minutes uh per speaker. before providing comments, please state your full name. All comments must be in a respectful manner and public comments
on items not on the agenda uh cannot be discussed today but could be added to a future agenda. Does anyone on the board or in the audience have any public comments? Okay. And so we'll go to our first item,
10 Vesper Avenue. Um this is continued from 9:15 2025. Good evening. Evening Scotty, professional engineer representing the buyer in this case. Uh the meeting was continued for a few
items. One was notification to buyers which I had the green cards here and a couple of plan revisions. One was adding a locus uh to the plan. um adding a professional land surveyor
stamp to the plant. Those are both occurred. There was also one other comment that the board had brought up about the feasibility of moving the septic tank. Um and I took a second look at that and initially obviously you
can't redo the plumbing but I was able to move the tank and just pipe it outside. So, by moving the tank to the right side of the house, this the variance requests were increased, I guess you would call it. Instead of needing 3 and 1/2 ft to the
lot line, now it's five and one and a half to the foundation is now six. Thank you. Go ahead, Jen. Um, do you have an inspection report? I see the details but
I don't see it listed on the mark in the back. Uh it's a little difficult to read. There are four monitoring wells these four dots and I have
got and that's this detailed this. Yes. I have one other. So given that this is close to the harbor um which is a nitrogen sensitive area,
do you you don't have marked on here the potential location for an IIA septic component? We're not obviously it's not required you're not being required to install one. Um but um those are regulations do require that you put it
on the plan by the people. Okay. So even if it's not in your proposed IA even if it's even if you are not required at this particular instance you still need to have it locatable in the plan.
Oh sorry. Is it outside of a nitrogen sensitive area in the Heights? It's outside of a nitrogen sensitive area. It's right across the street. It's It's like a block. It's like one building from
That's right. That's Yeah, I know. But it's also in the draft right. Oh, he misses it. Yeah, I thought he misses it cuz I remember looking at top by about 87 ft. Oh, you miss it. Okay, never mind then.
I withdraw that. Okay, good to check. I was just uh I was because he's only, you know, It's only elevation nine. So, I was like, "Wait, it's not up on the heights." Yeah.
Any other comments or questions? Were you okay with the uh with the sit back to the crawl space? Do you want you want a memory first or you think
it probably should be membrane? What's the elevation? That's what I was trying to pick out for the elevation of that is below the crawl space, but Oh, you're right on it. So seven
I think it need the footing is there. The crawl space is way up there. Depicted above it does show it above it. Say the top of the stone is at eight and
eight at the cast iron and then there's dirt above that in the crawl space. Right. We don't have a dimension on depths below crawl space grid there, but the pipe is buried in the crawl space, but I don't
So, it's deeper. It might be okay. Yeah, it might be right. Yeah. Well, as long as it's buried, at least the bottom of the bed is at seven. Oh, yeah. The bottom of the bed. Bottom of the bed is at seven. And the
invert in the pipe is 88. So that's what's the bottom of the crawl. There's the bottom of the crawl space and the finished. So yeah, that's this 9.8. So what's a four? It's probably four foot,
right? Four. Five would be five, right? ish for the leech field. about the you worry about the footing or you worry about the I don't know where you I don't know this because the leaf field is at 8 elevation meet the at the top of it
at the top right right right the bottom is it the cast iron comes out of the house and is buried by it looks like something anyhow inside the house right by at least8 ft if it's at least 08 ft then right
of burial so the only thing I was looking for sir is the description on your modern worlds need to be within 3 in your inspection port should be within 3 in of gra I didn't see where those were described
where the elevation of them was described cuz it's not on the uh I think it's what he's labeled observation wells um to the right of the system profile right underneath your thumb. Right thumb.
Oh, okay. Here we go. Yeah. 6 in bags. It should be 3 in under title five. All right. Do we have a motion? Motion to approve of that minor addition
to to instruct the contractor that the observation ports would be within 3 in of grade uh prove the variances with the standard set of conditions. All right. Do a second. Second. All in favor?
Any oppose? Thank you. Okay. Our next item is uh 17 Green Pond Road continued from July 14th and July 28th.
Who do we have? Thank you for the recommendation. Tom Bunker of BSS design and Michael the found of engineering representing Nick Nick Peters uh who were here last time
can't uh variances creating our own hardship which in this case was a seller wall foundation wall. So we did uh so that we can get a house on the property just on peers. So
there's no 20 foot setback to a cellar wall or 10ft set back to a crawl space. Um so the house can be done um but you'll have no no storage. Very small house as you can see with with no storage. So it
was suggested that you would entertain the request um to then uh on environmental grounds that is to move the SAS 9 ft further from wetlands.
Um but that brings it 9 ft closer to the street line of Green Pond Road. Um which then we'll have the uh SAS uh on the
whichever the second plan which is um the SAS uh 3 ft from the street line and the reserve area only 1 ft from the street line. We have those uh those variances 7
ft for the SS and 9 ft variance for the street line. But you noted previously the uh the water man is on the east side of the road or on the west. I was not within 10 ft of the water man. Um this will not affect any s of anybody else's
septic system. uh you know being too close to the septic system either neighbors to the north or south or um and so uh see see it's a win-win environmental win
uh you know for moving it further from the wetland we're 17 ft from the groundwater you know 17 ft vertically and this will end up being uh uh 121 ft uh horizontally Y to the nearest weapon.
And so we request that we could get this variant so that the uh owner can have a basement for a little bit of storage and see it as a sort of win-win. No no downside environmentally. It's a
it's a plus environmentally and you can get a little basement for a very small house. And the owner has not created the need for his own variance. He has not created it or he can fit a house. He doesn't want a house on peers. Yeah.
But it it fits on the lot that way. Mhm. Thank you. From the board. Well, finding that the owner has demonstrated that they could put the house without
variances. I would uh motion to grant the warrant a standard set of conditions plus the uh registering with the deed that this is to be only a one-bedroom house and a standard set of conditions.
George, can I add a a finding? Sure. That this is Do you need a second please? I think you can add a finding. I'll add it if you tell me what you want. Well, finding that it is farther away from the wetlands resource. Yeah. Um so it is an improved um environment
environmentally better um in addition to being able to fit it. So finding that the grandma varants actually allows for better environmental protection. Uh yes. Yes. Okay. Second. Thank you.
Go ahead. Make one comment. This is a two-bedroom system. He does have a onebedroom house shown on the plan. That's right. It's a onebedroom house. Can if we because we're not allowed to locate a onebedroom
system minimum in the code and the minimum allowed but it's a onebedroom house. Can that be with some change to plans be a two-bedroom house? Did we have a two bedroom?
The motion is there. You somebody seconded it for discussion. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm open to the discussion, but Yeah. So the uh the motion that you just made said it
would be deed restricted one bedroom one bedroom because the applicant came to us and it is a tight situation and we acquiesed for having some storage in the house not a second bedroom in the
house but uh that's how it had been presented that he could do something without variances. Uh the board is not allowed, title 5 doesn't allow us to issue a permit for one bedroom system,
right? But says nothing about the restriction of uh use of the house. Other comments in the future if if some situation arose, he has a two-bedroom capacity system. If something that I'm not able
to think of right now happened where there was a way to get two bedrooms in the house, he could come back. He wouldn't be asking for more uh variances because he's already we can't make the system smaller than the two-bedroom capacity. You certainly could come back variance
way that I can't think of right now to get a second pet. But that would be increase in flow. I can't either even at that point that would be an increase in flow so whatever happens at the time of that circumstance that you cannot imagine and neither me on my best day couldn't
imagine he could anybody can apply forbearance well there could be like a change in zoning where the building's going to be taller I don't know when you could put a um do you I I so We're But anyway, we're speculating a long
way. Yes. So, the question we have right before us a proposal right before us a motion. It's been seconded and we've been discussing it, but we appreciate Yeah, I'm sure the owner
appreciates getting this variance on environmental grounds so you can build something with a with a basement. Um, but again, it's it is a two-bedroom system, so we wouldn't be increasing flow above the size of the system that's
designed on the lot. And that would be the argument you would make if you came back for a variance. Yeah. But what would there be a variance? I was just I don't know what is it is going to happen that will allow him to go up that
450 square footprint. Did you talk about a zoning or some other variance? It wouldn't be a health variance to come back with this that I would there. Right. I think you're saying the footprint of the building would not allow as it stands a second bedroom.
