From the Eagle-Tribune;
Atkinson water proposals OK'd for ballot
By Jarret Bencks
Staff writer
ATKINSON — Residents last night approved three amendments to the water withdrawal ordinance to be placed on the Sept. 9 ballot.
The amendments were adopted by about 50 residents during a deliberative session in the Timberlane Regional High School auditorium, but not without concerns from members of the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board.
"There is a possibility the town may be brought into a long and costly litigation," selectmen Chairman Paul Sullivan said.
The amendments were presented through petition by John Wolters and supported by Atkinson residents concerned about Hampstead Area Water Co.'s interest in pumping an additional 100,800 gallons of water per day from five new wells in town.
The first Special Town Meeting amendment asks that the withdrawal proposal be adopted as a health ordinance to ensure the quality of the town's drinking water.
Doing this would make it more difficult for the ordinance to be appealed, according to Bill Bennett, a supporter of the amendment.
Some residents asked for studies to be done to determine the current state of Atkinson's water supply before approving the amendment, but supporters of the proposal objected to that idea.
"(Conducting a study) would only delay what has to be done," resident Ken Grant said. "And that is take control of the water supply locally."
The second amendment involves several sections aimed at protecting the water supply through local law and enforcement — which would go beyond state law. Although the amendment was approved for the ballot, selectmen and other community members were still concerned.
Planning Board member Jack Sapia said the amendment is illegal because it would "circumvent" state law.
The Board of Selectmen received legal advice on the amendment and were told that much of its language could be subject to legal scrutiny. The town could face a legal battle if the amendment were approved, Selectman Bill Friel said.
Planning Board member Paul DiMaggio expressed frustration with the amendment, saying supporters are taking drastic steps to protect the town's water.
"You people are led down a path so far from reality that it is hard for me to comprehend," DiMaggio said.
The third amendment asks for seven areas in Atkinson to be classified as "prime wetlands," creating an extra layer of protection against water withdrawal.
The polls will be open Sept. 9 from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m at the Atkinson Community Center.
Atkinson Town Hall
The Norman Rockwellian picture of Atkinson
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
Hey Jack,
Why are you worried about the possibility of $10-$20,000 in legals fees now, Your actions cost the town more than that in legal fees during your three years in office alone.
You Hypocrit!
Well, yet another balanced report from LT, but that aside:
"Planning Board member Paul DiMaggio expressed frustration with the amendment, saying supporters are taking drastic steps to protect the town's water."
Well, duh. Of course they are. You are not doing it. And contrary to what you believe Mr. DiMaggio, the contents of the aquifer are not unlimited. It doesn't rain one day and the next it's coming out of the tap. It can take years to replenish an aquifer. Also, I'd like to point out, according to HAWC's consultants own report, the Midpoint well, even at its extreme depth, had recovery issues. I've read the report, have you?
It is quite interesting that some of those most opposed to the petitions were Planning Board members. Why is that? Why are they so afraid of lawsuits? Have they done something wrong? Has HAWC done something wrong and they blessed it?
I also find it interesting the Planning Board has not published meeting minutes since January. Sure, I could do a RTK, but they belong on the town web site. This whole thing is beginning to fail the smell test.
Posted on Atkinson-Factor, Jack making an ass out of himself as usuall. Can not beleive this guy is on any position in this town. Telling you and me that we are all wasting time on this issue. Telling you and me that we should just let it go? With that attitude, we all would still be paying a huge tax on tea and wearing a red coat!
Wasn't it Ben Franklin who once remarked; "it is better to remain silent and have people think you an ass, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"?
Signed, sealed and delivered.
What remedy would a homeowner have if their well went dry but they do not have HAWC access in front of their home? Is HAWC going to immediately drop everything and rip up the streets to lay in an access pipe? Who'd pay for this? Would HAWC repave the streets for the town or expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab? Would the homeowner pick up the tab?
These are the questions I have but I haven't heard anyone ask them yet.
