Laserfiche WebLink
I , <br /> What is safe. Two issues with nitrates. "Safe"'number is 10 rail per liter of nitrates in tap <br /> water. The reality is only babies under l that have that low a tolerance in drinking water. The CC <br /> Commission has adopted a standard of 5 for mass loading - from wastewater and surface <br /> loading. Is there enough fresh recharge to reduce the average to less than 5. If you target 5, you <br /> hopefully will never hit 10. <br /> utrop ieation issue: there is no simple singular number. It is all site specific. Nitrate is part of <br /> natures cycle. It seem to get out of balance by mans activities in shallow, saline estuaries, <br /> Tom explained we have had lots of monitoring done, the town has been working with Dr- Howes <br /> on this issue. <br /> Mr. wood said you cannot use one standard to fit both situations. <br /> If the l ashpee River is already "'broken") will adding more nitrogen matter, or how much do you <br /> have to tale out to fix it. By bringing development to a halt within the watershed, hove does that <br /> effect the town. A community has more than l set of goals. <br /> Proposed goals for the ton: <br /> - develop a wastewater management plan that protects the drinking water and reduces the <br /> probability of eutrophication in the estuaries. A plan that will allow for development of vacant <br /> land in accordance with the towns master plan and zoning. <br /> In order to achieve the goals 4 things you need to do: <br /> control rate of nitrate loading of new construction <br /> - careful consideration to where new nitrate loadings occurs <br /> gradual upgrade of the wastewater disposal methodology used. who will pay for it? It is <br /> political process the town must struggle through <br /> - incremental expenditure of public funds for infrastructure, that the town will support. <br /> Reality is standard title 5 septic system may no longer be acceptable in most sensitive parts of <br /> town. <br /> Careful selection of location of where effluent will flow. what is the preferable location. This <br /> opens a whole new set of possibilities. <br /> Options: should the town provide a centralized treatment facility, build a series of smaller scale <br /> treatment facilities, or take over the operation of existing facilities. <br /> Conventional model first deckles where treatment is needed the most and develops a long range <br /> plan to sewer the town over time. Typically gravity sewer systems, with pump stations only <br /> where gravity doesn't work. Build plant which is up radable to full size_ User fee which is <br /> function of the water meter. <br /> Ideas discussed in Mashpee: could the town do less than that. <br /> Cost: capital costs, system wide, are bettered. Operational costs function of flog. <br /> "tertiary treated effluent: water that in some states is acceptable for spray irrigation - water with <br /> nutrients in it. <br /> 2 <br />