Right. Well, that's there is an option for a third floor, but it's but he can come back if to try to get a bedroom number two. So is the question to are you requesting
that we remove the deed restriction language? I certainly well I thought you could certainly restrict it to two bedrooms but anything under 330 threeb will need a deer restriction and then it's a question of you want to allow two today or one today for the
bedrooms more than one direct question but the flow the variance I mean sorry the dean restrictions required based on the flow the size of the estates So the question to us is whether or not it's a deed restricted two or restrict
to what right? But sorry Scott you just said and I'm not remembering why it was deeed restricted to one in the first place. That was the application we had to build this house. Yeah. Okay.
And all of that was sort of implicit in the hearings that we've held so far because he said, "I want to build something." Yeah. And we had the applicant before us when he said, "Wow, if it was a one-bedroom
house, he could get, that's what he'd get." Yeah, I remember that. Yeah. Okay. So any other discussion? All in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you.
All right. Okay. Our next item is 115T ticket path irrigation well variance request. We have someone here. No.
provided this paperwork. Um if you read his letter, he essentially says that there's no septics within 40 ft. Um you need 10 foot setback to a septic on the other person's property. So that would give you 50. This is also going to be sewered. Um the well now looks like
it's in the basement just outside the basement for irrigation. And yes, that place the area will be sewered. you know, that's part of the uh tassel, but we don't know the we don't know the distance to the
existing septic. Yeah, I didn't get a chance to look at this one. Well, it show it's shown on the plan. The existing septic is there. It's red. It's in the front yard. Yeah, I see that. So, what you could do is is to allow it once the septic is abandoned. That would
be a possibility for you guys to do that, right? It's too close right now, right? It's hard to know right now. Well, yeah, looks um we're looking at 115 ticket path,
right? Yeah. Well, there's a you can see a lot line scaled at 50 ft here. So, it looks like the septic is 25 maybe off of if that. Yeah.
Where's the 50 foot lot? Uh the north right here kind of. Yeah. Okay. There to there. 50. Yeah. So it's a lot less than 50. Yes. Yeah. So it can't be allowed right now. Yeah. Not in the close location though,
right? Yeah. We could do what Scott suggested. Yeah. He does mention in his letter it's more than 20 ft. Okay. Which is great.
So you'd be granting if you're going to grant it, you'd be granting lot line separate setbacks of 10 approximately 10 ft and a 30 foot setback to the individual septic system. You don't want to do that. That other option would work. You could wait at plot abandonment.
It's up to you. When most likely would it be in uh two years? Three. Yeah, they'll be starting probably within two. So I it's a good question of when they tie get to that particular part of the
street, right? So I'm not quite sure. Could I ask uh Scott when we and we we've had a few of these people putting in irrigation wells. Yeah, it's probably great in areas where there's a lot of nitrogen loading anyhow because they
probably fertigating. But, uh, do you go out and inspect these when the well is installed to make sure that our regulation is adhered to as far as placement of signs and things like that.
Um, we should be doing that. It's usually part of the part of the process. It is difficult to know when well drill is drilled. Well drillers are not um as easy to deal with. So they don't come to you for that permit. No, they get a permit from us. Their installation a lot of times they never contact us again and we have a hard time
finding them for all the paperwork at the end. It's not like septic installers. So we've been working on the five well drillers that exist in the on the to actually come in with the paperwork after the fact. So yeah, we would do it if we were notified. There is a problem and actually I was talking
it's going to be one of the things once we hire the the assistant is to button up these irrigation wells to make sure we can get out there and see the placards. So it's hit or miss with what happens at the end on some of these the ones that we done more you know especially the
ones that were done several years ago especially those during co but well drillers we have a hard time getting anything out of them. We don't license them either. And they don't they don't have to pull a plumbing permit to do any of this.
Um I mean not if it's inside not if it's outside the house. I mean you're not running this in and coingling it. You shouldn't be running this into the house, but usually there's something you shouldn't be. I agree. Yeah. You shouldn't be inside the house already.
Yeah. This was back before permits were, you know, this is back original to the house. I don't think we ever issued a permit for this. This is probably he said about 50 years or so. Yeah. He said the house was built in 1920 and the water was not available for 50 years after that. So that's what uh
they were using for drinking water was a irrigation well outside the inside the house. Then when town water came in whenever it came in probably the seven right around 1970 probably around the right time they tied into town water and abandoned the well.
Well, I mean, if it's going to be two or more years, then might as well address it then, right? We know that the septic system's actually been right. This would be a tough one for us to track. Yeah. So, you're saying to deny it until it's
until we can achieve. Is that a motion? Somebody make Do we have a motion? Well, we could permit it in two year for not to be installed, but then Yeah. Yeah. But then it's hard to track. That is a little difficult to track.
Right. Right. Yeah. So, I think we have a motion to deny this application. No, go ahead. I was going to say, do we have a motion to Amy's about to make one.
Uh, yeah. to deny installation or conversion of this drinking water well to an irrigation well until the existing septic system is abandoned or a suitable setback from the septic system can be achieved. Second. All right. Any other discussion? All in
favor? I I opposed. Okay. What time is it? 6 o'clock. Uh too early. Do we have a motion to take out of order?
Pull. Yeah. Take out of order um from new business and schedule future meetings a discussion of whether we should um discuss further within the board. The letter to be written regarding um uh artificial turf fields.
Uh motion to take out of order the new business and schedule future meetings. topic to include the opinion letter. Second. All in favor? I meeting.
So, sorry. Next meeting. So, the next meeting you want to discuss the letter? Yeah. Well, if we do, uh, do we Amy, you're you're working on that letter? You have it. Oh, I didn't see it. It was handed out. Uh, it's on your
file. Oh, that was here today. So I d I drafted it. Jed reviewed it. I comments. Yeah. And I incorporated accepted and sent to Scott. It's not on our agenda. So we can't
really talk about the details, right? But we should but we can we can decide about the content of future agendas. And the question is, do we put this on a future agenda or is it complete?
Well, if we discuss whether it's complete, we're discussing something else. So then we need to put it on the next agenda. I haven't even seen it. So I can talk about I can talk about it if I want. So I think we should put it on our next
agenda to discuss you. It might be very briefly but it allows us to to discuss it. When is our next meeting? Yeah. Uh I don't think we have it scheduled. We don't have it scheduled. Um
two weeks two weeks would be the 13th which is um a holiday indigenous people day. Three weeks is the 20th. How busy are we, Scott? Whatever you want.
I don't know. We've cleared everything that's on the everything that's given to me. Usually the fall can be on the busier end with the septics anyway, but October 20th. Yeah. Okay. Well, that ate up three minutes.
Four minutes, I suppose. Yeah, it's kind of boring for other people to watch, but yeah, we do. So, just to explain recess, I have to shut this off. So, just let me know. Okay. Okay. Thanks.
We have We have a public hearing scheduled to 6:30 and so we can't open the public hearing until 6:30. just um um can we see if they're here? I'm here. We can try. We might have to
temporarily adjourn that. Yeah. Well, you are allowed to go. You don't have to start You can't start the meeting early. You can start the hearing late. Okay. All right. You don't have to start the meeting. Yeah. Long as the hearing is not early. That's what I've been told. All right. Right. I mean, as close as possible. I mean, if you look like
you're you're going to go another half hour, maybe just table and come back. All right. Do we have a motion to bring that discussion forward? Motion to bring the McDonald's
263 TT highway discussion forward from 7:10 time. Second. Second. All in favor? I Okay. Um, we have someone here representing. Yes. Do you want to introduce yourself?
My name is Alexandra. I'm here on behalf of the owner, Mark McB. Um, you know, essentially we're looking for variance. Um, this is going to be very, you know, financial hardship for us to accommodate. Um, you know, the cost of the packaging. We would have to
remodel the lobby, the the back area, the dining, the, you know, the sink and the storage area. We'd have to retrain crew. um you know, we would have to close, we'd lose revenue um due to the increased cost of the materials. We may
have to increase prices. Um it it's it would be a real undue financial hardship on the business. Um which we are a small business, single owner operator. So, we're just we're looking for an exception on that.
So I think we should move through a number of the items in the letter are actually waiver requests which don't come to the board, right? Or do you want them to come to the board? The variance request comes to the board.