Actually, most of your questions have been asked of the NHDES. They also have not been answered. Answers will be posted once received. Go to:
www.just-goaway.com/q%26a_with_the_DES.htm
The people of Atkinson have a Problem.
Due to the lack of diligence at protecting the towns citizens and property owners interests by our representatives, plans are proceeding at a rapid rate the interconnection of inter-town water systems.
The below link clearly states the intentions and progress of this interconnection:
http://www.puc.state.nh.us/Regulatory/Orders%20of%20Notice/073008onDW08-088%20Hampstead.pdf
This is a serious matter and there is reason to fear that serious risk to your property values in a substantial portion of Atkinson.
The Town should instruct their council to immediately intervene on behalf of the town to protect our interests and all necessary and proper steps should be taken to inform and protect the people of Atkinson.
Are we surprised ?
Another cautionary note:
If you think you can depend on or expect other individuals to have either the knowledge or willingness to put forth the effort required you will likely be disappointed if you do nothing and depend on others.
Let’s look at the evidence of nonfeasance:
1. The first questions asked by DD after presenting a motion to “delay and study” the town water were, “ Has the town done anything to understand our water resources and protect them?
The answer by the Town to each question was a resounding NO!
2. ALL negative comments, check the tape and minutes, came from members of Atkinson Town government (with the exception of Mr. DD) while these are the very persons responsible fo protecting our interests. And they have done nothing and do not even understand the issues involved nor show any motivation to do their jobs. GET RID OF THIS DEADWOOD. Before you loose “big time”.
3. Mr. DiMaggio, a long standing member of the PB stood at the microphone an gave us a argument composed of non facts that were pure BS. Its time to GO Mr.D.
I have long held the notion that this large groundwater withdrawal has more to do with the planned 55+ condominiums at the Atkinson Country Club than it does about repairing existing wells in town as HAWC first used as the primary reason for its application.
Below I provide you proof of this theory. This is from our 18 October 2006 Planning Board Minutes:
Chris Frye, Atkinson Farm, Inc./Lewis Builders
Mr. Frye represents Lewis Builders and is presenting plans for the new project. He introduces a 17 sheet plan which identifies the development which allocates land use plans for residential areas, non-residential areas and open space areas.
Phase I consists of a 27-acre, nine 32-unit condominium buildings of residential and non-residential use. The units will be 1350-1600 sq. ft. with a 1500 sq. ft. average. Franchised public water utility system served by Hampstead water company will provide water to the units with a treatment facility on site for wastewater. Working on a large groundwater withdrawal system for the wastewater system. The permit application process has been started and should take 6 months to 1 year to complete application process. Public hearings anticipated regarding well head locations and production.
The condominium unit will consist of 9 units on the 1st through 3rd floors and 5 units on the 4th floor. The plans show that the development will be on 27 acres of the 405 acres of the Atkinson Golf Course. Mr. Frye explains where the development will be on the plans, and the new development will be on the golf course.
In order to get approval to build this development, Lewis Builders needed to amend zoning ordinance 620 as the proposed building exceeded height limitations for buildings in a rural area in Atkinson.
This was first reported in the Eagle Tribune in 2005. Given the number of units that are being built in this development, the estimated increase to our town population, should all units be sold, was THIRTY PERCENT!
As this had enough publicity to make Atkinson residents aware of the issue, the proposed zoning amendment was overwhelmingly voted down in town meeting, sending a clear message to Lewis Builders, the BOS and the Planning Board that we do not want this.
Well, Lewis Builders did not give up and kept getting this zoning amendment back on the ballot until it was passed. And here we are...and it stinks!
DO NOT BELIEVE HAWC IF THEY TRY TO SPIN THIS AS REPAIRING EXISTING WELLS! IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WHY DO THEY NEED TO INSTALL FIVE NEW WELLS? CAN THEY NOT REPAIR OR REPLACE THE TWO FAULTY/QUESTIONABLE WELLS THEY CITE?
