[Music] hour >> and uh >> gas >> the meeting will commence.
>> What's today's agenda? >> Yeah, >> this is going to be a relatively short meeting today because um there is beer down the street at aquatic and there will be a couple of individuals down there talking about things that we're
interested in. >> IAS >> IAS so we might find ourselves decamped to there. We can go there. >> Uh what? >> So moved or is that a motion? >> No, I'm just I'm just I'm just I'm telling you that we're the goal is we only have one real strong item on the
agenda. >> Um >> staggering >> and um the other one is a >> DP. >> Um >> yeah, >> more of an more of an exercise. I'm going to throw it everybody on the board to come back at our next meeting and delve into a little bit deeper. But with
that, Steve, you're you're first on the agenda with the board of health. the IIA regulations versus the TMDL targets. >> Kristen's gonna start the PowerPoint. >> Am I running the whole thing for you? >> Uh, do you need that
>> or are you coming up yet? >> I I'd like to do it from here. >> That's fine. Um, as you all most likely know, the board of health recently passed a requirement
for IAS in certain circumstances and I thought it had a number of implications for this committee. So that's mainly what I'm going to be talking about. Go to the first slide.
This is just background. This is nothing the board of health did. This is numbers that I got from Kristen and Steve. And you can look at this as a bar graph, but I really want you to look at it as a map of Falmouth.
Take Falmouth, take away all the water bodies, uh, streets, parks, uh, conservation land, and just leave it with lots. Make all the lots square, the same size, about the size of the intersection of two of those heavy
lines. and arrange it in a square grid of about um 150 by 150 and you'll get the 23,000 24,000 lots and fountain with and then arrange them in these categories. The
bottom bar is existing sewers. That's not going to change. Right above it is sewers in progress which is we know is going to happen. and then proposed sewers which is subject to a lot of variables. And then coming down
from the top the non nitrogen sensitive part parcels about 5,000 uh and then then there are the IIA the nitrogen sensitive U parcels.
The biggest group is the ones the I that would need IAS to achieve the TMDL given that number of sewers and then the ones that wouldn't the lucky people that wouldn't have to put in IAS in that scenario
and uh Steve has mentioned that with the out correct me if I'm wrong if with the outfall there might be the opportunity for more sewers in which case the line above the proposed sewers numbers would go up reducing the number of IAS and the line at the top of the
IAS would come down because each sewer lot can replace a couple of IIA lots. So that's that's the background and and and the reason I like it this way is because these aren't just data on nitrogen. You can think of these as
people and the economic impact or not on them. And uh if you go to the next uh slide, the the board of health uh regulation
uh requires uh best available nitrogen reducing technology IAS in any construction where there's going to be increased flow, an addition or a brand new house. And I think we should thank the board of health for their
diligence and courage to make this issue real. Uh I I hope I was hoping they would be here so they would know I was not just knocking them. I do think the regulation has a technical flaw which we'll get into. But
that is partly the fault of the water quality committee for not having a plan for the town after over 15 years. We should be embarrassed and we should get to work. Let me go to the next slide.
By the way, all all the sloppy graphics are mine and the good ones are Christmas. Um the the advantage of having it square like this is just as if you're mowing your lawn. It doesn't
matter whether you mow east, west, back and forth, or north, south. It's the same amount of mowing and you cut the grass, right? Or painting your basement floor or something. So, those were all those horizontal bars on the overall figures. But now I'm having the the
board of health regulation come in from the left and that's how many they asked the the building department how many permits are issued each year. The building department told them about a hundred.
But building permits aren't correlated with nitrogen sensitivity or sewers or anything. That's just across the town. So some of those hundred build the building permits that meet the economic uh criteria that the board of health has
set. So some of that, for instance, the ones that are in a non-nitrogen sensitive parcel, the board of health admits that it would be stupid to make somebody put an IIA in there or where there's an existing sewer or sewer in progress.
So even though they're doing a hundred a year, even after 20 years, they've only painted the map out to where those lines show. So this is an excellent pilot project but it's not
in my sense of the word significant a significant reduction of nitrogen. I mean it's a good thing and you have to do it but eventually you have to do the whole other thing too.
Um the so if you can go to the next slide. Um I guess I I said the first one. No, I guess I said all of that and go to the
next slide. The problem is that the areas that are planned for sewers but not yet funded are not exempted and those property owners will have to pay first for an expensive IIA and then
a few years later for a sewer connection. The board of health will say well that could be 20 years. Yes, it could. But remember this whole thing has to be done in 20 years. So if we have a plan that's consistent with D
Uh, some of those sewers are going to have to be in five, some in 10, some in 15, some in 20. And if you or the town were being double build that way, would you be amused? You first you Steve says, putting an IIA
is like burying a brand new car in your backyard. So, you have to bury a brand new car in your backyard. At the end of 20 years, throw it away and connect to the sewer. Um, and at the board of health hearing, the rebuttal was that the town is not
trusted to build the sewers. That's on video if you don't believe me. Uh, if that mistrust is justified, and it might be, it's a sad comment on our slow progress on the plan. Uh, next slide.
I submit that the solution is that we need to work as quickly as possible to outline the proposed areas for sewers and IAS under both scenarios of outfall and no outfall. And just to show that I'm not being
completely arbitrary, you could instead of m I mean they they may be saying, well, most new construction is out of rich out oftowners who can well afford this because they're building a multi-million
dollar house. Uh, okay. But you could also imagine some kind of tax on new construction and then use that money for something else dealing with nitrogen that isn't then thrown
away 20 years later. Um next slide. Um this is the elephant in the room. Um by the way fascinating thing what chat GPT does. You see, there are six
generic old white guys and um one younger guy with dark hair and or I said white guys with white hair and and there's a um it's but it's obviously us if you look
at the clothing and everything but but it's weird if you look at the faces close up. Um, if you go to the next slide. >> I think that the the chat GBT makes us look absolutely handsome and much younger than we really are. >> Can you get Chad G2P to dye our hair
black? >> Yes, I could >> Orange for Halloween. >> Let's do that. >> Yeah. >> And so the elephant is the scale of the problem. How to install all this in 20 years? >> Yeah. >> How does the town afford it? And how do we aortion the costs fairly? We need a
dialogue with town financial experts and should those required to install IAS pay any more than those required to connect to the sewer. Go to the next slide. Um we know what major technologies we'll be
using sewers outdoor IAS and maybe UDs which I call indoor IAS. Um, there are other technologies, oysters, inlet widening, PRBs. They're all either running fine without us like oysters or of known limited
contribution. There's no time to wait for additional new magic. Um, and we could have a lot of the time saved getting interim reports on those and spended thinking about the elephant
problem. Uh, the outfall project seems to be going well. Mass Tech Center will be doing the UD pilot project if they achieve Banner status. Then it's a no-brainer that they can be voluntary indoor IAS. If they
don't achieve Banner, but they're reasonable, we'll have to think h hard to include them that's fair to the people that do it and to the people that don't do it. And we need to focus on areas and funding for sewers and IAS
quantitatively and at scale effective affordable and fair. And the next slide the overall planning needs to be done by us and town management. Only the details can be contracted out. You don't hire an
architect without to say design a house for you without first knowing the desired size, features, location, and funds available. I don't see why this is any different. And the next slide. Uh that's it.
