1/2/2008 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes

Home Browse Search

t system shall be upgraded to achieve no greater than 19 mg per liter MG PL total nitrogen concentration in the effluent. On. 19/39/07, a letter was sent to Dino Mitrokostas, Kevin Kirrane of Dunning & Kirran , doe Henderson of Horsley &Witten, and Scott Moles of Warwick & Associates, stating that the BOH had voted on 9/12/07 that properties over 609 gallons per day shall have their systems upgraded prior to transfer of property. The upgrade was further defined to include secondary treatment. After notification 'and clarification of the regulation, the property ownership was still transferred without complying, thereby violating the BH regulation Part IX, section 14.99. A fine of$399 per day, effective upon receipt of the letter, was imposed by the BOH, together with an order to appear at the BOH meeting on 12/19/97 for a "shover cause" hearing. The Show Cause hearing was delayed until the meeting tonight, 01/02/08. Thomas Paquin distributed to the Board a timeline of events which he felt clearly indicated that there had been no violation of the BOH regulation. In September of 2097 the Horsley Witten Group, retained by the Seller, and Warwick ick Associates, retained by the Buyer, installed a monitoring well in conformity with the BOH Regulation Part IX Section 14.5.1. On 10/99/97, groundwater samples were collected from the on-site monitoring well. On 10/16/07 a certificate of analysis was issued by ESS Laboratory. The finding indicated than the system at 491 Pathan Ellis Highway met the BOH total nitrogen septic effluent discharge requirements stated in Regulation EX Section 14.5.1. The closing on the property took place on October 2 , 2997. Mr. Paquin stated than it is the Seller's position that if the existing system produces effluent with a total nitrogen concentration under 10 mg per liter, it meets the standards set forth in the BOH regulation Reg.. IAC, Section 14. if it is the Board's position that such a system must be upgraded to include a secondary treatment, notwithstanding ithstanding that the total nitrogen concentration is under 10 mg per liter, it is Mr. Paquin's position that that is outside the scope f the BOH regulation. Mr. Paquin stated that based on the timeline he presented, as far as the imposition of the $390 per day fire, there was no violation of the BOH regulation, and h asked that the BOH rescind the imposition of the fine. Glen Harrington stated that he had spoken to Scott Moles of Warwick & Associates about the sampling of the well, and said that even though the sampling of the well is below the 19 k MG PL it is not the basis for an exemption or exclusion for upgrading of the property. Glenn Santos stated further that the BOH regulation testing requirement does not apply to the monitoring well, but applies to the effluent corning out of the system, out of the tank going into the leaching system. Mr. Paquin stated that he would first like to address the fine. He stated that professional engineering firms had been hired by the buyer and the seller, and their test results indicated no violation of the BOH regulation. Therefore, the fine docs not apply. Mr. Paquin added that he felt the BOH regulation as stated is ambiguous. Tom Lee, with Horsley Witten, introduced himself to the Board. He stated that he had done the testing of the monitoring well according to the regulation. His opinion was that the BOH regulation should be modified to stipulate specifically than the testing be done to the effluent corning out of the tank going int the leaching system, and not the monitoring well. Glen Harrington stated than his understanding of the intent of the regulation was that the initial testing of the affluent was to occur at the location of the effluent corning out of the tank 2