So folks, the takeaway message is this. Even if we win the battle with our water proposals, we cannot lose the war. Lewis Builders and HAWC will not give up on this as they have too much to lose! And if we win in 2008, if we become complacent, we may lose in 2009 or beyond.
Listen folks, here's the deal; if you're going to allow your Planning Board to be loaded up with people that earn their money from construction and development of land, this is what happens.
Why do you think they volunteer their time? Do you think it's only civic duty? When Lewis Homes/Hampstead Water comes up before the Planning Board with a proposal, they know that the board isn't going to be overly stringent, or try to protect Atkinson's rural character. You know why?
Because the head of our Planning Board is a fellow developer. Sue Killiam is developing land in Atkinson NOW! While you may be thinking that having a developer that develops land IN THE TOWN is a conflict of interest, that's not true in Atkinson! Atkinson is where conflict of interest flourishes!!!
Think of the other people that sit on the board; Teddy Stewart is a hard worker, but he owns his own construction company on the side; how much work would he get if he started being hard on developers in his votes on the Planning Board? Can you say "Conflict of Interest"?
Or our town engineer. Where does he make much of his money? From construction companies and developers! Do I have to ask the question of what would happen to his earnings if he started being too critical of developers in his votes on the Planning Board?
Haven't you ever wondered why regular citizens have so much trouble putting a deck onto their house, even as companies like Lewis Construction/Hampstead Water/East Coast Lumber are able to do almost anything they want?
ATKINSON IS BUSINESS INTERESTS FIRST, CIVIC DUTY 2ND!!!
If you don't like what Hampstead Water is doing, then don't spend money at East Coast Lumber; they're owned by one in the same! Home Depot is right down the road, and it's a hell of a lot friendlier to Atkinson than Hampstead Water/Lewis Builders/East Coast Lumber is. How greedy can one company be? Why do they need to line their pockets with money earned from emptying the same aquifer our children and the town need to live?
to anon 7:47 AM
HAWC has much larger plans than water for the new development. They WILL effectivly control the water supply and availability of Atkinson. The antitrust issue must also be explored. The association through ownership and management of Lewis builders ( water co. sprang from the building enterprise), Atkinson CC (needs enormous amounts of water), HAWC (read rhe puc dodckets and orders for their compliance history), and their involvement and participation/nonparticipation on effecting town boards. The non effected area of Atkinson should establish a water district to protect their property values and limit their tax liability when disaster strikes and the town is left with huge financial obligations to solve for the peoples water needs.
It appears that HAWC has more than one action in the works. Check this out.
http://www.oca.nh.gov/OCA%20Activity%20-%20Water.htm#5
DW 08-065 Hampstead Area Water Company Rate Case
On April 28, 2008, Hampstead Area Water Company (HAWC) notified the Commission of their intention to file a rate case. On June 25, 2008, the Company filed its case. The Company has requested an annual increase in permanent revenues of $167,193, effective July 1, 2008. According to the Company, an average residential customer would experience an increase of 13.77%, or their rates would increase by $58.50, from $424.92 to $483.42. The Commission has not yet issued an Order of Notice.
ORDER OF NOTICE NOT ISSUED? YES, IT HAS AND WAS DELIVERED THE DAY AFTER THE SPECIAL TOWN MEETING. BUT ONLY TO A SELECTED FEW.
THE SELECTMEN, PLANNING BOARD, SUE KILLAM AND ALL THE REST OF THE "SPECIAL INTREST" HACKS KNEW IT. THAT'S WHY THEY WERE SAYING IT WOULD BE A LOOOOOOOG DRAWN OUT COURT CASE AT THE TOWN MEETING.
THEY SET THE TAXPAYER UP FOR ANOTHER LAWSUIT AT OUR EXPENSE.
THESE PEOPLE ARE BASTARDS. READ FOR YOURSELF WHAT CAME IN THE MAIL. SEE BELOW.