Chat GPD can turn the elephant around for you. Can you come back a few slides? Um go slowly. I'll tell you where. I think just went by it. So, I my my first and foremost comment,
Steve, is um we're going to town meeting to get some money to start doing the watershed plans. The wershed plans are going to be prepared through the oversight of the DPW
um and the wastewater department. Okay. The expectation is that the watershed plans will identify how it gets done in 20 years and everything. I mean you you I'm just I'm just trying to frame
>> what this what this committee >> does or doesn't do and that's where I want to go to with the thing I stuck on the agenda. But um we we did an exercise over the last year taking um
for lack of a better word the nuclear option inside the watershed uh plan requirements that says that you have to have a 20-year plan and it gets monitored every 5 years and if the Determines that you're not
achieving whatever you think you're going to achieve in a five or 10 year period they get to say you got to go to what is called the contingency plan which is sewers and IAS no land use reductions no storm water
changes there you know no oysters nothing okay utilizing the math and the formula um intrinsic to the MEP about nitrogen and flows and everything else we sat and we saw wershed by watershed what the
contingency plan looks like. watershed planning will produce a different plan and as you pointed out in your earlier graph as that develops e even just come can you come back to the very early graph the proposed sewers IAS
so just staying right here Steve in the watershed planning going on the IAS to achieve TMDL is anticipated to come down I don't know whether it'll come down by 10% or come down by 15% but it will come down for
things like you accounting for actual attenuation distance from receiving water bodies and everything else that's going to be done by people who have the time and the resources to do that analysis. we get an outfall the proposed sewage changes and then you
had a another slide where you talked about whether there is an outfall or not and by the way this is >> no no I just said that verbally there this is the only other slide is this with the >> okay >> board of health >> yeah yeah okay >> close sorry okay so um
but again the the idea through the watershed planning will be um you know if we don't have an outfall. What does it look like? I'm I'm presuming this Amy, if I've got this wrong with where cuz Amy LOL is sitting back here. She's been working with, you know, developing
scope and the consultant and coming up with a budget to go to town meeting on all of this, Steve. Okay. Um, so yes, the things you say need to be done and it's time to get them done. I I would agree, but I don't think that we are in the lead for looking at individual
wersheds and saying what does or doesn't have to happen. I think the watershed plan develops and we we are likely to get some form of update and and provide feedback to where that planning process is going. Okay,
fair enough. I I still think there are coarser or global or more preliminary decisions that it's totally appropriate for this committee to address and then to interact with the public and the select board and management and so on
about such as making the that part of the um board of health proposed installations that seem duplicative. And to me, incredibly
wasteful of money to make that work out. >> Um, not just by giving them the knowledge right away, but by I I mean, they did that because they're frustrated that we're
not moving fast enough, I think. I mean, that's their stated goal, unless there's some hidden agenda. Um, and so I think I I think that's legitimate and we could
discuss I mean you have a bunch of creative people here. We can take input from the community um which you can't expect your contractors to have. Uh how to solve that problem of the members of the board? Uh
>> uh you guys want to buck up, play rock, scissors, stones. >> So I I have a neighbor who's in this situation where they want to do some work on a house and it's going to cause them to fall in the um new board of health regulations to put in an IIA, but
they're also on Great Pond. So but they're on the Acropasca Peninsula. So probably going to happen in a few years, but not right away. There's no moneyies yet directed. So they're in this double jeopardy position where they're going to have to do both. So what I'm wondering is, and I'm still
sort of curious why the board of health didn't really entertain this, is that for the watershed plan, that should be done within a year or two. From what I'm hearing, the monies, if the monies are directed there, we're going to put together an integrated plan that looks at all 14 NSAs. At that point, we should
have a good idea of what homes are being sewered, right? That's the point of that watershed plan. So why couldn't the board of health for those homes that are have the potential to be sewarded grant them a little bit of time before requiring them to go to an IIA because
we'll know soon enough whether they're going to be in a sewer um area or not. Um and by waiting a few years it's not going to cause a huge issue I think with nitrogen entering the estuaries for some small subset of houses. But that's not the way it played out. They're going to
have to pay for the IIA and then have to pay to, you know, the at least the easement for the sewering. >> Thank you. >> Not the hookup. And and I brought this, that's my point, profession. >> I brought this up at the first meeting that we had in the senior center, but they just told me that they're not changing. So, I think for people that
are in that situation, it's going to be very financially painful. They're not all multi-millionaires building, you know, million-dollar mansions. That's sometimes the case, but not always the case. So, but what recourse do we have now to do anything about him? >> Part of the reason that I'm doing this
is because I got that same rebuttal twice and um I thought, well, maybe they think Leighton is this weirdo who's just ranting if I could get this committee to agree with me or they might listen.
Ed, >> this this article or first item on the agenda really is overlapping into number two, which is great because I think this is strategic planning for where does this committee go? Where does this town go? What do we recommend the town does
over the next 20 years and most of us won't be here to see what happens, but you know, we hope to >> You look pretty healthy to me. >> I I feel good. I I expected you. I was talking about you. But anyway, um, a couple of things just, you know, a
minor technical point. The the non impacted NSA parcels 19, let's call it 2000. Um, as I understand it, those are ones that are in the NSA and because when we went our geo
boundary exercise, we said, "Nah, those don't need an IIA. got enough with the other parcels and the potential sewing. So, we won't need that. However, the board of health in their new regulation, ignore that. If you're in the NSA,
they don't know from geo boundaries. If you're in the NSA, you are impacted by this regulation, which I think the numbers and the historical data I've gone through a lot of the uh building department records and you know the the 100 a year is a good number
because it does have more like 120 and so it gives that allowance for those that are in the non NSA parcels. So just technical point those non-impacted NSA parcels that's not truly correct. What
the board of health did and I think to people need to understand the implications of this mandate is the first step in a multi-stage process of triggers requiring IAS. It will not end
here. A lot of towns have more stringent IIA mandates that include things like a time trigger of 10 or 15 years when you will be required regardless of changes to your flow. Um they include transfer
of title triggers. So if the house is sold at any point from the moment the edict went in going forward, thou shalt install an ia burial plus they have that already. Um and some other towns on the Cape I think Wall Fleet does are
considering it. So this is only the first step. What it does do is define the local that are impacted. the NSAs after months of verbiage discussions at the board of health meetings of what little tweaks how much are the parcels
in the area and all this other stuff. So they've really made a great stride in defining the areas of impact. It's the NSAs regardless of our geo boundary concepts which we put a lot of effort into. So that's and the other thing that happens
here is that 100 a year there is no town provided subsidy. >> That precedent is now locked in this regulation. And by the way that precedent has been
set over the last eight or 10 years when people have been installing IAS in Falmouth of which there's somewhere between two and 300 already in the ground already there. They're most of them aren't very good. They're probably
performing in the 25 or not much better range, but they are >> and they were voluntary >> in some cases. They weren't all voluntary. Some were mandated just if I can. So there is uh a zoning overlay district called the water resource
districts and any subdivision with five homes in it inside an overlay district was obligated to put in an IIA. Now a number of developments that went 40B said that's a town regulation. We don't have to follow it. But the bulk of them
that went in came in under that um that regulation. Yes. Okay, just wanted to clarify where it came from. >> So, there are two to 300 of them already in the ground. No subsidy. If they work their tax correctly, they
could have got some subsidy as via a state tax credit for that, but the requirements are stringent and Jonathan's done a lot of work and others with our legislators. So, that there is a bill pending in committee now. No, I'm I'm all in favor of Jonathan's bill. In
fact, I came up with part of the initial idea. But the that makes no distinction between sewers and IAS. >> Correct. The difference >> that's just between rich and poor. It's a good thing, but it has nothing to do with any unfairness of IAS versus
sewers. No, but it addresses the subsidy requirement or request or hope for a lot of people that are impacted by this. So, that's a priority uh issue for this committee to work with
the town fathers and other communities to try and make that a reality. But understanding what I'm saying, the impact of this regulation is groundbreaking for the town of Falin. It is mandating something that is new.