Yeah, you can do the variances. You you could do the part that you need to do as variances and we can do the waiverss as we to be consistent what we're doing with everybody else. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I can maybe if I could just ask. So how
much flexibility do you have in terms of being part of being a franchise of a larger corporation? How much how much flexibility do you have in terms of material? Not much. You know, we we're not allowed to use anything outside of the McDonald's system. You know, for
branding, food safety, you know, if we run out of something, we're not allowed to go to the store and buy it for food safety. Um, years and years ago, we did have a a setup in the lobby for like the sauces, but McDonald's completely pulled out of that entire scenario due to food
safety. Um, you know, unfortunately, we don't know what people are doing in the lobby with things. So, um, you know, we're we're we're really limited, you know, within the McDonald system. Some of the things are some of the materials are compostable already. I saw in your letter.
Yeah. Okay. Thanks. So the just following up on what you just said, you said you had a sauce area in the lobby previously. So that we're talking like 15 years ago. Okay. Long time ago. The pumps pumps and stuff like that. Yeah. I was just wondering what was
dispensed there. Was that ketchup must sauces? Oh, all the That's it. No, we didn't have They don't even make all the sauces. That's not even a thing, unfortunately. But you didn't ask about ketchup specifically in here. No.
So that ketchup was something we had prior to CO. So we could put that back into place. Um but as far as all the varying sauces that we have, we would too much variety. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Okay. Do we want to work through condiment packets which is a waiver item or do we want to focus on the variance? Well, the waivers are we just said are SC correct? Right. The health a so we delegated that authority. So we probably
should just focus on the varian request. And so that is item four in the letter. Um well number two, right? Polyropane number five. Oh, sorry. I crossed that out. Is that should be a waiver also.
Oh, number two is a waiver. Yeah, the use of one, two, and five, right? Plastics can be through the waiver process because that one was particularly challenging to solve,
right? Caps. So, I'm sorry. You're saying number two is a whether or not correct we should move past that. Pass that. Three to four bars request is number four. Is that that's correct? Okay.
So the limited time promotional materials um and question on that the time frame given for the promotional period is October 1st through May 31st. Is that correct? So, seven months monopoly
and it runs for that long every year. Um, not sure. It's the first time we've had it back in nine years. Oh, really? Yeah. Interesting. Okay. So, that's a long period. Um,
can you tell us what uncoded craft like uh starting at the top of the bulleted list, Big Mac cartons fluted uncoded craft. I'm just not sure what that is. Um, I assume that would be what we would be replacing it with.
I'm not I'm not sure actually. I think it's the or what we currently have. Like the box, but is it cardboard? It's efflu uncodated craft. I don't know what spelled with K. I don't know what that is either. Craft is a type of paper.
It's a Yeah, crafts. Okay. So, uncodated paper would be acceptable. It's like the Big Mac, the fish, the nuggets, the box, right? And those are all effectively a cardboard, right? Craft is a cardboard. It's basically it's a type of it's
Yeah. I don't know. The the F flute is just the construction of it. Yeah. The way it it latches together. Yeah. Well, it's the corugated basically corrugation. So, that seems like progress because otherwise that would be styrofoam, right?
That's what you Yeah. So I don't so a number styrofoam at all. Right. A number of the bulleted items I don't think are even outside the regulation I guess is what I'm getting at the uncodated craft. Yeah.
So the all of them the make all the hamburgers of the different kinds whatever things that are not wrapped in paper because you have some of them are wrapped in paper would be the file of fish the Big Mac the 10piece nuggets and lodge fries. They were all essentially the same
similar stuff. If they're the craft or relevate board, that's probably because of the heat and the oil on that particular one. It's going to be a little bit more sturdy than the paper ones that are going with bun with a bun in between. Um so all that stuff is not styrofoam
obviously and it's not um any one of the numbers of the plastics, right? So it's basically paper covered, but we do have it in our regulations that we can't have Glue is what's the term we use? Covered
paper. But it says it's uncodated, right? A number of them say some say coated, some say one. Yeah, there's Well, they do say like one says bioax coated, so that would be fine. Yep. That's a wrap. Yeah.
The bioresin polyropylene. What is that? Well, it's I mean it's polyropylene. You know what that is? The bio resin just is some phrasing that suggests that it's derived from a what does that make it suggest?
If it says poly if it's polyropylene it's polyropylene. Yeah. So So that would need a variant. So the cold cup would That's what I was trying to home in on. How many things here? Actually, there's
two cold cup sizes and then the hot cups, but I think we already made allowance for calling it for l for lined hot cups. So, really, it's just the two cold cups. I think when I looked at this, those are
230 and the 16. Yeah, the two things that I saw. Mhm. I mean these these are probably not certified compostable polyropylene. No, no, no. But even even the unbleached
craft or this or the firewax board. Do you have to certify? I can't remember. Wood resin I mean wood fibers as compostable. They just are. Right. Products made entirely of paper
and wood that are not lined or coated. We did not say needed to be certified compostable. Right. So that does reduce quite a bit. Yep. Yeah. Um it's the polyropan.
There's two, right? There's just two cos. The rest are okay under the current rag. Right. None of the waivers. Yeah. None of these needed waivers, right? The lower the lower level the waiver as opposed to the variance. They're all set already by regulation,
right? That's how I wrote it. Can I ask what the final restaurant participation exclusion list is? The restaurants who are not participating in the promotional event. It's it's too late now.
Okay. So, had you wanted to not participate in it, you would have had to long before like at least a year or two ago. Yeah. So again to explain to the audience what's going on um this is actually the first variance request we've seen under
this new the new regulation that um requires the use of compostable materials for dis in place of disposable single- use disposable plastics. So that's why it's sort of we're kind of wandering around a little bit this
is complicated and there's a lot of materials right and each facility will have unique challenges and products that we might not be aware of. So it'll take a little bit of time. Um but it it does simplify it down to a pretty straightforward
two cold cup scenario for a limited time emotional event. That's it on the whole the whole letter. That's it. Just those two in terms of variance. Yes, in terms of the variance. That's correct. And Amy, are you aware of any
easily available? So, the problem is there are alternatives, but if these have to be printed for the Monopoly game, right? Yeah. Then they're provided by McDonald's corporate and you can't just roll out to, you know, a different vendor and buy
something different. So I do see it as a you know there are limited to no options right do we make a motion um Amy has to make all the motions
yeah I can I can try it um no I can give it a roll our first one here I said do you have to move on to honors is really exciting um so finding that the two
particular items discussed, the 30 ounce and 16 ounce clear cold cups constructed of bioresin polyropylene are branded as promotional materials during a limited promotional event for which the franchisee has no other
option. Um I move to grant this variance that wasn't very well constructed but do you want to specify for the cold cup polyropene this variance for the specified period of time of October 1st 2025 through May
31st 2026. Okay second any other discussion. Okay. So, how about the lids? The general lids have been used dayto day. Um, we don't have information on the
lids that are used daytoday. That's the number. Oh, number two. Number two. I mean, that's the Okay. So, so this is a list is a variance, but is it a wer? Well, maybe you want to finish that
first decision. Exactly. That's Yeah, cuz I'm just going through my mind racing about the million things that are on there to make sure I didn't did you specify if we're going to discuss other things on here. Did you specify the polyropylene
bio? Okay. I specified the two cups. Two cups in the range. All right. Do we have a second on that? And it's been seconded. We do. It's been seconded. Okay. Yeah. All in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Go ahead, Scott. I was just wondering how how we want to
handle the second number two, right? Yeah. Whether beverage cups and lids beverage cups and lids and the regulation says that waivers may be granted for the following products only. Um and resin codes 1, two, and five in any color
other than black. So that would be a variance because it's number five plastic non black. or sorry that would be a waiver covered item. So I guess my question is everybody uses
plastics straw plastic lids rather. So once we allow this here we're going to allow it everywhere because I'm not going to pick and choose which ones we allow and don't allow for plastic. So, this is a number five plastic. That soft plastic that's on the Yeah, that's I mean, we we homeed in on
one, two, and five specifically because they were um either the most reusable, recyclable, or the most commonly used plastics for the things that were very difficult to substitute out like drink lids.
So, Uh just if I might, um these are all supplied by McDonald's. So, and McDonald's does not give you any other options. There's not Do you know of any? We could do straws. Those are an option. Yeah. But lids, not that I've ever seen.
