Laserfiche WebLink
of TMs s,s <br /> z. <br /> AU1MLIUV�y <br /> own qf MaS 2 Panning Board <br /> c� <br /> 16 Great Neck RoadNorth <br /> -Mashpee, -Massachusetts 02649 <br /> Ms. Waygan inquired about bog restoration and DEP standards for before and after. Before <br /> delving into types of mitigation, this technical question needs to be settled. She explained, <br /> through what they learned here, a standard for bog restoration, especially nitrogen mitigation <br /> not wetlands, we are looking at the removal of nitrogen from the system. Based on these <br /> scenarios, mitigation is for nitrogen, which would require testing before and after, to prove you <br /> are removing the nitrogen. If a standard is not met, the applicant doesn't want to be on the <br /> hook to redo or upkeep. <br /> Mr. Drainville discussed nitrogen calculations from the development, including the 12 new <br /> units, demolished unit, and new unit tying to plant, there is a net increase from that <br /> development. He used the permitted nitrogen for the plant, not current performance of the <br /> plant. You are held to what the permit states. <br /> Mr. Klein agreed on the calculations with the permitted value. In the last eight years the plant <br /> has been performing, he came up with an average concentration total. He went on to describe, <br /> of the 35mg/I, just over 26mg/I goes into the groundwater. The plant has a permitted <br /> concentration of 10mg/I, with an average performance of 6mg/I, and nitrate of 3mg/I. In the last <br /> eight years, it violated the 10mg/I one time. <br /> Mr. Pesce noted MEP has done an analysis on Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), for amount <br /> of nitrogen. Nitrate in groundwater causes the receiving salt waters to change, thus the need to <br /> limit nitrogen. MEP came up with an analysis of the loads now, and what could be done in the <br /> future, looking at the maximum amount of nitrogen the embayment can handle and properly <br /> metabolize. Two things that help, the plant is doing much better than the permitted limit and is <br /> also way below capacity. <br /> Mr. Drainville stated the testing timeframe pre-construction is just short of a year. Post <br /> construction testing can be as long as three years. The groundwater will show the performance <br /> of the restoration, which means wells would be installed for testing. They would be responsible <br /> for contacting the testing company and he can provide names of firms, if needed. <br /> Mr. Eddy clarified that normal monitoring under Conservation does not entail nitrogen <br /> monitoring. The mitigation being proposed is a wetland mitigation, with monitoring programs <br /> through the Conservation Commission. Their post construction period may be longer than <br /> three years, but it's of the system and that it is working, not monitoring. <br /> PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> Dwight Enstein- He has been here for four decades. He purchased a lot in Fox Run before <br /> the fairways went in. Willowbend has been a good neighbor. He commented how some people <br /> are afraid to come talk about this. The pace of this is stunning, the same questions are being <br /> 3 <br />