It doesn't have subsidies. It requires everybody in an NSA, which is roughly 80% of the town to do this if they're not in the sewer area. And I agree with you know Jonathan's and your concerns about
people that they might be 15 years away from getting a sewer in Aapeski you know without the outfall that isn't going to happen with any speed and the outfall is not going to happen tomorrow 5 7 10 years from now in the meantime we
can be planning for when it gets there but if it doesn't we have got a major problem as a community. So this is great to trigger a discussion going forward and and put some u criticality to it that we need to move
and move forward. We're an advisory board. We we've got some people that have good ideas and and do a lot of digging and understand the problem. So our charge is to advise the select board and thereby the
community as to what we think is the best path forward. And yeah, I agree with you. We got to hurry up and do it. But understand the limitations of the fiscal reality, the permitting reality without the outfall. What are we going to do? We got to have it. That that's a
got to have. And you know, a lot of people and Amy especially has done a tremendous amount of work uh to get it to where it is. And >> nobody disputes that. I'm just saying I don't think it requires any input, any substantial time spent by this committee. It it's out there being done.
>> Well, but I I think it's I disagree with you because I think the the mission of this committee should be to pursue that, advocate for it in any and every form possible, including the community. We're going to have to do a selling job to, hey folks, we want to
spend, you know, 75, 80 million, $90 million on this. >> Fair enough. Okay. >> And also to get the permitting process through. The Buzzards Bay Coalition wrote a wonderful letter of support to D explaining the need and their very
stringent and strong support of the entire concept. We need to advocate for that. I think that's a big part of our mission to help those to help that tax credit uh change that would be very important to people of limited means.
Go for it. That that's what we got to do. And I think that brings us right into section two, but we've overlap some of it. And so I just want to see if anybody go ahead. >> I just want to thank Ed for one part of that and emphasize thank you for emphasizing the fact that this sets a precedent for
no subsidy for IAS. I totally agree that with that and I don't think that's a good thing. But I think that there are people that don't care what the homeowners pay but do care what the town spends who are
very happy setting that precedent in what I submit is kind of a sneaky way. Other other committee members who want to turn on on what Steve has put in front of us. So, I'd just like to say first of all, I I think this really
crystallizes very nicely what we've been moving towards for the past since I've been on the committee. And uh you know, there's clear strategies here and and the you know, I don't think when I first arrived on this committee, we could have
broken it down by parcel like this. Maybe I'm naive about that, but and with the work that Kristen's been doing on the watershed plans, we're even getting to the point of having spatial spatially explicit breakdowns.
Um, and so people have made a lot of nice comments. The one place where I wonder if we couldn't have some impact given the large number of parcels that are going to end up having IAS in order to meet TMDLs
is lobbying for the UD technology. the criteria for best available nitrogen removing for UD technology to be different than just the concentration
because I don't I'm not convinced that if concentration is used in the effluent it's going to succeed but from the mass loading point of view I think it will succeed very nicely. So
uh D needs to somehow modify their criteria. It's it's I mean that is an elephant that uh you know if we can't you know the liability of putting in 7,600
units at 50 or 60 or $70,000 a piece is just huge. And if you could do it for $15,000, uh, I think a lot of people would have liked to do it. Yes. Well, I I came away, you can ask
John, tell I came away from this recent rich earth summit out at the mass test test center. Um, and I mean, I started out as a cynic about UDS. I I'm no longer a cynic. I can see a lot of people going for that because
the price differential is huge. >> Exactly. >> I think though that uh you only have to uh read the uh Falmouth police log in the Enterprise
to know that not everybody is well-meaning. Um, and if you just think that those are a bunch of poor drug addicts or something, what about Bernie Maid off and other people or you get into political work? >> Where does Bernie live? I haven't seen
his name in the police report. Civil >> No, I'm saying I don't think >> I'm saying there's a lot of >> What's Bernie made of? >> A lot of bad behavior that isn't. >> Are you serious? >> Yeah, I you just threw in a name. I have no idea what you just said.
>> Oh, wait. Let him finish. >> There are a lot of famous white collar criminals and there was somebody that >> you're worried about yellow collar criminals. I'm not sure. >> There was somebody that worked for >> a local business as their bookkeeper
embezzled thousands of dollars over the year. So I don't want anyone to claim that everybody is good. >> No one's claiming that. >> Okay. But I >> take a vote. Is that how many people think that not everybody's good? So, so the >> you can quote us on that.
>> The catch the catch with the UD regulations is it has to have something enforcable >> because otherwise there's a huge temptation to spend the much smaller amount of money. >> Now you're getting into the weeds, you know, do you do you put make every
toilet a UD toilet or something like that? >> Absolutely. >> Saying I I agree with you, but the task is to come up with >> but but the larger The larger point that I was trying to make when and I you tried to make this point a couple meetings ago was no one's going to do it
if it doesn't count as an IIA and you have to also put in an IIA. >> No one's going to do the >> Yes, that's correct. So the so there's this huge cost savings that's hanging out there that will not be
achieved unless D is willing to accept UD as an IIA and that hinges on concentration and I just especially if water use declines if you have a UD which it may
which they're claiming it does, then you're never going to get to the concentrations necessary to qualify as success. >> I just want to jump in. Last time I checked inside the town of Falmouth's board of health regulations,
there was a provision in there that if if you were not making the permitted target for an IIA system, you could come back and demonstrate through a mass calculation that you were removing a
certain percentage. >> But will D accept that as progress? I don't I don't I'm just I'm just telling you that there's already inside town regulations that it's not just the concentration. There's the ability if your system is working properly, but you're not making the concentration to
show the mass balance and show pounds. >> The town is more farsighted than than the Commonwealth. >> Well, we have George Hoffelder on the board, >> right? >> So, that helps. >> Anyway, that that's >> I just wanted to cover that that detail. >> That's just one >> John knows this because he sat on the board with me. Um I would just like to
make one comment. And I think we sort of really misidentified the elephant. The elephant then is we have a welldeveloped town model for how we sewer and a portion the costs of that. And we have a
long range town capital plan which identifies how we're going to afford the sewering we're planning for the future. Uh what we don't have is a long range plan that includes a comparable con uh
contribution to the people who are mandated to put in IAS. Uh that's missing and it seems to me that's the real elephant. So until we convince the town planners that they
have to figure out a model that treats the IAS in a proportionate way that we've treated the sewer people, we're destined for fair. >> And I'm going to I'm going to drag Amy in momentarily.
My recollection, Amy, is last time you and I had a side conversation was that on the whole watershed planning, there was a belief that somebody with some understanding of town economics needed to be involved in development of this
overall plan to talk about where the numbers fall and how how the numbers get get made fair. Am I misstating anything? >> No. >> Okay. So, it it needs to be done, John. I agree with you. Okay. It's a better statement
of the elephant in the room, which is how how are we going to handle IAS and the costs and the and the you know the the the making it making it balanced somehow. So that's that's that's that will we go to town meeting, we get some
money, we we get some people working on this, we start getting feedback of how the variables work or don't work a little bit. Okay. So, >> so I I hear you agreeing with John
and me and the other John and I think almost everybody that you want to make IAS a similar burden to the homeowner that sewers are >> because I'm I'm stumbling I'm stumbling on the
word similar because I think that that that they are they are Both things that will reduce nitrogen, I think the impact and effect on homeowners, as you've well pointed out, fall into different categories and somebody should do some
effort to figure out where the numbers should fall. Okay? But but there are people like me that say it should be fair. I don't care how you work out the fairness, but it should be fair. There's this a real issue of unfairness. And
then I hear other people who talk about it in a sort of sideways way. And I admit we don't know the solution, but I want to hear people at least say that they agree that it ought to be fair because you have no choice. It's not a
volunteer thing whether you do IIA or sewer. That's chosen by us and our contractors in the town. >> That was a statement. And do you are are you willing to say that you agree it ought to be fair or or do you want to
say abstract? >> No, I think that we need to be able to strike a balance on the cost to any individual homeowner who either has to put a sewer in or an IIA in so that one one party or another is not bearing an
unfair burden. Whether or not they're exactly equal, I I don't know if we can ever get there. Not exactly equal, but not grossly far apart. You willing to say that? >> I feel like I'm being cross-examined. >> Well, you are because when when I first
realized this a couple years ago, there there was a different um well, I don't know what the title is. Is this the town the the chief financial officer of the town? He retired and has been replaced by someone I have not met
or talked to. But at the time I went and >> Is that Bernie? >> No. >> Who is Bernie? You were going to tell me who Bernie was. >> You seriously don't remember his name? >> Is he Does he live in Felmouth? >> No. >> No. >> Oh, >> no.