Right. Okay. I mean, we don't need to make any particular motion to No, we're just informing Scott forward. Yeah. Just don't try. Well, in in just um this letter is a
good first step to the due diligence process for waivers. There is a waiver form um and that's available through the website, right, Scott? Yeah. Um, and it does ask that you provide some specifics on cost
alternatives that you looked at. So, take a look at that and and usually the waiver process, the intent is that you'll go through it with the health agent at the time of the inspection because that's a time when they're in your facility and you can say, "Hey, look, look at my dispenser area. Here's where we're limited or here's my product
that I'm using and and here's why it's challenging to replace it." they can do a better job of that than we can here not knowing what a saluted craft product might be. Yeah. Um, so just before that visit, it will behoove you to do that, complete that
waiver form and do that due diligence looking truly looking for alternatives and what those costs might be. Like I know it's stated in the letter that is cost prohibitive, but actually providing some examples of where you look for alternatives. Who would that be with our just our
regular visit or would it be another visit? It would be the normal inspection that I think usually happens between now and the end of the year. Okay. I'll I'll have Morgan. You're the person emailed us. I'll have Morgan email you. Okay. Perfect. You guys start a conversation through
email. And in your case, yes, we do inspections twice a year. Okay. Twice a year inspection. It might also be helpful to reach out to McDonald's corporate just to get a correspondence from them saying, "Hey, here's, you know, here are our limitations in Felmouth. What do you
have available?" And make sure that they apprise you of any options or alternatives. Okay. Anything else? Thanks for your work and thanks for coming early. Worked out great.
Yeah. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. So, we're five minutes from public hearing time. Actually, 10. That clock is fast. Oh, it is. So,
yeah, we can do minutes. Want to make a motion? Motion to take the minutes out of order of September 15th. Come on. Second. Second. All in favor? Hi. The minutes are awesome.
Except can I be Amy Wall? R O T H. Sorry. It's okay. I flip around a little bit in the minutes. Oh, I definitely People always think I've save. It says it right there. So, I have no name.
Oh, that's no problem. But I think I have you as Ross in this entire Every now and then I pop up as Ross, but I'll fix that. Thank you. Oh, that might have been in the other seven minutes. It's Yeah.
So, we're looking in July, right? September September. What's next? I had no concerns about [Applause] this place. This is
Oh, wow. on 6:40. It's at the time 640 93 reges. Can we identify who Doug Carson is? So that u Mr. Mcanetti typically consults with
Doug Carson. He must have a title with the uh joint base kick side also that's spelled differently. So what yeah I think it is too 640 93 road on the 15th. Yes. Okay. What what's
Mr. McCain added about halfway down. Okay. He typically consults with Doug Carson Carlson. Carlson. I'm not sure, but I think Jen's looking and he would have a title. So, you know,
I mean, it could be if somebody's reading the minutes, they might say, D, right? And when you do get the right answer, it shows up again in the motion. Yep. Yeah,
it is. It's Carson K A R S O N Douglas. Correct. Um US Air Force U. It's the AFCE, which is the Air Force Center for Oh, no. They've changed the name.
Engineering Excellence, I believe. He's identified as being some authority from the base that would know what they're doing when they're He is their um uh
public relations person. Is he? Yeah, he's a I can't remember his title. That's why I'm thinking he's been doing this for a long time. I got an email from Okay. Where is he? He is a community involvement lead for
the Air Force Civil Engineering Center. No, I didn't. Um, in the Regis Road J. You might want to look at this and try to figure out what you were trying to convey. The last comment before the motion, Mr. Goldstone.
So, uh, noted Mr. Goldstone noted that uh, remediation pumping is for VOCC's. They turned they turned all of the wells off but have returned them have returned them to service
for for PIA capture then and then you just strike out that which do not necessarily flo the same way. Okay. So the remediation pumping the VOCC's turned off all the wells if they were turned on again for
they turned Yeah. all the wells off and they returned them to service. Well, monitors keep us or remediation. Remediation. Okay. Are we good with these?
I think so. Motion to accept the minutes for September 15th, 2025 as amended. Second. All in favor? I opposed. Okay. So, now we got two minutes. We'll
recess for two minutes. Wait. All right. We ready? Okay. Let's bring this um public hearing of the Fmouth Board of Health to order. September 29th, 2025, 6:30 p.m. Uh we're here to
have our second meeting on our uh proposed update to our home rule regulation on septic systems to supplement um title 5 uh regulations from the state. Uh the proposed regulation will require best available
nitrogen reducing technology um to be installed on septic systems on properties located in nitrogen sensitive areas as designated by the town uh that in uh increase wastewater flow according
to the definition of new construction in title five. And we had a previous uh public hearing and received a lot of good feedback and um last board meeting we discussed that feedback
and um incorporated very minor changes including an update to our terminology for the designation of nitrogen sensitive areas. um to distinguish from the already um defined
nitrogen sensitive areas coming from the state and what was the new term that we the felmouth nitrogen regulated areas. Okay. So throughout uh what you have in front of you where
you see um the term nitrogen sensitive area replace that with fel with a nitrogen regulated area. Okay. Um so do we have any comments or
questions for basically the whole town right in sensitive area except for a little piece of woods hole. It's not the whole town. see the map. It's pretty pretty It covers a lot of it. Yeah. Almost the It's like 99% of the town.
Well, we're a coastal town with seawater all around us. So, yeah. Um I'd like to to note that um for those people who were not at our most recent discussion or perhaps not at the the uh previous hearing um the
um best available nitrogen reducing technology is defined by the state um and is to uh down to 10 milligrams or liter nitrogen or less total nitrogen. Um
the nitrogen regulated areas that we have defined um include those defined by the state as nitrogen sensitive. We have added in the district the great cipetit marsh district of critical planning concern. Um
the uh also the watersheds determined uh by the submitted by the Massachusetts common Massachusetts to the clean water act section 303D report. And then what we particularly note um in our due to
the discussions and the comments from our previous hearing, we added the um uh the area covered by the drinking water resource protection overlay bylaw um which protects both the uh surface water
and uh the the drinking water wells. I'm going to have Yeah, go ahead. That's a quick question. Um sorry if you could speak Harlo Hawks you had the DCPC. Did you consider the ACC and walkway as well? Um that's actually already covered.
Okay. Because um that is considered a a nitrogen sensitive area following the state. So, but while while the the um drinking water resource protection overlay, much of it around the wells is
already covered by the nitro sensitive areas, was particularly the area upstream upgradient of um Lump Pond that that area encompasses like the area, the high schools and so forth. Um and that we would like to also protect because we
just want to make sure the L pond is protected in the future. Thanks for that clarification. Thank you. Um my name is Michael McGrath. I assume you're now ready to hear testimony, right? I can now speak.
You just keep it to two minutes, please. All right. Um for the benefit of the uh audience, I built the first denifying septic system in Massachusetts history. And boy was I punished. You see,
I proved that a D assumption was wrong. So basically, they put me out of business. And in fact, at one time, they told me that they wanted me to remove all 63 existing systems and replace them with a system that didn't work. So my
attitude is I will never believe anything that D says. D has decreed that there's no such thing as attenuation in our soils. There is. there is attenuation of total nitrogen downstream
from a septic system. And I referenced a study, I'm sorry, a performance standard in the Chesapeake that basically says in 100 meters 60% of the total nitrogen is
lost. The soil bacteria are removing that uh nitrogen. it's it's gone off as free nitrogen and uh the other thing that happens is that we also have recharge and the recharge is uh I think
it's 26 in approximately per year. So if you picture a football field including the end zones, if you were to start and say one of them is the the top of the um
the water table in one year it's gone down two um one 2.2 ft approximately. So what happens is that this is absolutely discriminatory because if you
look at the uh you don't have a map here right that we can point to if you look at the the uh people that live on the north side of Hatchville and some of these people have houses that I'm going to describe as generational
houses meaning they're very small ranches and or ranchlike structures that might be 80, 100 years old. You're going to end up telling them if they need a building permit to get another square foot, you have to replace the systems.
And as far as I can see, the nitrogen will never reach that. If you take and what I just described about the loss of of the two feet every football field including the end zone you stack them
all the way up often times you be below the estuaries. Now a while ago there was talk in film about having an outfall in the Buzzards Bay and I spoke against it and the Buzzards Bay coalition said I was wrong.
