Laserfiche WebLink
L <br /> 4 <br /> and also accommodate the proposed configuration that was four-bedrooms. The <br /> existing septic according to the inspector was failed because he felt it was clogged. <br /> He used the camera to go into the system. They were replacing it with the standard <br /> new Title v system with denitrification and the UV. They were re-locating it as far <br /> as possible away from the wetlands, farther away than the existing system currently <br /> is. They felt that this was an overall general improvement. Presuming that this was <br /> an existing three-bedroom residence and presuming that the denitrification only <br /> provides them a treatment to 19 parts per million based on this scheme, which was <br /> very conservative. There was a reduction in overall nitrogen from 8.8 to 5.75. That <br /> was proposed. The worst-ease scenario is that there was an increase in nitrogen. <br /> Thereby an improvement by using the d ntrifi ati n. He believed that the board <br /> members had reviewed this last time and were inclined to look at this favorably. <br /> This area was afforded to the abutters comment. He did notify the affected abutter. <br /> Mr. Harrington asked if he knew what UV model he was going to use. <br /> Mr. Grtle stated that that was the one that was provided by the vendor of the <br /> FAST system. It was vertical and very easy to maintain, talus they functioned well. <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that he was showing the nitrogen loading calculations for <br /> three bedrooms. <br /> Mr. Gr t l re-iterated that again this was the worse scenario and if there were four- <br /> bedrooms there would be a much higher existing loading. Presuming that there was a <br /> question as to whether the existing system was three or four bedrooms. He used the <br /> three bedrooms. Then he would should the four--bedroom calculations-with the <br /> denitrification. <br /> Mr. Harrington clarified that he was showing the three-bedroom without the <br /> denitrification and then the four-bedroom with the denitrification system. But, if <br /> they were going to call that an existing three-bedroom home, which they had tallied <br /> about before, this made it new construction. He didn't have a reserve area. So that <br /> put it back into IIP. Or did it have... <br /> Mr. Grotzke stated that they dict show the reserve area. <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that the reserve area was just a couple offeet off of the <br /> property line and the SAS was two and one.half feet. what they discussed before <br /> that this would require an 0 & M contract with the Liv, which was coliform testing <br /> for two year and the FAST innovative alternative system would require total <br /> nitrogen quarterly for two years. He would also recommend that the property lines <br /> be staled because they would be right next to the property. But, it did not require <br /> DEP approval because they had ' to the reserve and the SAS. So they were not <br /> meeting any state requirements along with five feet to ground water. <br /> Mr. Ball clarified that they were requesting four-bedrooms with a denitrification <br /> 7 <br />