My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/14/1997 SEWER COMMISSION Minutes
>
5/14/1997 SEWER COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2019 1:32:32 PM
Creation date
12/9/2019 1:32:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
SEWER COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/14/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
wastewater on the surface, i.e. us to irrigate a golf course. <br /> Brad asked why not, since the wastewater has been treated to drinking water standards? <br /> Torn agrees that is makes sense but he was told that a certain amount of pathogens get through. <br /> Worn said the next step for the Sewer Commission is to prioritize the areas in town. <br /> Dennis asked if there was only one area in town to be swered, which would he want to do <br /> Tom responded something in the Mhpee River re-charge area, probably the Ilashpee Week <br /> area. <br /> Torn explained thatde-nitrifying systems can be scaled to any size. They can be used with <br /> existing development, with existing systems. The wastewater would be pumped out of an <br /> existing systems, which acts as a holding tank, and would then go, possible, to a neighborhood <br /> system; something much smaller than a big sewage treatment punt. If those systems were not <br /> removing enough nitrogen, the treated water could be pumped out of the re-charge area. <br /> Brad said he would like to take this process to the next step. <br /> Bennis said we need to get costs of the systems. � <br /> Tom said there is an intermediate step,to look more closely at the neighborhoods in terms of <br /> duster systems, develop a collection network. Then we can look at costs. <br /> Torn recently attended an excellent conference at VVBNERR on advanced de-nitrifying systems. <br /> They gave some rough casts for a Few of the different types of systems. <br /> Brad said the Sewer Commission has to came up with cost Factors for the different types of <br /> systems. <br /> Tom said presently we don't have sufficient data on costs, or on how well the systems Yn'1l work. <br /> Studies are going on at WBNERR. The Mate has assigned 19 parts per million for all of the new <br /> systems, vs. 35-40 for a Title V system. we know some systems work better than others, some f <br /> claim to get lower than 10 parts per million but the Mate has not accepted that information. <br /> They chose an arbitrary number 19 that they feel comfortable with. Most systems are probably <br /> better than that. <br /> Brad said, of the systems available now, lets put a list together to see which one will best suit the <br /> different areas of town. Lets erne up with a game plan and then costs. <br /> Torn said the cost factor is a tall order. There are probably multiple systems that can fit each <br /> area. He does not think the Sewer Commission has the ability to come up with costs. we have <br /> no other numbers to go by. we need to get money to do a study. That idea got shot down at the <br /> DCPC meeting. <br /> Brad said we can get figures for the total number of houses in town and use Title V criteria to <br /> get a ballpark figure. <br /> Torn said he asked, at the conference, if these systems work on a seasonal basis. Almost NONE <br /> of them do, the bacteria die. Using cluster systems vs. individual systems may balance out the <br /> seasonal and year round population. <br /> Torn said the Planning Department has figures, real numbers and Title V numbers for the Town. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.