Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> i <br /> Commons. The Chair noted that here would be a facility built for a new development near <br /> Mashpee village and that here was no available plant in the area suitable for expansion in the <br /> Quashnet River watershed. M-r. Gregg indicated that he would further consider the high School <br /> facility in order to operate down to 3 mg L_ <br /> There was discussion regarding phosphorus and attenuation and the sensitivity of some <br /> resources. The Chair noted the intent to sewer areas around Santuit Pond and sending flow in the <br /> eastern part of town to the Transfer Station site. <br /> There was discussion regarding the possibility of a Nitrex retrofit on ars existing system. fix. <br /> Lombardo indicated that it was not a complicated matter. Where was discussion regarding <br /> addressing the age'of some of the plants as well as the possibility of rebuilding, such as <br /> evil lowbend. The Chair stated that plants should not be re-built if they were already doing a <br /> good job treating the nitrogen. Mr. Gregg pointed out that New Seabury was the newer facility <br /> with available capacity and recommended building it out because it-offered 3 00,000 gallons per r <br /> day. Mr- Lombardo inquired about the main treatment plants being considered and it was noted <br /> that they were willowbend, Mashpee Commons, New Seabury, the Transfer Station site and the <br /> ugh School. The Chair stated that the greatest watershed challenge was the <br /> Quashnet/Moonaki ss area. Mr. Lombardo discussed Hi re ' ability to lower organic below 3 <br /> mg/L and other processes and features to further reduce the number to I mg L, as well removing <br /> the ammonium and nitrates_ Mr. Lombardo offered additional details regarding the use of <br /> litre , including recirculating media.filter that could be added to an existing plant. Chairman <br /> Fudala suggested that costs would need to be determined for each existing facility, Following Mr. <br /> Gobell's assessment. err. Gregg emphasized that each facility would be run to their design flows <br /> until they reached heir design life. There was discussion regarding the Mashpee Conn <br /> facility as an 80,000 gpd plant with a need for 500,000. <br /> Mr. Gregg indicated that, with a shopping list, he could review previous projections and recharge <br /> areas, as well as incorporate the shellfish plan, in order to identify the highest priorities. The <br /> Chair stated that he wanted Mashpee to do only their fair share and assume that the adjacent <br /> towns would be doing the same_ Mr. Gobell recommended establishing a criteria list. <br /> Discussion of How to Deal with Possible MAM Options <br /> Mr. Gobell reported that Mashpee had been identified as the most cast effective to develop <br /> infrastructure to reach NB4R, as well as for treatment at the facility. Mr. Gobell emphasized that <br /> there would be competition-for the available capacity with Sandwich, Falmouth and bourne who <br /> were also interested in using the facility. At present, there was just 100,000 gpd capacity <br /> available without any expansion.. Mr. Gobell stated that Mashpee needed to be prepared to <br /> consider whether they were ready to act on a possible proposal. Mr. Lyons proposed that the <br /> Sewer Commission draft a letter to the Board of Selectmen regarding use of the WAR for the <br /> northwest portion of Mashpee, which could save money and work for the Town. <br /> Mr. Lyons made a motion that the Sever Commission draft a letter to the Board of <br /> Selectmen regarding use of the AIMR,as is or as expanded,to cover the northwest portion <br /> of Mashpee. Mr. Gurnee seconded the motion. <br /> 4 <br />