>> I think he's in jail. >> He's dead. >> He's dead. >> Oh, he died. >> Did he Did he live in Felmouth and then die? >> No. >> He had nothing to do with Felmouth. Look at it that before. >> I'll tell you after. It's a long story. I'm simply saying there's a lot of
substantial white collar crime. Um, in case you didn't like my Falmouth police log story. Um, now I've forgotten where Amy's got her hand up. Go ahead. >> Let's Let's hear from Amy.
>> Yes. She's going to explain who this who this so mythical this mythical figure. Oh, I know what it was. There's there's a thing about um uh Weekend at Bernie. Is that the guy? Is he in the guy from the movie? >> Uh >> I don't know whether you're joshing me or you really don't know who he is.
>> A couple of things he really knows. >> One is uh Jonathan, you had said so I wanted to just defend the board of >> Wow, that got a lot louder. I wanted to defend the board of health's um uh progress a little bit in that I think
that IA systems will reduce the amount of nitrogen going into the coastal ponds wherever they are. Some of you know if it's further away it'll take a little more time to for that reduction to be seen but it's it's it's I understand that their goal is to make progress and
and doing that will make some progress. They also the regulation has a a time frame where if they've put in a an IIA and the sewer comes along they have an extended period of time where before they have to actually connect to the
sewer. So um um I don't remember the exact time frame but it's something like >> 15 years or 20 years or whatever there is. >> They still have to pay the better. >> I'm sorry. >> They still have to pay the betterment. >> They do have to pay the better. Yep. um when the betterment comes along. Um
but the other thing about the the cost and the fairness is is so on the on the board of health regulation these are it this new regulation is applying to people who are either you know demolishing a house or doing new
construction. It's not people who are just sitting there at exactly the same in their in their um property and are forced to change their their septic system. They're doing a substantial modification and there and then they have to change their septic system. I
don't I'm I'm I think the I think the discussion of fairness has become kind of absolute and uh and I don't I don't think it needs to be quite so um so stringent. Um I I do
want I do also want to say I mean I think you guys you know that the town has not been allocating funds for IAS in our in our overall plan and to do so would be a monumental change uh a
monumental increase in the cost. So yes, as part of this waste or um excuse me, wershed plan over the next year, we will be looking at plans for each watershed and IA areas and sewers. But I don't want to um make a commitment right now
that it's that the town has has planned to to pay for IAS or that that things are going to be exactly fair. things are never exactly fair and we will be looking at costs and financing plans, but I I think you guys are sort of it
sounds like you're sort of teeing up to say that things are going to be a certain way and I think it's too early to say that we need to look at the overall cost and figure out what's feasible um and and then then make these uh decisions. I one
one of the things I recall when you know one of the learning experiences from doing the Marav Vista sewers people articulated that if they got a grinder pump instead of the gravity sewer connection there were different costs and there was some inherent
unfairness and the town looked at that and they went through the legislature to sort of balance it a little bit whether it was perfectly balanced or Not. So I I've been sitting here thinking as this develops and we get further down the road on sewers and
other things. The town has the ability to, you know, at any moment in time come back and ask the board of health to change their regulation andor decide, you know, if there's a subset of people who've put in an IIA because they have to put it in, you know, we come up, I'll just choose a peninsula, we're going to
put another 800 sewer connections in and 15 homes have got IAS. the town can come revisit wherever we're at right now and decide if you know maybe you got to go to the legislature and say if you put this in and it's functioning and you're
maintaining it you you don't have to hook to the sewer and you pay maybe a portion of the betterment not the full betterment I don't know but the these are the sort of things that can be looked at over time that's the way I that's the way I look at it for now the
board of health's taken the first step Okay, which is we don't know when the sewers are coming, how fast they're coming, or when the outfall is going to be in place, or how big the sewer area is going to be yet. Okay, none of this stuff is pinned down. It's very amorphous in a lot of ways. So, if you're putting in new construction and
you're in an NSA, you've got to do this as we get closer to doing other things. We will continue to discuss this. At least I would believe we're going to continue to discuss it and say, "Wait a minute. You got 15 people that have already done this. They're helping out. we shouldn't penalize them. And that to
me it's analogist to the we made the grinder pump decision, you know, the E1s and went back to the select men and and this and and we set a camera how it worked out, but somebody did a thing and they set a number aside and then, you know, and we're doing the same thing in
the on the next one. So, you know, I think the town has worked hard to be reasonable and fair and that we've had to work inside budget constraints, you know, and one of the big issues is how do we raise
money for this overall program and where does it come from? And, you know, there's many parts to this. I I went on. I'm sorry. I shouldn't go on. No, I just wanted to respond to to one thing that uh Amy said, which is unfortunately in the same class of
hyperbole as Bernie Maidoff, which is >> be careful about using precedents as a reason for not change. Uh in 1861, we'd had slaves for the order of 100 years and it was decided that wasn't exactly fair, should we say, and it was changed.
Um, and no one said, "Well, you got to keep doing slaves because look at all those other slaves in the past that have been enslaved." >> Would be absurd, right? >> Yeah. >> And the the town treasurer story was that I went to him when I first realized
that that there was this discrepancy in my mind and he agreed with me. And I think saying he was in a state of shock is too strong a word. But he he and town management at that point realized that this was tens of millions of dollars.
There's a huge potential expense that the town hadn't even thought about, let alone budgeted for. And I I think they saw it as impossible financially. Uh so so it's it's a huge political
issue. >> Kim tearing you up. >> Um Kim Kard from the Famouth Pond Coalition and the Freshwater Pond Advisory Committee. Um just a few quick points. One is um I the found coalition
supported the board of health's um uh requirement that folks who are going to be having increased flow or new construction on their house substantial renovation uh that they be required to install uh an IIA. The idea which the
Buzzards Bay coalition also talked about is when are we going to stop digging a hole and making things worse. So, if you're building a new house, you're going to install tit you're are you going to install a title five for 25
or $30,000? And the decision was no, let's not continue to dig a hole by allowing people to install a title five, which is the biggest contributor to the problems we're having in our waters. and they may have to pay another $25,000
the different the differential in order to install an IIA and there is the state tax credit and so there's there's some help that people get. Um so I think that was that was core to that decision at the board of health. Are we going to allow people to just keep installing
title fives or are we going to say no more no more title fives? It's just all I'm my only objection. In fact, what Amy said about the non-impacted NSA, I have no problem with putting them there because that they will not have to put in
>> I understand. I understand. Um and uh yeah. So, so I I think Steve's point just now that there's time in the future to to u deal with these folks who were
required to put in uh an IIA uh and then 10 years 15 years later they have to pay the betterment there and maybe the town has to deal with that. Um on in terms of this fairness issue, I think one of the first conversations I
ever had when I met George White Felner, whose name has been invoked and I'm looking forward to seeing him soon uh over at the brewery. Um George commented to me like, you know, 11% of all the households in town are on sewer. 89% are
on septic and all of us who are on septic are subsidizing the people who were on sewer. I had my uh septic pump today, paid $400 for it. Um so yeah, all
of us who are on IAS um uh who are on septic, you know, there there's there's and I think um John Waterbury's point about an elephant in the room here. Yeah. If you do the math, like we're spending we're gonna spend $60 million
to sewer eight 850 homes, something like this, right? Pretty soon. That's phase one. If the town were to provide a $10,000 subsidy to the $7,000 people who might be required to install an IIA,
that would be uh $70 million. $7 million and you get you're getting $7,000 subsidized IAS. You could give them a $15,000
tax $15,000 subsidy, that's $105,000. You give them a $20,000 subsidy, it's $140,000. We're spending >> 140 million $140 million. $140 million. So it's 70 million. 70 million with a
$10,000 subsidy. 105 million with a $15,000 subsidy and $140 million with a $20,000 subsidy. We're spending $60 million to sewer 811 homes.
