My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/20/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
11/20/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2026 5:18:52 PM
Creation date
12/16/2025 9:46:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/20/2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission <br /> 16 Great Neck Road North <br /> Mashpee, MA 02649 <br /> "best available nitrogen-reducing technology" list to set local performance standardsFalmouth, for example, <br /> uses a 12 mg/L limit, which effectively excludes older, weaker performers while allowing the newer high- <br /> performing technologies. <br /> In response to questions,he emphasized that some widely used products, such as the "Sledgehammer" <br /> system, do not appear on MassDEP's best available nitrogen-reducing technology list and based on their <br /> design, are unlikely to achieve nitrogen reductions comparable to Nitrex or Nitro. The key technical difference <br /> is the provision of an external carbon source. Older aerated systems rely solely on the organic carbon present in <br /> incoming wastewater to fuel denitrification, which appears to limit their performance to around 17 mg/L of <br /> nitrogen in practice. By contrast, wood-chip systems supply abundant carbon in an anoxic zone, allowing <br /> denitrifying bacteria to convert nitrate to harmless nitrogen gas much more completely. <br /> Mr. Baumgaertel discussed the longevity of the wood-chip media. Under anoxic conditions, wood <br /> decomposes very slowly. Stoichiometric calculations suggest up to a century's worth of available carbon, <br /> though a conservative practical estimate might be on the order of 20 years. If performance declines, the wood- <br /> chip media can be vacuumed out of the tank and replaced, making long-term maintenance manageable. <br /> Because advanced treatment reduces nitrogen loading to the leach field, homeowners may also see longer leach <br /> field lifespans compared to standard systems, offsetting some of the cost of advanced treatment. <br /> On phosphorus, he noted that technology development has lagged because there are few regulatory <br /> requirements for phosphorus removal in on-site systems. Several approaches exist. One is to keep effluent near <br /> the soil surface where finer particles (silts, clays, and organic matter)provide better phosphorus binding and <br /> where plant roots can take up nutrients. Shallow dispersal systems, such as drip dispersal or products like <br /> GeoMat, keep effluent within roughly a foot of the surface and can be trenched in with minimal soil <br /> disturbance. Another approach uses electrochemical plates made of iron or aluminum to release ions that bind <br /> with phosphorus and form solid minerals. Some technologies incorporate these plates in tanks or leach fields <br /> (he mentioned Fuji Clean and Waterloo ECP as examples), with the bound phosphorus precipitating either onto <br /> filters or in the soil absorption area. A third method involves dosing septic tanks with alum, which effectively <br /> binds phosphorus but introduces aluminum, a regulated compound, creating a new compliance challenge. <br /> Because phosphorus removal is rarely required, companies have invested less in bringing such technologies <br /> through Massachusetts' approval process. <br /> When asked which systems are currently the best options, Mr. Baumgaertel replied that Nitrex and NitROE <br /> are the most promising high-performing nitrogen-removal technologies available today, with NitROE <br /> substantially further along in the Massachusetts approval pipeline. He added that he is aware of other <br /> manufacturers working to adapt their long-established products to achieve lower nitrogen effluent levels, and <br /> he hopes more "best available" options will emerge,particularly from larger companies with existing <br /> manufacturing capacity. He explained that Massachusetts is a difficult regulatory environment, and some <br /> vendors have focused on other regions with simpler approval pathways, which has slowed adoption in the <br /> Commonwealth. <br /> Mr. Baumgaertel also addressed questions about MassDEP's testing requirements and data transparency. He <br /> noted that the 50-system field installations for provisional approval typically cover a range of site conditions <br /> and that gathering enough installations is itself a challenge because homeowners are wary of adopting <br /> provisional technologies that may not receive final approval. He encouraged commissioners and residents to <br /> explore performance data directly through the MassTC website's data viewer, where users can filter by <br /> technology, use type, and performance metrics. He also referenced an EPA-sponsored study at Schubel Pond in <br /> Barnstable, where 13 advanced nitrogen-removal systems have been monitored monthly for several years, <br /> demonstrating strong real-world performance. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.