07/30/08 THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
DW 08-088
ORDER OF NOTICE
Hampstead Area Water Company, Inc. (HAWC) is a regulated public utility pursuant to RSA 362:2 and 362:4 and provides water service to approximately 2,700 customers in Atkinson, Hampstead, Nottingham, Danville, Sandown, Fremont, East Kingston, Kingston, Chester, Salem, and Plaistow.
On June 27, 2008, HAWC filed a petition for authority to borrow long term debt pursuant to RSA 369; to extend its franchise area; and for a step increase in rates. HAWC’s petition was accompanied by the direct testimony of Harold Morse, President of HAWC, and Stephen P. St. Cyr, a consultant to HAWC.
HAWC intends to borrow $1,100,885 from the State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) administered by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES). Terms and conditions of the borrowing include a 20 year amortization, an interest rate of 3.488%, and payments of principal and interest monthly beginning 30 days from the date of closing. The proceeds from the proposed financing would be used to fund the construction of an interconnection between HAWC’s two core systems in the Towns of Hampstead and Atkinson of approximately 15,000 feet of 10” PVC water main along Route 121. HAWC asserts this interconnection is supported by DES, and that connecting the two core systems provides stability and responsiveness to the two core systems both as to overall water supply and emergency supply. The interconnection would allow HAWC to access water resources in the two systems in times of drought, as the water storage tanks in the two systems would essentially be connected. 07/30/08 - 2 - DW 08-088
HAWC’s request for an expansion of its existing franchise area results from the route of the proposed interconnection. As proposed, the project would proceed through a portion of the Town of Atkinson not presently within HAWC’s franchise. HAWC asserts it would be for the public good to include this area in its franchise to potentially serve existing homeowners along the route as well as providing service to parcels of land that are developed or may be developed in the future.
HAWC proposes that, in order to recover its investment in this project and service the additional debt, it be permitted to seek a step adjustment in its rates at the conclusion of the construction. HAWC estimates that, based on projected costs for the project, it would need to recover an additional $85,340 in revenues, which represents an overall increase of approximately 6.73% in revenues and would add approximately $0.32 to HAWC’s current consumption rate.
The filing raises, inter alia, issues related to authority to borrow pursuant to RSA 369; prudency of the proposed interconnection; expansion of HAWC’s franchise pursuant to RSA 374; and HAWC’s request to increase its rates pursuant to RSA 378:3. Each party has the right to have an attorney represent them at their own expense.
Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED, that a Prehearing Conference, pursuant to N.H. Admin. Rules Puc 203.15, be held before the Commission located at 21 S. Fruit St., Suite 10, Concord, New Hampshire on September 3, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. at which each party will provide a preliminary statement of its position with regard to the petition and any of the issues set forth in N.H. Admin. Rule Puc 203.15 shall be considered; and it is 07/30/08 - 3 - DW 08-088
FURTHER ORDERED, that, immediately following the Prehearing Conference, HAWC, the Staff of the Commission and any Intervenors hold a Technical Session to review the petition and allow HAWC to provide any amendments or updates to its filing; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to N.H. Admin. Rules Puc 203.12, HAWC shall notify all persons desiring to be heard at this hearing by publishing a copy of this Order of Notice no later than August 8, 2008, in a newspaper with general circulation in those portions of the state in which operations are conducted, publication to be documented by affidavit filed with the Commission on or before September 3, 2008; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that HAWC shall provide a clear and concise statement of the proposed rate change and a copy of this Order of Notice to all current and known prospective customers of HAWC and the Clerk of the Towns of Atkinson and Hampstead, New Hampshire, by first class U.S. Mail, postmarked no later than August 12, 2008; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to N.H. Admin. Rules Puc 203.17, any party seeking to intervene in the proceeding shall submit to the Commission seven copies of a Petition to Intervene with copies sent to HAWC and the Office of the Consumer Advocate on or before August 29, 2008, such Petition stating the facts demonstrating how its rights, duties, privileges, immunities or other substantial interest may be affected by the proceeding, as required by N.H. Admin. Rule Puc 203.17 and RSA 541-A:32,I(b); and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that any party objecting to a Petition to Intervene make said Objection on or before September 3, 2008. 07/30/08 - 4 - DW 08-088
By order of the Public Utilities Commission of New Hampshire this thirtieth day of July, 2008.