>> I'm just going I'm going to I just want to make sure you get your math right. Okay. >> So, on the sewer project at $60 million, Right. Right. We're getting a percentage of that money back from the Cape Island trust fund. We're charging Betterments
for another large component of it. So although we go to town meeting and say we need $60 million because you have to have that borrowing authority to go forward, the actual cost to the town at the end of that exercise just just to keep your numbers working right.
>> I'm going to pull a number out of my head. Amy's probably going to going to correct me, but it's going to be $15 million to the town. Town's going to incur a $15 million cost out of a $60 million authorization. >> Okay. So, so I'm just it.
>> Okay. So, even using your even using your number, >> No, but the numbers are manageable. The numbers, the subsidy numbers are still manageable. I just want I I like to keep everybody >> Okay. So, use your number. $15 million gets us 800 800 uh sewer homes.
$15 million and for seven and to get $7,000 uh for a with a $10,000 subsidy is going to cost us $70 million. So I just I mean we're just we think nothing of spending all this you know massive numbers
amounts of money on on the sewers. And I guess the last the last thing I'll just say is that um with all of the septic the you know this this move to IIA seeptics um if we don't
push these companies to figure out how to treat phosphorus and we're putting hundreds or thousands of of IAS in the ground that don't treat phosphorus. We're just missing a big opportunity. So I know companies are starting to
experiment with it. But I think this committee, the board of health, our freshwater pond committee, the select board, we have to try to uh encourage these uh companies to to figure out this technology. Whatever you can do to help with that would be important.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, I'm Tammy Gilbert with the West Felmouth Village Association. I just want to say thank you. I appreciate the fact that you are thinking along these lines about fairness because as you
know, you know, the entire town, all of the taxpayers are paying for the sewers and now West Falmouth in particular, I think a lot of people in West Falmouth are going to then have to bear the burden of putting IIA septic systems in as well. So, I appreciate that you're
having these conversations. I understand that it may be a little bit premature and when we do get into the watershed planning we can have, you know, some additional talks. Appreciate that. Um, one thing I did want to mention, I received an email today um from the
Association to Preserve Cape Cod and they were talking about I'm wondering if I septic systems, urine diversion, sewers, are these the only things in our toolbox? you know, the per the uh PRBs that Ed and I had a discussion about
recently as well. Um, but the Association to Preserve Cape Cod sent out an email this morning. Is anybody aware of what they're doing over there with Mashb Wake Pond? >> Yes. >> And an amphidrome treatment system that
will reduce nitrogen and phosphorus in the wastewater of over 200 homes near and along the northern shore of Wake Pond. Yes. >> Have we considered anything such as that? I don't know anything about it. >> Okay. So, um
the Glam Camping on Cypit Road. >> Yeah. >> They have an amphid drone system. >> Oh, they do. >> They do. >> And um >> basically cluster IA. >> Well, that's No, it's it's a So, there's several treatment plan. So, we always
talk about the West Falmouth treatment plant and we talk about the new Silver Beach treatment plant, but there are a number of other privately owned and operated and maintained treatment plants in Falmouth. >> Okay. Serest has got one. >> Okay.
>> Atria Woodbarrier's got one. The the uh what's the name of the campground? I keep saying Glam Camping, but somebody Anyway, >> Auto Camp. >> Auto Camp. Auto Camp. Those are the three that I come to my mind. There's a there's another one at the other campground. So, um this is a system
where where there's a tight group of homes around this pond. They're building a collection system to gather that >> and um when they refer to it as being underground is it's it's not treating. So, we project that if the town sewers
everything that they should sewer >> Mhm. >> and ties it all together, it's around 3 million gallons that would get treated. Okay. Initially, it's 1.5 or 1.7. The the mashp system, I don't have the numbers in front of me yet. You you you research things, but my guess is it's
probably 60 or 70,000 gallons. The amphodrome systems, you can get them up to about 160. Okay. 160,000 gallons a day. So, it'll take care of a group of homes, a cluster. >> So, could we maybe consider something like that in the water? >> I think over time I think over time we
we in the right location. You know, the thing that pops to my mind right now is there is a neighborhood >> treetops is another one that might consider that at some point. >> Treetops might but but there there is a neighborhood um on to the north of Aquite Bay
>> on the Mashby line. It is a very dense neighborhood. It's really far away. Um the trick is always finding a piece of land that you can put that system into. And then on these small systems, um, you can't just leave them running on your
own. Somebody's got to somebody's got to be there and watch them and take care of them. So, I applaud Mashby for tackling >> the situation they have. Um, there are several types of of systems you can get. You can get rotating biological contacttors, you get the amphid drone
system, you can get um, there's a number of systems. So the the the fundamental rule is that if you have more than 10,000 gallons a day of waste water, you can't be permitted by the board of health, you have to be permitted by the DP. So Saxs and Partners
made a m presented a plan for a certain type of system because they were over the 10,000 gallon per day number. So yeah, in the right locations, I would would think we'd look at it, but to date, if you look at the plans we have, they're very dense neighborhoods on the
southern peninsula. And um there's very little land. I mean, if you drive down Mara Vista, you know, where would you find four four acres of land that's not, you know, that's not already occupied by some dwelling?
>> Mhm. Um, you know, the challenge, you know, Amy has got the the the patience of a saint some days because, um, she spent the better part of a year and a half trying to find a location for a pump station for the next phase of sewers
going in. And, um, it it it it was it was agonizing. >> Yeah. >> Um, but yes, I I I we're not opposed to that concept. At least I'm not opposed to it, but it's got to be the right neighborhood. Okay. >> Okay. >> Um, from the plans that we did before, and I'm speaking only for myself because
we haven't talked about this in the board, but we did look at um, you know, up in the Megan area, >> you know, there's a there's a clustered neighborhood up there, and the question is, you know, where where would that go to to a wastewater plant? That's a long
ways to go. there may be an opportunity up in that area with other things that are going on to put a system like that in there once we get to it. >> But I so I hear what I'm hearing is that you are aware of that technology or that type of system. So that's great. And you
know, perhaps when we do get into this next phase of looking at individual watersheds, I mean, maybe there's something more we can consider besides just these tools in the toolbox because I can't imagine you asking 7,600
homeowners, regardless of what their financial resources are, you know, to pay. >> I would characterize the MASHB as not an IIA system, >> but as a wastewater treatment. >> Right. Right. That's what I'm saying. Like if we can you any available tools, >> you know your neighborhood
>> better than we do. >> If look around and if you see a lot um where you could could imagine a tiny sewage plant being built and then go ask the people that live next door to it if they agree with you.
