Laserfiche WebLink
+ <br /> own oj�cis L�l� men bloc I . Orks <br /> Sox 4 <br /> Nashpee,Massachusetts s segs 02649 <br /> Telephone- C5ow ,539-I42Q <br /> r n(508) 5 <br /> t <br /> -t - 39-1403 <br /> f <br /> k <br /> a <br /> February 9 1996 <br /> Mass. Dept. of Environmental <br /> P lronmenta Protection <br /> €:} Southeast Regional office <br /> 20 Riverside Drive <br /> Lakeville, MA 02347 <br /> A � <br /> ttn. Mr. Leonard Pinaud <br /> • y' <br /> Re: 60°fin Plume Contain � � 9 996 <br /> ment System _ MMR _�.� _ <br /> C i. l■ti.A■■ _••y <br /> Dear Mr. Pinaud. <br /> r y <br /> b; y Having reviewed the ��% design. gn at the IRP office, I believe the <br /> design has several serious deficiencies related to the inclusion of the Town <br /> . of Mashpee. Several assumptions an <br /> l P d design research gaps exist.. Thefollowing list are he most noticeable issues: <br /> r <br /> I. The intent to discharge . <br /> g 900,000 gal/day, 4.5 miles off base <br /> 15 <br /> totally unacceptable. The treated water is in done II of 3 town <br /> wells and will degrade the existing aquifer water quality. <br /> P-1, 335 M.G.D. <br /> Holland Mills 1.M.G.D. ( year) <br /> e <br /> ar) <br /> Merganser 1. M.G.D. (future) <br /> Many private wells <br /> 2. Thero osed assumption b <br /> P P P y OpTech that water will be discharged <br /> ed <br /> down gradient from where g <br /> g e it is extracted has not been held in <br /> the CS-10 s upheld P <br /> system. The discharge should be into the water shed <br /> from which it was taken. <br /> 3. The design of the infiltrationable s is seriou <br /> g y sly in error. The <br /> {` proponents say they designed for 70 gal/day/SF,ISF, but the <br /> y area <br /> provided allows for less than 40 gal/day/SF.ISF. The ' <br /> g y assumption that <br /> T the leach its need to be 22 feet in <br /> ?` deep is error. <br /> They need far less <br /> than is provided with far <br /> area less <br /> excavation. <br />