Debra A. Howland
Executive Director & Secretary
Individuals needing assistance or auxiliary communication aids due to sensory impairment or other disability, should contact the Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator, NHPUC, 21 S. Fruit St., Suite 10, Concord, New Hampshire 03301-2429; 603-271-2431; TDD Access: Relay N.H. 1-800-735-2964. Notification of the need for assistance should be made one week prior to the scheduled event.
NOW YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE HACKS ARE NOT ONLY NOT WORKING FOR US. THEY ARE INTENTIONALLY WORKING AGAINST US.
WHERE DO WE KEEP THE TAR AND FEATHERS? IT'S TIME TO GO TO WORK AND CUT THE RAILS FOR ALL OF THEM. WONDER HOW GOOD ALL OF THEM WILL LOOK IN BLACK MIXED WITH FLUFFY FEATHERS?
"...the estimated increase to our town population, should all units be sold, was THIRTY PERCENT!"
Not true. The entire condo development is 288 units. Since it is over 55 housing, no kids are allowed. Assuming two occupants per condo, that's 576 new residents. Current population is around 6600. So the increase in population is 9%, not 30%.
The project is currently on a conditional approval status because the planning board is concerned about where they are going to get the water and sewage disposal. I am surprised that everyone's in a frenzy over the wells but not the sewage.
You know why people aren't worried about the sewerage Tim? Because there's so much bullshit flying around Atkinson, people won't even notice it...
;-)
Regarding the over 55 housing...
Don't forget the extra emergency services that will be necessary, especially in the future. Who's going to pay for that?
I have no problem with over 55 housing, but the size of that place is out of control. Exactly how much money does Harold Morse need? Does he have a gambling problem or something? How rich does one family have to be?
"HAWC asserts it would be for the public good to include this area in its franchise to potentially serve existing homeowners along the route as well as providing service to parcels of land that are developed or may be developed in the future."
I cannot believe what I'm reading, or more the to point, the gall of HAWC. It's just as a lot of people have speculated; first they dry up our wells, then sell the water back to us. And to top it off, they want the us to pay for the privilege. Public relations wise, this company acts like they want to play it like the Keystone Cops.
Tim, saw you at the meeting. Good job and thank you. It appears you are a distinct minority on the PB but I'm sure glad you are there.
Regarding the sewage; I don't think its been an issue with people because as far as we know, Lewis is not planning to replace the water in our wells with the sewage. But, let me guess, their plans for resolving this should be of great concern also.
And thank you for the update on permits. I heard a rumor they were going to ask for their permanent approval soon. Permits should be conditional because they have not even started the large scale testing.
Tim Dziechowski said...
"...the estimated increase to our town population, should all units be sold, was THIRTY PERCENT!"
Not true. The entire condo development is 288 units. Since it is over 55 housing, no kids are allowed
Tim, I am afraid you are not entirely correct. If you look closely, you will see that 288 units are planned for "Phase 1." There are more to follow...
Please visit the library and look for Margo Sullivan's 2005 article in the Eagle Tribune. The projected population increase from the total project is 30%.
Concerning the spectacle at Deliberative Session of town officials selling out their town: -
-Why are Atkinson Planning Board members Sue Killam and Paul DiMaggio, along with thankfully-former town abuser Jack Sapia so determined that the town lose any legal challenge to the Groundwater Withdrawal Control Ordinance.