>> Okay, we'll do that. >> You know, I I will do this. I will do this because I I I do have a little bit of history doing this stuff. Um, the Quisit campus of Hoie >> Mhm. >> has a has has a little treatment plant
on it. >> Okay. >> If if you go there, there's a ballpark, the softball field. There's a little building next to it where they store some bats and balls. There's actually a small treatment facility inside that building and the leeching field is under
the ball field. So, one possibility for the McGansen area, again, speaking only for myself and from some background I have, you know, there's a ball field sitting right below the library. You know, you go in there and you put a system in.
You, you know, you look at the cost for doing that. Amy doesn't want to run another treatment plan. >> I'm spitballing Amy. This is dangerous when I do this. >> I think it's good to talk about everything. Uh, but I have personally
been opposed to the town be having responsibility for lots of municipal treatment plants because each one has a groundwater discharge permit. And when people hear about violations, they don't care the perspective. People don't care
whether it's a million gallons per day or 60,000 gallons per day. The attention that you get for a small plant is the same that you get for a large plant. and the the cost and the effort of m of maintaining municipal small municipal
treatment plants is not proportional to the flow. >> It is and the issue you brought about sighting brought up about sighting is another one. So I have we have one satellite treatment facility and that's the new silver beach treatment facility
and it it gets a lot of attention and um and requires a lot of um effort that is disproportionate to its its treatment volume. >> That's my and the amphodome system at the at the auto park. Um, if anybody
read the paper, there was a year and a half to twoyear long exercise with the board of health saying it's not working. It's not working. It's not working. They dug it up. They took it apart. They modified the system. It took them two years to get it working. And I haven't seen anything lately about how good it
is working. Okay. >> It's it is MASHP has a lot of individual system. their private systems and they have um talked a lot about taking on some of those private systems and making them part of their municipal system. I
personally discourage that for the town. I don't I'm not saying it can't be discussed, but my perspective is sighting and permitting and operating those plants is is more difficult per gallon than centralized.
>> I I believe you. Is it fair to summarize that by saying you're saying it's the opposite of an economy of scale? >> That's my my take on it. Yes. >> And historically, I can tell you from having sat through the whole planning
process for New Silver Beach. It took us years to put that package together. So >> 20 >> I think that's not something we want to use as a model to in going forward.
So the next big big one in town will be Sax and Partners, right? >> They're going to have their own treatment plant. Yes. >> Will they run it or Yes, >> they will. >> Yeah. >> And that is different. I mean that they it a private plant um has has different
requirements in not in not as far as their um this one will have I believe I hope uh different discharge limits from others. Um, but they're anyway, it's different for a private entity to run it and site it than it is for the town to
do that. >> Other comments or questions? >> Okay. Um, I'm going to just move on to the second item which we've sort of been doing. Um, and I'm not asking for a big discussion right now on this. Um
the water quality management committee initially got formed to evaluate alternatives. We looked at a number of things over the years as a as a committee. We are sort of a little bit at a at a crossroad in which you know the wastewater
division of the DPW has responsibility for designing sewers, constructing sewers and they're going to have responsibility for for getting the watershed plans developed and implemented.
That doesn't mean we don't have a role of, you know, comment and input, but I'm going to task everybody to think to [Music] what should this committee be doing? You know, um you know, it it's been
rightfully pointed out to me by um a couple of people that we seem to fill the agenda sometimes as opposed to having something that has to be done. you know, another not picking on Tommy here, you know, another update on uh you know, shellfish or whatever. So, I
really want everybody to walk away today and spend some time so at our next meeting we can sort of say what what what what's out there that that fits this board's ability to look at things and advise the selectment. Um I don't
think it's our job to review sewer designs at this point. Uh, you know, we have a consultant does a good job on that. Amy's got people working in her department all the time. Um, I don't want to I don't I I feel borderline that
we have and and no all difference to the work you've been doing, Steve, to try to frame some of these questions. We should not be the board second-guessing other boards um or others. >> Why not? >> I don't know that that's what this board
should be doing. I'm asking I'm asking you to all think about what this board should be doing and see how it fits in with what we've been doing. Okay? That's that's that's the second thing here. I'm not I'm not asking to to have a full-blown discussion right today.
Okay. Um item three, reports of members and staff. I'm going to go to Jonathan first. >> Okay. So, um, on October 17th, Steve Rafferty and myself, um, went to the state house in Boston to provide oral
testimony on David Vieier's House Bill 4082, which is, um, proposing to change the Title 5 septic tax credit from non-refundable to refundable to make it more available to people who are probably in the low middle income tax
brackets and don't actually owe the state much money, if any money at all. So they really can't tap into that um credit. So if the law was changed and people were required to build an expensive IIA or for the hookup of their sewers, this could be another um large
pot of money that they could tap into that currently they can't because of their income situation. They just don't owe the state any uh tax money. So basically it's a threeminut presentation. It went well as far as I can tell. the committee, it was the uh
um joint committee on revenue heard this um bill. They have uh I think till the second week in December to make a decision whether this bill continues on down the legislative process or it's basically dies a quick death and I guess we'd have to wait till the next
legislative cycle to um submit it again. In addition to the oral testimony, we submitted written testimony and we've actually uh sent out notes to a wide range of people. um different environmental groups uh water quality
groups from different towns asking them to also submit written support of this bill. Um that has to be in by basically the end of November so the committee has a chance to read it. And then in a recent email um Kim mentioned I think it's a really good idea hitting up the
um the commercial sector the banking sectors of town that also would be impacted to try to get their letters of support. Um, and that's something I I would pose to the rest of the committee. What What besides the usual suspects should we be targeting in the next
couple weeks to solicit their support for this bill? So, >> Chamber of Chamber of Chamber of Commerce is the first thing that pops into my mind. >> Yeah. So, I I was hoping we'd have more time to discuss that today, but I realize that there's beer waiting, so I don't want to stand between a pint and this committee, but
>> Amy, um, if if we Jonathan will do this because he's really good at this. if he gives you how how comment letters or or or whatever can go forward. You know, there's there's a certain person it's got to go to in an address, can you post it on on um the site?
>> I'm sorry, I don't understand. So, so anybody that's watching or sitting here that wants to write a comment letter in support of this proposed change in the um tax laws, there's a very specific way that person and way they have to send it
in and um uh >> we'll also we'll also we'll also >> you want that posted on the water quality management committee website. >> We'll get to that information as well. Okay. >> Yeah. If you provide the information about how to do that, we can get it posted on the water quality management.
>> I'll send you an email tomorrow. >> Yep. Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, you can send it to this whole mailing list, whatever. >> You can send it to as many people as you want. You don't have to just I mean, surely send it to Amy, but >> yeah, I'm just doing the fact I'm doing
the fact that we're on TV. Somebody might see this and they might be like, "This should get past it. We need this." You know, >> I'll send it to the committee members. I I thought we had provided some of that information. >> Yeah, we we we did. I just trying to reach out a little further right now. Okay. >> Now, just if if I may add to that, we
have a person here from West Felmouth. Tammy, thank you for being here. And I think you got a newsletter going out in a couple of weeks. >> Yes. >> And I think neighborhood associations like that. I think you said you had 600 odd people on the list >> that will get that message. So, you
know, include people like that. and you know Falmouth Heights Marav Vista and whatever other organizations there are Ticket Civic you know wherever there is there's a group of people that are interested if they understand the problems I think you got to do two things give them how to do it >> and why just be sure
>> very sure to explain clearly the difference between refundable and non-refundable >> his testimony was his testimony was excellent and we should probably put the testimony up on on the website as well Amy okay because it's very succinct It's
to the point and >> and I have the written testimony that I wrote on behalf of the committee members that was circulated to you guys voted support that that does talk about that. I'll send that out to I guess it's really if
you guys know these um associations just send them to me. I will put together the letter that I could send to them that will have all the relevant information and any other associations that you can think of. I mean, now now's the time to get this done. Um, because by the end of
November, the committee is probably going to run out of time. >> Yeah. I mean, the association the association for the preservation of Cape Cod, the Buzzards Bay Coalition, you know, sort of all the big ones responded. I reached out to board of health and a number of the other Cape communities um at least one of them I
think made a response. I it's been on me and I I'm I'm a little remiss, Jonathan, to you know, circle a second time saying want to let you know we're we hope you can get get letters out. So >> yeah. >> Um and you know if it doesn't get out of committee this year, we'll make sure it
gets out of committee next year. I mean, you know, Dave Vieira has been very supportive. By the way, in 74 years, I had never been to the state house. And I must say, I spent hours looking for the ballroom and couldn't find it.