Um, so the bottom line is I met with the Buzzards Bay coalition and they sent me some test data in the middle of Buzzards Bay that shows Buzzard's Bay is healthy. The estuaries are stressed, but the but
the um the bay itself is healthy. And yet I look there are some of these recharge that go into Butters Bay. And why would we say to people that live, you know, a
long, long distance away that they have to build these $40,000 systems to protect a body that's not stressed. So, as far as I'm concerned, you need to go back and and I made a suggestion in my last written testimony to cut these
areas back sufficiently because they're absolutely discriminatory. I have um um I have a funny aspect of my life that most people wouldn't know is that I'm a practicing Roman Catholic and what I do
is I'm a backup usher which means on Sundays I collect money by passing a basket back and if you saw some of the people that we put the basket in front of them oh I'm 78 I'm calling those but
no matter what I can see them open their wallets and they don't have any money, but they're given half or a third into the bath into the basket. So, you go up and look at the far end north end of Hatchville. There's a lot of houses like this. So, and and you and you're going
to knock on the door and say to, "Well, you're you're going to screw up Hudson's Bay unless we unless you put in a $40,000 system." The reason I'm making this number up is $22,200 for the the uh the one process I know
that's being put in. You're they're supposed to have three. I've told them outright, I'll never do another rock the way I've been treated. You wouldn't even answer a simple phone call. So, I know that there's a the nitro system,
but I think you're almost creating a monopoly for this one system, unless you can show me some other systems. I've heard there's maybe infidrome, but I haven't seen any real data from
infidrome. So, I look at this as completely wrong. You need to fix it. you need to adjust it for attenuation. I know DP doesn't believe in attenuation. So, you listen to a decree. Guess what?
Attenuation does exist. I I I found it underneath the soil absorbance system at the Cape Club. I can now that's So, you want to you want to start wrapping up? All right. That's all over 70 foot deep
atria. I'm discharging 570 feet away the total nitrogen is 37. We lost 30 to 33%. Now according to regulatory science in a tertiary
treatment like that what is what they would assume is 10 is reaching the groundwater and it's not. So attenuation exist I've lost 33% in 150 ft. So, as far as I'm concerned, rewrites of
regulation because it's absolutely discriminatory. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for all of your work on this subject and on the the rock system. It's important work. And what do you know? Someone complimenting
and com Massachusetts. I've got complaint I'm sorry compliments from from Florida, California. I study nitrogen in groundwater as well and I there's a lot of logic to to to a lot of
what you've said but we can't continue to do very very detailed research forever while the problem gets worse and I think what what the state and what the town has done is is uh arrive at um
solutions that will that will solve the problem investigations research can't continue and and it will, but we have to go with what we know now. Dave Hill from Hatchville. Uh I'm tiptoeing through a process of trying to
get a permit to build an ADU so my daughter has a place to go when her landlord sells out from under right. Born and raised in FA found schools, gainfully employed as a registered nurse, but has no hope of clawing her way into this housing this crazy housing
market. So, I want to do something that'll give her a place, secure place to go. And as I go through this process, this elephant in the room, this septic business keeps rearing its head. It's looking like I'm going to spend more on
the septic upgrade than I am on the building. I think that's crazy. And I, you know, I agree with a lot of what Michael said. I mean, 35 years, retired geologist, worked on the base cleanup for 35 years, right? I know about the attenuation. I know about groundwater
velocities. I'll never live to see the benefit and 90% of the people in this room won't either. Um, you know, these best, what is it? Best available nitrogen reducing technology. To me, that's a fancy word
for a sewer and a sewage treatment plant. But since I'm not in a sewer district, I get to bury sewage treatment plant in my backyard, eat the cost upfront. There's no program I'm aware of that'll allow me to do it
as a 20-year veteran like the sewer districts have. You know, so it's ownorous. It's prohibitive just to get just to get myself in a position to allow my daughter to stay on the cape, which she wants to do. And the way things are going, she's going to end up
in a corn field in Iowa just to find affordable housing. This isn't we're not doing this in a vacuum, right? This is a town. We have multiple issues. Nitrogen, in my opinion, is not an emergency. It I think we're being hasty. We're heading
headlong into uncharted territory. We don't know if these systems work. And if they don't, you know, the testing I'm aware of, a lot of it, very high percentage of it fails to 10 microgram per liter. And then what do you do? You invite someone into your home, check all your
connections, you know, your faucets. It's very invasive on your privacy and let alone the the testing costs that you know how do we know these work? Are the companies that that offer them for sale?
Are they bonded in case there's a massive failure of their technology? I don't know. I'm just getting into this. I didn't spend my life. I'm not a builder. I'm not conveying the cost of this to abide it. I'm absorbing it
myself and I'm retired and it's uh I it's ownorous this regulation and I think you're being hasty by adopting it if you do and I recommend you don't. That's all I have to say. So I'm going to defer any of the questions about testing to George. He's
going to answer that. Um the questions about costs are ones that need to go to higher authority than us which would be the select board and town meeting. Um we and I'm going to channel Dr. George
Topalos who's not here. We very much recognize the fact that this costs money. We a lot of money and and we very much we've talked about it. We've talked about it repeatedly. We very much understand One thing that I
think the audience needs to recognize and we've talked about is the fact that we are paying now for pollution that we did we've done over the last 50 or 60 years. So we we have not had the technology to address that readily until maybe about
15 or 20 years ago. Um uh but we are paying now for things that that we'll never see the benefit of and and unfortunately there are people who if you don't live right next to the water you're going to look out but if you use the ponds we already know that
the sewer and it is sewer not IIA but in this case the sewer is having a measurable real effect on little pond and and the water quality management committee has has been supporting the research in that um and I don't know
whether you want to invite them to comment on this but um but I've seen the data and um it despite the fact that we know that there are errors baked into the way the TMDLs were calculated the
model is wrong it turns out from data that I've seen that the errors are offsetting and the data seems to reproduce seems to fit the model predictions which is um kind of remarkable. But
you're talking about the sewers and the peninsulas. I'm talking about the sewers and the peninsulas. So sewer obviously is is um 100% removal of nitrogen. Um we are talking about you know Yeah. problem solved.
Uh the challenge is you know Yeah. So we're we this is a step um and and you know in terms of of there are besides the select board you can also appeal to the state for for support
which we would um I I think I think you should wait for something to be implemented before you adopt this regulation because it's it's ownorous on us folks who aren't in the sewer district. I'm sorry for speaking out of turn. Could you say your name again? Dave Hill.
Do you want to address the ADUs specifically since that was ADUs are only captured under this regulation if there is an actual increase in flow. So an an added bedroom in an ADU would
pull it under here. But if you decreased a bedroom in the primary residence and built an ADU, it would not fall under this regulation. I'm sorry. Could you say say that again? So if you have a four bedroomedroom house, you said, "Yeah, I want to make a
place for my daughter." Uh, and you want a twobedroom for your daughter or onebedroom, which is kind of what I did for the old folks who want to retire. And if you take one out of your house,
you can build that ADU without having an increased flow. Increased flow. I guess that isn't entirely clear based on what I've been reading and hearing. So that was a more recent change and so the version you looked at might not have
had that in it, but that is something that we clarified recently. Yeah. So back in 2018, we had a town ADU bylaw that required denitrification. So the state said that you can't treat ADUs any different you would any other
bedroom. So they're now being clumped in as regular as they would be with any bedroom increase or just adding a bedroom in the house. So if you're not net increasing the bedrooms, you can float bedrooms anywhere you want on your property without having to do the deny.
And also your um leechfield should already be sized for the number of bedrooms that's there anyway, so you're not adding. So, um, that is the option that most people take when they come to see me to talk about an ADU is usually the option that's taken and and yeah, I'm sorry. That's that's
actually not that's a part of this that it didn't that's one of the changes that we made to clarify in response to our first hearing um was that um you know even new construction shall only include an ADU if there is an increase in actual or design flow to the property. Okay.
So, so whether it's attached to the house or separate, it can be a standalone structure or integrated into the home, the only trigger in is the increase in flow which is five bedrooms. Right.
Understood. Ed Jallowick. I am a member of the water quality management committee, but I am speaking only as an individual. But just to uh provide some information to those that are paying attention to this issue in this hearing.
First of all, gentleman mentioned the how do we know they work? When the state approves a system, it requires certain number of years of performance to standard by a certain number of houses
for general use approval. And the nitri system expects approval by year end of 2025. They have to have 50 houses for three years and the data with quarterly testing needs to show it's meeting that
performance of what they're being certified for. So in this case 10 milligrams per liter 50 houses have to do it for three years straight to get that approval by the state to qualify under this regulation. They have had
those systems in operation for close to 15 years in other states including Massachusetts, but they're they have at least the 50 already installed for the past 3 years. So that's I I think should help to address your concern about do
these damn things work. They are expensive, but the way the state tax code is currently written, income tax credit for a resident, a house that you own, should you install
this system under a mandate from the board of health to meet a nitrogen issue, call it a crisis because it is. If that is decreed by this board, and that's what they're looking to do, you will be eligible for up to $18,000
tax credit over a six-year period to a maximum of 60% of the cost of the system. That's a pretty good subsidy. 18,000. You have to be paying state
taxes to get it, but that would pay for close to half, if not more than half, of the average simple installation of an IIA module on a working Title 5 system. So, I hope that helps to clarify some of the things that are important to
consider as you look at this regulation. Thank you. Thank you. Um, I have a client that put in basically a wood chip barrier and he did it ad hoc.