As current or former town officials, they should, (if they gave a damn about Atkinson) be rooting for the town to prevail and not the HAWC. If they cared about Atkinson, they would want the Water Ordinance strengthened so as to be more legally defensible in court. They would support the proposed amendments to the Water Ordinance that give it more teeth in case of a legal challenge.
But instead, sue Killam, Paul DiMaggio and jerk-Jack Sapia foam at the mouth and loudly oppose giving the town a stronger legal position. Why do they want so badly for Atkinson to lose any legal challenge.
With their anti-Atkinson frame of minds, they should not be serving on any Atkinson town boards. Board service should be reserved for those who care about and who are rooting for Atkinson and not the water company.
Selectmen, act responsibly and replace Killam, DiMaggio and Morse from the Planning Board with pro-Atkinson people.
Finally, the selectmen also are selling Atkinson out. Instead of whining about possible future legal costs, they should be working at strengthening Atkinson's legal position by supporting the passage of ballot amendments that do just that. Get with the people instead of opposing them and standing with pro-water company sell-outs like Killam, Dimaggio, Morse and Sapia.
Finally, I believe that the reason Killam and DiMaggio are so foaming at the mouth is that they see that the townspeople are exerting the initiative and leadership which they, as Planning Board members, have failed for years to provide. Killam and Dimaggio's egos are out of joint because the townspeople have displayed their contempt and disgust with the do-nothing Planning Board, and have taken the leadership role from them.
RE: August 14, 2008 11:36 AM
Well put. After Monday, I also question the loyalty of many town officials.
I'm also amazed with the level of concern expressed by these same individuals regarding "potential" lawsuits rather that the reason all of this is happing in the first place, that potential sucking sound from our taps we all fear.
If lawsuits are of such a big concern, why has nothing been done with that man with serious anger management issues and some rather strange thoughts regarding fiscal management down the street from town hall? If the BOS is so concerned about lawsuits, they've had it in their power for years to remedy a huge potential.
It really does make one wonder if we're living in Atkinson or Lewis New Hampshire.
No, the sewage issue is to cover their butt so to speak because in years past they have been dumping the raw stuff onto their property. If you think this practice is a laughing joke it is not and certainly is the gateway to introduce pathogens, bacteria and other nasty stuff into our well water.
This sewage is not treated and in 1998 an ordinance was passed in our wonderful town making it illegal to dump sewage onto any property regardless if it is your own. Although this pleased the general public, Lewis and company still performed the practice; the TOWN DID NOTHING ABOUT IT!
The last dumping took place in October of 2007. I can imagine that the sewage he was dumping came from the golf course and condo septic fields that he owns. If you drive down Salem Rd, you now see corn growing right where it was dumped. Also note that this field is in high land and any water runoff from the field where it was dumped has the potential for infiltrating into the aquifer.
Unsuspecting residents pulling water from this area would be exposed to cancer and other deadly viruses without ever knowing it.
So do you think you can trust these folks with your water when they themselves fail to abide by the laws in the town as well as uphold our health?
About the corn field...I wrote to the DES and the FDA about this and the FDA is not involved unless food crosses state lines, tehy referred me to DES. I spoke and wrote with Timothy D. Sweatt, who says....
"After our telephone conversation last week, I spoke with the Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health Services health officer liaison, the representative of Lewis Builders Development Inc who coordinates permits required from NH Department of Environmental Services (DES), reviewed the annual report records supplied to DES and past site inspection reports. As I stated in my earlier response, DES records indicate septage has not been applied to the section of the property where the corn is being raised in at least the last four years. The statement regarding the disposition of the corn crop as animal feed not for human consumption came from the Lewis’ representative. Also as stated previously, both DES rules and Federal requirement 40 CFR Part 503 show that there would be no crop restrictions after this amount of time, irrespective of the corn crops final disposition. I will be in the Atkinson area later this week, and will perform a site inspection to verify the information supplied to me at that time. "
We'll see what he says next.
Here is the original DES response to my inquiry.