>> Well, they're about to tear down the east wing. I I was going to say they should they they need to add a big big addition right on the front lawn, you know. >> Okay. Other committee reports. >> Yes. There's another chance. I know beer
might be going to waste this evening, but there's another chance to mix waste water and beer uh next Tuesday, the 4th, in New Bedford. Uh here's the announcement from the New Bedford Science Cafe. um some of our local talent. Dale Levit
is going to be presenting along with uh Christian Pedipa, I think you pronounce her name, Amy. Anyway, they're they're having a a meeting over there explaining the testing for water quality and um the beer's not free. It's the only thing
that isn't free. There's free parking, free admission, everything else. Um, and I'm planning on driving over that afternoon and I'll be willing. >> Are you going to designate yourself as a driver so I can drink to my heart's content? >> Yes, I will be the I will be the um the
dry, but anyone that's interested in going, it looks to me pretty good. Amy, I sent you a little blurb about >> H. >> Yes, we did. >> Yeah, I didn't know whether you wanted to show up or not. It seemed to be up our alley. Shell fisherman and wastewater and treated wastewater. Okay.
>> So, anyway, if anybody's interested, um I'll be heading over. Right. >> Um I'm going to jump in here just real quickly. Uh the um Meepa uh all the comments have come back
from Meepa. There are 16 or 18 comment letters. Amy, >> are you going to post them? >> You should. >> You should. you know, I don't I don't think you need to go too far. The comment letters are back. Um, I would I
would characterize them as being informative. Um, you know, a lot of work has been done over the last year and a half working with agencies. Um, you always get one or two people that kind of spitball concerns about this and that. Um but the the next step is the
state looks at these comment letters, looks at everything we submitted and then they define if an EI is required and what the ER will have to cover. Does that seem reasonable? >> Yeah. Will you let me speak for a moment on
do we all want to let Amy speak? >> Yes. >> So this is I I wasn't sure it was clear, but this is on the outfall. Uh, and we did get back 15 comment letters um on the outfall environmental notification form. Um, in general, I think as you you
said, they're very helpful and thoughtful comments. There's a lot of support um for for the benefits of the outfall project and there are there are requests for um additional information and and follow through, but there were
no surprises, nothing that makes us say, "Oh, this is going to take a lot longer than we thought." or there was there was I was very happy to see that our scope for the next phases is not different now than than we had thought it would be.
>> So what is the current timetable estimated? >> So force to start up of an outfall is 21 2031 to 2032 is the estimate. Um >> yeah the schedule hasn't changed at all. We got to get
>> close to a two-year period between putting together the ENF, getting an EIR, responding, preparing an EIR. >> Right. So, we have a request for funding at the this April, this November town meeting, as we've all discussed, for funding of the next phases of this,
which is the EIR and the um conceptual design of the the outfall itself. And um and the the next step in just by uh the beginning of next week, the the um MEEPA
analyst um for the state is reviewing all these comments and he will issue a letter that says what this what it's scoping the EIR. Uh so I look forward to receiving that and moving on. >> Great. Thank you. I'm never sure what committee you're on.
Ed, you got you got any any anything? >> Um, just just a couple of quickies because everybody seems to be rather antsy to do something else. Um, the uh D website is very interesting place and I just meandered in there for
the latest performance data on IAS. >> Is it Barnesville? No, D. Okay. This is IA's statewide nitro, the Cadillac system. In everybody's estimation, the data they have through part of 2025, 57 installed
systems, 84% are meeting 19 milligrams per liter. Only 54% are meeting 11, >> which is somewhat disconcerting. The nitrex
similar but competing technology only nine systems 100% of them are meeting 10 milligrams. Holy moly. You know they are way low on an installed base but the performance of
the few they have is very very significant. I was disappointed to see how poor Nitro did. >> Well >> only half are meeting 11. Can you make one comment on that? Cuz I think a lot of the nitre systems are clusters. >> Don't know. >> No, these are small under 2,000 under
2,000 gallon per day. So, >> single family homes. >> Okay. >> What does that mean legally and bureaucratically as far as nitroe getting banned approval? >> Um, doesn't look like they're there. I
don't know what the percentage of non-compliance would >> I want to answer his question. So if they have 57 installations and they go for full approval, they'll get approved for a certain number based upon the data, >> right? >> They won't get approved for eight.
They'll get approved for some number >> 11, 15, or 19. You know, I >> But what if it's not 10? >> Then they'll get they'll approve it for what it what it performs at >> and and what's the definition of banner? >> 10. >> 10. 10, right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. So then
>> is there anything that meets banner? Not yet. >> Not not anywhere. >> Not full approval. >> Need to get more nitrix systems. >> Nitrix would need 50 for three years minimum that meet >> the sounds like a long way off. I mean, >> yeah. >> Yeah. Because they're not in any hurry to install
>> and nitro sounds like a long way off because they don't have the statistics. >> That was disconcerting. >> Nitro. So anybody just I just want So this whole process goes like this. Anybody can come back and say I you you approved me for 12. I now have more data
because we tweaked our systems, we did whatever, and we now want to get approved for whatever. But this is useful stuff to understand that they're not they're not they're not they're not lined up to be under eight right now. Eight or under, they're not lined up to be there or even 10. >> So they're going to prove something.
>> One other technical is there any trend? In other words, is nitroe getting better with over the years or is it >> seems to be but it's all over the place? I mean there there's a chart and you can see >> doesn't look like >> no it's not impressive at all but the
other systems are even worse. So I mean it's just >> you know the technology is great. It's a hell of a lot better than what's been out there. It's much better than title five. >> John John and I have got probably too much knowledge about the fast system which everybody put in. And you know they're approved for 19 and you know if
if any one of the systems in Fmouth is making 19 it's a good day. you know, they they typically are running 23 to 25. >> Okay. >> And the question with the nitro is if you've got one that's making 20, >> did it have an input of 200?
>> Right. Yeah. >> Back to the mass. >> Absolutely. I mean, this this but this is what D utilizes to make their decisions. So, >> just a point point of information. I've got others, but I won't bore you with them tonight. >> Well, it's also relevant. >> Why don't you share the link to the website to all of us so we can go dig
into it ourselves? in bass dp.org. >> Let me point out that let's see Kim isn't still here. John Calfman showed some numbers. I correct me if I'm wrong about how urine diversion was in the
same ballpark >> as 10 milligrams, right? >> It depends on if all the urine's being captured. >> Yes, but >> it has a good shot at it. If all toilets are being urine diverted and all you're
getting is gray water. Yes. I mean uh Hild and Earl were 8.7 ppm per liter. >> A lot of people including me who used to walk around thinking that two or three I mean we were just wrong
thinking that two or three of the IAS had a good shot at getting to 10 and urine diversion was way up at 20 or 30 or something. But in fact, it could actually be the other way around. >> Good.
Okay. Um Kristen, where are we at with getting approval offormational release on the PRB? >> So, we have approval from the funding agency.