He had a diting system and one of the things that I've been talking to a scientist um is that over time the observations show that it's doing
better and better and better time. One of the things that most environmental engineers are used to is design plants where the detention time is maybe a day. But what happens in something like this
that's buried and is vented. It takes a long time for the carbon to become available. So, at some point, I'm trying to get the MBL scientists out there to look because it's gotten better and
better and better over time. So, what I have said is that we need to build more of these wood chip areas because they do them all the time in Long Island and they're showing over 90% reduction of total nitrogen from all
sources. So what you have to be careful of is that you don't put something in place that are that doesn't fit your exact box but actually removed a lot of nitrogen. And uh again I was put out of
business because a competitor discharged 36. Remember I said don't trust EP. I asked EP why don't you enforce the discharge limit? There's nothing in our regulation that allows us to to enforce that. So they put me out of business and
you should see what I'm doing. I'm taking out PFOS and PFAS at a tria and d that's what we should be focused on. I've had a relative die from from a strange disease and there's been now connections to PFOS and PFAS.
Okay. We're get we're getting off topic though. Thank you. Thank you. you should be focusing on that, not nitrogen. So, a positive thing from Mike McGrath, um they are proposing to put a reactive barrier along Nashina Street to capture
um the nitrogen coming from the wastewater plant and hopefully that'll once they put that permeable barrier in. But of course, that just is a it's a very simple project. It's just the funding and that's the hard part. um
like everything, you know, it just they they've got to get the funding. So, we're hoping that moves forward. Uh it'll be a huge uh benefit to what's been contaminating what's harbor. Um I had one quick question for all of you. How many of you have read a contract
from Clean Tube? Clean. I'm going to give you one. All right. And the reason I'm going to do that is I think every we're I don't think anybody's against improving the environment, reducing nitrogen. You know
that it's we see it everywhere. Um you know we see people fertilizing their lawns. They've been watering their lawns all summer. You know you storm water runoff. I mean we have a million issues of I mean not a million but a lot of issues that are impacting the nitrogen
um going into our harbors, our bayments and everything else. um where this is just the tip of the iceberg of trying to tackle it right now. Um storm water runoff is huge. Um when I watch dogs go down my street and all morning long and when I have my
little bags that I water my trees and there's more dog urine on them than there is water in the bag and I say, "Well, are we going to start regulating dog urine?" you know, because I mean, I'm just being, you know, that's where everybody gets a little cranked up about
government overstepping or implementing these very expensive I I mean PE I know Ed said you can get a grant and over so many years I'll be dead by the time I get my tax credits when I put mine in. Um I just think that the the the cost is
scaring the living daylights out of people. It's a total one company market. That's the other thing that's very disturbing. And again, I keep saying I hope this will open up the floodgates once they start to see that there's a lot of fruit on these trees.
But if it doesn't, I have a letter right here from Clean Tube that says once they get total, you know, permitting that the price is going to go up. So that to me just says, you know, are we just going to like gouge people because you're the only show in town? And I don't think
that's fair to, and I'm not going to say Hatchville, it can be anybody in any part of town that this is a big financial impact. Um, and I know it's only for new construction, as she keeps reminding me. Um, so if you're going to build a new house, but that's I think another thing. There are so many young
people, old people, middle class, everybody that would like to build a home. And this is a $40,000 hit. And I I have a my grandson, he just went to the bank and got preapproved. And then once he found out he was in the new nitrogen
sensitive area, the bank said, "Sorry, take a hike. That's another 40 grand. Then you don't qualify. You can't afford to put the septic system in." So it is a human factor here. It's not just a nitrogen factor. But I'm going to give you a contract and it'll be it'll just
make you smile or cry or say wow that this is you guys have your agenda that you're doing which is nitrogen. They have their corporate capitalist attack on us and I know that they did a lot of research and development to do this this
you know clean too and I'm not begrudging them that it's just the fact that now you're you're basically making them really rich and I really hope you read it because and I did I made a mess of it but because I I get I vent when I read
things and I write side notes so you might be disturbed. Thanks. Thanks for that. And but I I I'm curious. I want to follow up. Do you do you support this this um change to the regulation? I would I would I I support the change
to the regulation. I just think we need more options to pick from because I don't want to go to a store in Russia and have one loaf of bread that I can pick. And that's what I'm feeling like right now is that we just have nitro. Yeah. So if I might um so this is a
question perhaps also for George um but what is delaying other systems is if is it the D certification process? Yeah, it's so in that case, in that case, um I would suggest that everybody
email your state representative and request that the state representatives or state senators talk to DP on your behalf because um we can write letters, but we are typically we are very often ignored. Um, but if enough people who
are concerned about the cost of this because it's becoming a monopolistic thing due to the slowness of the D, then putting pressure on the D through our elected representatives is probably uh more effective.
I agree 100%. Not a good idea. Yeah, it is a very good idea and I've already been doing it. But, you know, it's one voice is Oh, I know. And but if there's collective voices then then I thought your letter head had more power than mine.
Probably not. Maybe less. Hi Elizabeth Blackburn North. Um I just wanted to comment on what Mr. Goldstone has said a few times and that is I feel like you're putting the cart before the horse. Um
I think the residents have a right to know accurate costs. Um, I think a big burden is being put on them. You know, not everyone I I think lowincome households will probably get some sort of assistance with the cost. And then
the Falmouth area has multi-millionaires with, you know, multi-million dollar homes. The rest of us are just regular people, um, retirees on fixed incomes or, you know, people with moderate incomes. that it's just a lot to put on
them to say where the the board of health doesn't get involved in the co cost that you're going to approve it and then it's up to us to contact uh selectmen and so forth about the cost. I I just would hope you would consider
that maybe you should delay your vote so that all that can be worked out beforehand so that this burden doesn't go to the public. um before you know and and let me just say one more thing. Um
the gentleman said that the system has been proven. I've been to both meetings and several people said um the system is quote better than it used to be. And that doesn't inspire a lot of
confidence, you know, especially when the burden is on the property owner to install it, to have periodic testing done to make sure that it's operating correctly. And then if it fails, um it's
up to the homeowner to deal with that. It's just a lot. And um I I just think although this board doesn't deal with cost, I would hope you'd be cognizant of the fact that this is a huge thing for the residents.
Thank you. If I might point out again, this is for new flow. This is if you're building a new house, if you're putting on a new bedroom, but a lot of people are and then this is an additional cost on
adding on building a new house. Yes, we acknowledge that, but it's not it is not at the moment. We're not talking about requiring everybody who is not going to be sewered in but who is in a nitrogen sensitive area to replace their current septic
systems if they are not adding flow. But I do want to recognize that that may occur sometime in the next 10, 20 years. And and that's and that's not
this is maybe our estimates were what 100 to 150 systems a year up to 100 I was up to 100. Yeah. Yeah. At the previous meeting it was also mentioned that if the sewer system becomes available to you and you've already done this IA system that
you wouldn't have to hook up to it for several years but that you would have to pay the betterment fee. That's yet another cost. I mean there are a lot of costs that this you know a traditional septic system is a lot different than
what is being proposed here. We we do recognize that and as I said we are now paying for the last 50 years of booth. I mean there it is. Yeah. There's no
sense in which we're rushing. This is not like something we just discovered as a problem and we've decided to do something rash about it. This has been known since the 1970s as a problem. So, we're talking over 50 years. People have
spent multiple careers studying this problem. It's very well known. And Felmouth, you know, it should have seeded when the federal government was paying 90 cents on the dollar for sewers. It didn't. So we have, you know,
decades and decades of accumulated pollution and that pollution goes right to our estuaries which are to a significant degree the the lifeblood of our economy. So we it is an emergency.
We have to do something. Go ahead. Um my name is Steve Leightton. I I'm just speaking as an individual not in my capacity as a member of the water quality committee. It's it's my understanding that there are about 23,000 properties in Falmouth
that um the steward areas will eventually be about 5,000 of those and the uh IIA properties which would be required to meet the D requirement. The TMDLs are
about 8,000. So 8,000 plus 5,000 is 13,000. A little bit more than half. But your map looks like it's more like 90% just in intuitively looking at the map, not counting anything of the
properties are are going to be required. Of course, you're going to say you're only requiring the new construction, but you're going to be putting it on properties that I think the water quality committee would never think would be required to meet the TMDLs. So,
I was be curious to hear what your thinking is about that. Go ahead. Yeah. More, but it's unrelated. If you want me to put both questions out first or if you want one at a time. I mean, my first reaction to that is what we're talking about is new flow.