We're just waiting to figure out how to collect funds for the town should there be funds. So, >> that was on your to-do list. >> I know. I'm sorry, but there was an issue that we couldn't announce anything until whatever announcement we wanted to
make was approved. >> Yes, we want approval. >> It's approved. >> Go ahead, Ed. We have been talking about PRB grant for Snug Harbor in West Falmouth. Jammy and I have talked about it. I've been talking to a lot of the neighbors.
We have been approved for the funds. We have the money. We have an approved press release by the federal government and we're just going to try to tweak that to get something out to the community at large.
But we do have funding to put in a PRB. Kristen and others have working very diligently on a volume of paperwork to get the permits. Concom is next and working to get on their agenda a little later on this year.
So hopefully we can build something next year. >> And once again, the the idea there is there's going to be some wood chips and there's going to be some vegetable oil and it's a bit of an experiment, but it's probably
less of an experiment than the Shorewood one. It's a it's a it's it's more targeted and more specific. And part of it is looking at >> well I think I think scale-wise the you know the ones we put in to date are small scale and not large enough to
have a real impact on the receiving water and I think that we know that the majority of loading coming from the wastewater plants coming into Snug Harbor and we cited this thing so hopefully it will intercept that plume and so it could have a real impact on
the water quality in Snug Harbor and in West Falmouth Harbor. That's the whole >> minutes. Tom, excellent job. Kristen, excellent job. >> No, I just That's Kristen stuff. All I'm doing is a little trimming around the
edges. >> Did you have your hand up, Tammy? Did you have your hand up? >> I was just going to say, um, >> you got to go to the mic. You got to go to the microphone. Sorry. >> It's my understanding. Oh, sorry. Tammy Gilbert, West Falmouth Village Association. Um, it's also my
understanding that you do have proof of concept with this technology for the permeable reactive barriers. Correct. And do is it correct that they're in three different places in town? Shorewood Drive, Child's River, and then Wo.
>> Yes. In in 2005, we put in two test barriers in in the Woit system. one at the head of the bay uh just on the you know the uh reserve site. >> Mhm. >> And that one's about 20 mters long and
then another one in the child's river. Yeah. >> Okay. So that was 20 years ago. >> Yes. >> And they're still working. >> So the one at the head of a quite bay still seems to be working quite well. Um and the one in child it's you know we
put these in with a back hole. It was not done in a particularly uh >> what do I want to say using best engineering technology >> augers we we we got we got we did a a
demonstration at Shorewood >> right using the oil >> but going back to the just the one the ones in McCoy >> um by the time we got to the child's river the tide was high and we could not get the wood chips deep enough to intercept
the plume using the technology we had. Okay, so it worked for a while uh because initially the wood chips leech a lot of dissolved organic carbon so that dispersed through the much like the technology of the emulsified vegetable
oil where you have a a carbon source that's a liquid >> and it kind of seeps around through the sediments. >> So that's the technology that was employed at Shorewood. >> Okay. And uh there I guess we put in two doses and one of those doses supposed to
be two years. It's what five years now. Five years later it's still working. So that's encouraging. Okay. >> Yeah. So with the vegetable oil andor the wood chips they they have a finite life. And part of the exercise is how long do they go before somebody's going to come back and put replace the wood
chips or put more oil in? There's one further down the Cape that's at the junior high school. Is it >> in Orleans? >> Orleans. Mhm. >> So they and there's a couple in Rhode Island as well at this point. >> Yeah. And there's some in Long Island as well. >> There's several in Long Island. >> So the technology is does definitely
work and uh the key seems to be locating these things in the right spot where you understand the groundwater flow and where you know there's high concentrations of nitrate. And in the case of West Felmouth, um
we also know that the size of the plume, the amount of nitrogen in the plume should be decreasing because we've in back in 2005, we improved the wastewater plant operations by adding tertiary treatment.
>> And so that vastly reduced the concentrations and the effluent there. uh but it takes a long time for that water to move from uh the plant down to the shore. So the
plume may continue for some time. And so the purpose of this PRB is to intercept that plume in the meantime. >> Right. >> Is that fairly said, Amy? >> No. No. It's I I got to You can go up and counter this, Amy, if you want to.
the the town monitors. They have monitoring wells and there is definitely in the sort of upper layer at Snug Harbor there is nitrogen, >> right? >> It's not entirely certain that it's from
the wastewater plant because of the way the water the rainwater pushes the groundwater down. And when you go deeper into the groundwater, the numbers tend to correlate more with what we think the treatment plant should be pushing out. But we're putting this in in that place
because much like we learned at short acres, you know, we we we saw that for several upgradient homes, the PRB is working really good. The shallower wells at Snug Harbor showing a high enough concentration of nitrogen in the
groundwater in the upper layer to justify putting these in. And >> we think it's going to help with some legacy issues >> from the treatment plant, although the question is is the nitrogen we're seeing from the treatment plant. Other data
would say it's not necessarily from the treatment plant, but there's enough of a concentration because of the way the groundwater is flowing in that area from upstream homes. We can now see whether the wood chips or the emulsion works best and lasts longest. That's where we're really at.
>> Steve, I see that Ken said second to last is the most important thing. It's sightsp specific. It's not like with IAS. If one or more of these companies gets their act together and figures out how to do it, you can put it in your yard. I can
put it in my yard. Anybody can put it in their yard and it will work. Like a car. >> These things only work in certain places. Even if they get theirs working perfectly there, it doesn't mean necessarily that you can take it. And
because I I'm assuming you're thinking the same. Gee, I did I was wishful thinking about the shoe pond project and the Hampford drone. Now maybe PRBs is my savior. It it may not be your savior because you may just not have the right
groundwater concentration. >> Yeah, but I mean you do have some proof of concept and we're just happy that you're taking the initiative there. That's been a problem for a really long time. So it's not like it will wipe out this graph and we won't need sewers and we won't need IAS because we just put a
few PRBs around. >> No, no, totally understand. >> With respect to West Falmouth Harbor itself, I think there is a possibility that this could significantly improve water quality going into West Felmouth Harbor. >> Right. Great. >> There's a lot of evidence that says there's a significant plume there. It's
coming from several places. Doesn't matter. >> Yeah, it doesn't matter where it's coming from. We need we need the harbor to be cleaned up >> and make a significant improvement. Eliminate everything. Absolutely not. >> Right. >> Can it be used elsewhere? Maybe. But it's very sight specific. >> We have to get it in deep enough that it
is intercepting uh waste water. >> How deep do does the augur go with the >> Can I make a suggestion? I bet you your association would love to learn about this. >> Okay. >> Okay. Ken, >> happy to talk to him. >> Yeah. Why don't we Why don't you find it? let us know when you have a meeting
and we'll get a couple people to know about this. Now, I'm going to make my pitch. >> We the town's required to make a matching grant to, you know, we it's not all paid for through the grant. So, to the extent that West Felmouth Association or anybody else who would
like to participate, we're going to use town forces for some of the stuff, but we're going to probably put up a nice sign and you could get your name on the sign. Huh? >> Okay. >> Kristen, >> you mean like library bridge? We could >> No, I mean go to the Kunamesa project. They, you know, you if you went by the
Kudamesa project, there was everybody and their brother got their name on there. They didn't have to put up half a million dollars or anything, but you know, they they had some skin in the game. So >> anyway, we'll work to get the word. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Get the word out. >> Thank you.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> You okay? >> I'm okay. >> Okay. All right. Now did did I have a motion on the minutes? Any comments? >> I move they be accepted as written. >> Second. >> All those in favor signifi. Any comment? Any discussion? Signify by saying I.
>> I. I. >> All right. We take one more motion. >> Thanks for the support to >> for the minutes. >> Second. >> Okay. I have a motion made and seconded to adjurnn. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.
>> All right. Thanks for your patience, Katie. [Music]