So, if the water quality management committee is looking at what's here now and they're making decisions about which properties, but they're taking into account buildout prop possible buildout. Okay. You can do that mathematically. Yeah, sure. Because there only so many vacant lots.
Yeah. Yeah. increase in flow is not limited to a currently vacant lot though. You can still make estimates. So um we can amend these maps. we would
have another hearing. And um and uh in the case of the uh you know when the um when the actual u watershed plans are
approved that delineate where systems would need to be um required. then we have s absolutely can amend any of our regulations um not quite at any time because we require hearings um and postings but um
uh absolutely it is something for us to consider um but but until those watershed plans are more firmly established I think this is our first first pass okay at preventing the problem from getting
worse That's that's the idea. That's a good transition to my second question, which is I I it's my understanding there are people here who know more accurately than I that we will know that within a year of the maybe less than a year. So, you
might want to consider waiting for that or make a change in here because my second point is in line with what the lady in the back row was saying, the uh your section,
your paragraph three on exception for new construction in the future sewer service area only covers sewer service areas that had past town meeting and everything. Even though within a year we're going to know
actually we know now within 20%. And within a year we're going to know exactly what the sewer areas are going to be. If town meeting and the select board don't approve them down the road when they have to. They're going to be huge problems for the town. You It's only
reasonable to assume that they will occur. And my way of looking at the numbers are you're only proposing to put in a hundred per year. Within 10 years, we're going to have to
be putting them in much faster than that anyway. So all you're really doing is a pilot project. It's not going to have any measurable effect on the nitrogen until we start doing it at scale. And so if you if you eliminate the
double billing of the people who are going to have sewers, then you're only going to have a a 22% change, taking 13% down to 10% of what you're doing as a fraction of what the
town has to do. So it's negligible in terms of the science and in terms of the effect of the nitrogen, but it double bills people and it's not negligible to them. That's a 100% increase. And so there's a lot in there. You just said
a lot of things and I don't agree with several of them, but I don't think I can necessarily remember all of them, but but sorry, the timing is big, right? We'll know. We'll know where the sewers are. Uh will they be there in five years, 10
years, 15 years? And if it's 15 years out, if it's 10 years out, so we wait 10 years before we do anything just for those people for everyone. So So no, it's just a sewer. So, so I would I would actually argue however that um I
would not I will not trust the future town meetings even though I am a member of town meeting because in 1982 the town was offered 90 to for the federal government to pay 90% of a sewer system in Fallon and town
meeting said no and I it it is now costing us immensely more money than town meeting thought they were going to be saving at the time. And so I will not I do not
completely trust future town meetings. And so this this exception for the um new construction sewer service area is explicitly at the request of the uh the wastewater superintendent who has
pointed out that you can't guarantee that you will actually construct a sewer on any particular time scale until it is actually approved. That's that's in theory true, but if you go that route, you're only doing a hundred a year. That's peanuts
years to do 8,000. Realistically, we don't necessarily even think we have the capacity to do 50 a year. And so we're we're if we do do a hundred a year, there's enough incentive to people to start putting them in. There will hopefully be enough incentive
to start producing new types of systems and having new companies come into this process. Yeah. We don't we can't if we were to say you in the next year you need to build a thousand IA systems there is not
there's no way that that could ever happen. So we're trying to seems to be what you're suggesting. Well let's wait and then in a few years we'll put in 6,000 which is completely unrealistic. This gives us a very gradual ramp up. It
begins to spin up the industries. It provides the uh impetus for new technological developments and new companies to come in with competing systems. It does all of those things. And ultimately, I mean, we're talking
about time scales of 20 25 years, probably more than 25 years to complete these plans, right? 20 in 25 years in this case we'd have about 2500 systems which is a pretty big chunk of the number of systems that
we're going to need and the to my understanding the water quality management committee has not decided that we have 8,000 IA systems needed and 5,000 sewer that there's still a lot of discussion about what that proportion is going to be so number last number we
heard was more like six or 7,000 IA systems So this would be a pretty big chunk of that across the time interval of of these treatment plans 25 years. I'm going to stand because my back
hurts. U Ed Jawick again a couple of points you know to what Stephen said and what you've said Kevin. Yes, it's going to take years to do this planning if we don't get permission and funding to build the outfall pipe which is going to
be necessary for us to do any sewing beyond great pond phase one and the outfall pipe is realistically probably seven years away best between permitting funding etc and actual construction then we can really say okay now we've got
design for the next phase great pond phase two that horizon's getting pretty darn darn long. Um, Mike McGrath mentioned his age. I'm about the same age as Mike. I'm not going to see this, but I'd sure like to leave something better for this town than what we currently have. A
couple of things to remember. You know, the the watershed plans that our committee is starting to formulate. The first one is due a year from now and then another one a year after that. We're talking a fiveyear horizon between before those plans are submitted to the
state and then they are a live document. They're not carved in concrete and that never can change. They will change depending on is it working? What the state decides and the state is the all powerful dog in
this fight. Remember that the reason we're here now is the state has said if you don't make these plans and start doing something, every house in the whole town will require an IIA within 5 years. The
industry can't support it. The money's not there in anybody's pocket to do it. People wouldn't be able to do it fast enough. But that was the hammer from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Do something. have your plans and start implementing and show us progress or you
will be mandated to do everyone in town. Some towns are still wrestling with that decision. Borne keeps going back and forth whether they're saying the hell with it. Everybody's got to do an IIA or come up with a plan. Remember too that Felmouth is not the only town in the
southeast of Massachusetts addressing IIA mandates. Martha's Vineyard, Tisberry, and Oak Bluffs have had mandate on the books for about a year now. I think it's 1,500 houses have to put them in whether it's
new construction, increased flow, and a transfer of title. You sell your house, somebody's got to put in an IIA before the deed is approved. Much more stringent and honorous
mandate. Well, fleet, uh, East Ham, uh, Dennis, Orleans, all of those towns already either have a mandate or will soon. Mashp has one. If you're within a thousand ft of a surface water body, you have to put in an IIA.
Last thing I'd say is concern about one company performing. Yes, they're the one that's closest to general use approval. They are currently operating what's called conditional approval. They have to they had to do a certain
number of houses under the piloting level. Your regulation very wisely says if it's got that 10 mgram per liter performance, whether it's piloting, conditional, or general use,
it's okay under this regulation. And Nitro is very close to getting general. Nitrex, another company with similar technologies, Lombardo Associates, has the same performance levels, and there are several other systems that are back
at the piloting queue to start trying it. So, this won't be a one-man show for very long. Yeah. Talking to the owner of Nitro, Clean Two Technologies, at uh a hearing recently,
he's putting in about a hundred systems a year. He's anxious and got his plans in place to start ramping up, but that all that's all he's doing. We add another hundred, he's going to ramp it up. He's working with his sub suppliers for the castings. So, he actually
projected the cost would go down. That's it. Thanks. Appreciate that. And it is it is a good point. I mean we here in this discussion which has been quite protracted discussion we've had many
meetings on this we originally had plans to do something that would have required IAS for a lot more circumstances like what you're talking about transfer of title and other kinds of things. Um but but we had members of the public here
who um helped us talk through it and and we we pulled back to something that's less intensive and will require fewer uh systems than a lot of these other towns have already done. So this is not sudden
or extreme in any way. This is very very small step and frustratingly small to some people which I think means we're hitting a compromise that maybe is okay. I I just have a question that I'm sorry if you've already addressed it before,
but a traditional septic system if it's functioning properly, does that still leech nitrogen or if it's working properly, is it? It's a good question. And yeah, they they don't remove very much nitrogen
even if they're functioning well. Yeah, cuz I was just going to ask if if you know the town looked at at residents if with older septic systems if they be required to test them and then replace
them with like a tried andrue old-fashioned septic system. But you're saying that wouldn't solve the problem. Exactly. Yeah. the the tried andrue systems are they're just made for removing organisms that would cause disease. They don't really help much for nitrogen.
Thank you, Corin Peterson on behalf of the Buzzards Bay Coalition. Um so the so the re the town of Falmouth is pursuing a huge investment in expanding
um their sewer collection system in order to remove waste water and to pro uh improve water quality. The water quality management committee is spending a lot of time on their um wershed management plans which you have about 15
estuaries that need a plan. It's going to take the town about 15 years to get all their plans done. The reason why the town is pursuing all of this investment in wastewater um is because of the decades of traditional
septic systems that have been installed that do not treat. They are not designed to treat for nitrogen. And so for for decades we have been contributing nitrogen to our estuaries. um our estuaries no longer meet state
standards and now we the town is compelled to make this investment. Um the bay coalition applauds the board for taking this step to stop a really bad problem from getting worse. So this
applies to new construction, new flow. um it's not continuing to put in a conventional septic system which is going to add nitrogen and undo the really valuable investment the town is pursuing today. Um so we want to control
those new sources. The town is not going to have an answer for every estuary tomorrow. It's going to take another couple of decades to get there. We don't want to contribute two more decades of nitrogen from septic systems. So with
that, the budget coalition supports this regulation and urges you to vote it. Thank you. And and it's worth adding to that, it's worth mentioning too that the nitrogen problem is worse than it looks right now because we the
the most of the nitrogen takes years to go from the septic system to the estuary. So as we continue to load and load and load, there's this big lag in in terms of uh when that actually shows up at the at the estuary. So as the
population has grown, number of uh uh septic systems has grown, we've built up this pool of nitrogen in all of the uh the groundwater systems that are draining to all of the estuaries. So, so
yeah, if we don't if we don't stop growing that pool, it will continue to get worse for decades, even even as we spend a lot of money to reduce the the inputs. So, uh my name is John Kaufman. I'm also on the water quality uh committee, but I'm
speaking as a private citizen. And I wanted to build on Ed's discussion about the existing state title 5 septic tax credit. It is it's nice. It's $18,000 of potential savings, but it discriminates against sort of low middle- inome people
because it's non-refundable. You have to owe the state money to claim the tax. So, that has been recognized and uh we've worked with David Fier who has now submitted a bill to the Massachusetts legislature. It's H4082
that is titled towards a refundable septic tax credit which would make essentially if you have any expenses that qualify and all the IIA stuff that we're talking about today would qualify and you would get reimbured for that cost regardless of what you would owe
the state in taxes. So for people making $40,000 a year they're never going to be able to reach that $4,000 a year limit that you can claim. This would take care of that. In addition, it would help the homeowners who are only part-time, which would allow them to do a non-refundable
tax credit claim. So, um, so there's mechanisms being advanced. Unfortunately, they advance very slowly. It's stuck in committee now. It's in the joint committee on revenue. this particular bill when and how fast it advances, whether it has a shot of passing. I think it's premature to tell.
But hopefully the state will recognize that this is going to be a significant burden on many people, not just the the millionaires who have no problem with this, but the common people in the lower middle income levels that are going to be forced to pay the same amount and would struggle to do so. So, I'm hopeful
that something will happen in the next couple of years on that front. That's important. Thank you. And um be very good if um if we could get notification of when it would be good to uh to write letters or make phone calls to representatives to
help them pass. I I found them really responsive and helpful. You know, I've met with Vieira. I've met with Dylan Fernandez. Um and they're super supportive of this. And as I say, David has pushed it through to the point now it's it's advancing. it
just it's in committee and it just takes a long time for the wills of the legislature to move things along. But hopefully in the not too distant future and yeah, we may be looking for letters of support that could be submitted to the uh committee on revenue, the joint committee that would help them because
they can do a thumbs down early on in the process and you know it won't go anywhere. So um the more support we can get the better. Thank you. I totally support what John is doing on that. I only take issue with one small thing that may be confusing. He used the
word all there. John is not corrected. There's still the 18,000 and 60% caps. Yeah. Yeah. As I said 18,000 you can use that against offsetting the total cost. It's not the total cost of
Thank you. back um on the left. Yeah. Me. Yeah. Um, hi. I'm Maggie McGov from uh from WA uh in the citizens for the protection at Wait Bay and I want to speak in support of this change to the
health code. I think is very important and I've attended a lot of meetings and seen how hard you have worked on this and how many people you know residents of the town you have heard speak um in connection with it. Uh, Waca Bay
experienced an enormous algaal mat um problem in May of this year covering the bay from east to west and almost the full north to south extent of of the
bay. It was a carpet of algae and it was a wakeup call to the town that you know Walk Bay really needs attention. We think this is a very important step to take to stop the uh increase you know
new flow. Um but in connection with questions about expense and uh you know limited options for IIA systems I think it is also extremely important and this is not really your problem but I think
it's important for people in the town to speak up about urine diversion about composting toilets about wastewater management all of the other things that are uh impacting the water quality quality in the town and
and advocate for other options for nitrogen reduction in home residential wastewater um systems because those other systems are going to be significantly less expensive and remove large amounts of
nitrogen. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Oh, yeah. Uh Kim Kart from the Famouth Pond Coalition. Um, I'm going to say some of what I said at your hearing at the senior center, but I'll try not to repeat it too much. The Famouth Pond Coalition strongly supports the uh this
regulation. Um, as U Corin's been saying and other people have been saying, we have to stop digging the hole. And this is a first step uh to stop digging the hole. As you responded to this woman over here, these systems, these best
title five systems don't treat nitrogen. they don't treat phosphorus. Um I'll put in a plug again for as you are incentivizing the industry uh to develop systems that also treat phosphorus. Um I
brought a uh we had our first our worst cyanobacteria bloom uh in 20 years uh last Thursday on uh my pond deep pond. Um it's terrible. I have photos of it. I brought a jar of green sludge to George
uh on Thursday. Oh, no. On on Friday for him to uh put under his microscope. Um as you noted, even if everyone were to switch to IIA systems tomorrow and we sewer the whole town, whatever, we have a huge amount of nitrogen phosphorus
that is flowing uh to our ponds and flowing to our waters. Um this is an emergency and um yeah if you for the town to install 7,000 IASeptic systems uh 250 days a
year which is about the amount of working days a year that's 28 years. You do two a day that's 14 years. So we don't have you know we got to stop digging the hole. We got to be uh aggressive about it. The tax credit work
is great. the stuff Jonathan Calfman just talked about is really important. U but we're all for this and uh we really applaud applaud your uh efforts and and thank you for it. Thank you. [Applause]
Anything else? appreciate very much appreciate all the participation. Before we close this, we have to note um in our we're updating the other parts of FHR15.
um basically just to bring them into line with the 10 milligrams uh nitrogen 10 milligrams per liter of total nitrogen and then also um note that the North American vertical data um may be uh that's that we list as the as the
current one is 1988 but there's a possibility theoretical possibility of it being updated in 20 26 I think um to change the assumed level of groundwater. So that's just minor things that um I need
to note for the record. Go ahead. Can you tell us when you'll be voting on this and if you approve it, when you think it would be when an implement implementation date would be? It's a good question. We talked about that last meeting and um
we we can if somebody makes a motion. Sorry, Scott. Is that for your next meeting? I'm sorry. Um, we we could vote right now. It's my understanding. If you close the hearing, you can vote now or you could I would you have to close the hearing. I I don't know if
there's a time frame. Honestly, I don't you got to close the hearing, but then you can vote at any point after that. I don't know what that how I since you haven't had he doesn't have a clean copy. Um, and you guys haven't seen we talked about the clean copy, but I apologize. I
thought I got into them right after the last meeting. Um, we could close the hearing and then vote on it next meeting, but it's up to you're chair. So, talk about the implementation time frame question and then the information. Sorry. Sorry. Talk about the
implementation time frame before we close the hearing. Yeah. Which we did discuss last meeting and I'm hoping somebody else remembers when we decided to do that. November 1st. You said November. You said uh you you were thinking about voting on it in your
October meeting and implementing it by November 1st is what? That's right. See what year though. Okay. So, our next meeting is the 20th. Yeah. And that would be really tight. That would be tight. So, we could go to
November 15th. Yeah, that would be about the same thing if we had decided to vote on it tonight and November 1st would be terrible. But if we're waiting till the 20th to call it
on November 15th, November 15th is a Saturday. It's a Saturday. Well, that's actually pretty clean because there's nothing happening that day. They give me the weekend to go through every building permit. The 610 that go on.
[Laughter] Yeah. The 11th is a holiday. Okay. Anything else? Okay. Thanks everyone for your participation. We're going to now close.
Do you need a motion this hearing? Yeah. Do you have a motion? Motion to close the hearing on modifications to the septic system regulations. Second. All in favor? I. Any oppose?
Thank you. Thank you.