"Thank you for contacting the Department of Environmental Services (DES) regarding to your concern with the Lewis Farm, 11 Salem Road, Atkinson NH. This site currently holds septage land application Site Permit #S97008S. This permit was renewed last fall, and will expire on October 23, 2017. The permit was modified on July 25, 2008 after the untimely passing of Mr. Peter A. Lewis, naming Ms. Christine Lewis-Morse as the permit holder.
The Lewis family has had permits since 1976 for the land application of septage at an agronomic rate to provide the amount of nitrogen or other nutrient(s) needed by the agricultural crop or vegetation, first with our predecessor, the Department of Public Health, and then with the Department of Environmental Services. Lewis Farm has been in compliance with the Department of Environmental Services regulations as set by the New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules, Env-Wq 1600, Septage Management.
To answer you questions regarding metals in the soil as a result of the land application of septage, soil samples from each field used for land application were collected in August 2007 (3 months prior to the end of the permit term). In accordance with the rule Env-Wq 1608.12 Soil Testing for Land Application Sites these samples were analyzed for metals by a certified laboratory. None of the samples exceed the concentrations of metal in soil as determined by the Risk Characterization & Management Policy. Septage management rule Env-Wq 1608.13 requires that land application of septage shall not be allowed if the soil metals tested exceed the allowable concentrations.
Lewis Farm is growing corn on a field that has not applied septage in a number of years. Lewis Farm has not land applied domestic septage since 2006 and when they did apply in 2006 it was not on the portion of the field that the corn is being grown on. The corn is being grown for animal feed and not for human consumption. Upon examination of the rules, both DES and Federal requirement 40 CFR Part 503 show that there would be no applicable crop restrictions. Agriculture best management practices (BMP) recommend farmers periodically rotate crops to effectively utilize any remaining nutrients left over from the previous crop or which have been mineralized from decomposing organic matter. This would account for the corn crop on a field previously planted in hay.
The Lewis Farm has always plowed the septage into the soils immediately upon application to conform to pathogen reduction and vector attraction reduction standards. Lewis Farm also applies manure as part of normal farming operations over field and crops for its nutrient and soil conditioning value. DES has in the past been contacted regarding the odor associated with the application of septage, only to determine that material being applied was manure.
I hope this letter helps to alleviate your concerns. Please contact me with any questions, or if any additional information is required, at (603) 271-2492 or via e-mail at timothy.sweatt@des.nh.gov.
"
RE: August 12, 2008 4:49 PM
The Water Site has been updated regarding the Q&A with the DES section. A lot of the information you are looking for is available from DES. A link is posted at:
http://www.just-goaway.com/
q%26a_with_the_DES.htm
You need to cut and paste both lines, or just click on Q&A with the DES when you get to the site.
Also posted on this page is extremely important information for what to do if you are concerned about your well. It may be too late to ask the DES to monitor your well (June 30th was the cutoff date) during the HAWC test period but there are things you can still do to protect yourself.
To the corn in the poop field, I disagree and have seen the septic truck where the corn now is dumping black stinky stuff onto the ground. So unless he was or is placing animal poop into his black septic truck and then taking it onto his field, this is human sewage.
Also, the town ordinance on not allowing the dumping of raw sewage onto anyones property is really a joke. Why did we vote for this if it cannot be held as law?
The same crap is going to happen with the water issue and guess what, we, those living in Atkinson have no rights as citizens.
I think if health officials did a survey of the health of those in the surrounding area, I think they would be overwhelmed with the individuals who have been stricken with various life threatening illnesses that surround that area. Whether it is related or not, it is suspicious.
400:7 Land Application of Septage. The land application of septage containing disease-causing bacteria and infectious viruses and protozoa; the stockpiling in any form, and the land spreading of Class B sewage sludge containing heavy metals, pathogens, parasites and hazardous organic chemicals, is not allowed in the Town of Atkinson, New Hampshire. This ordinance shall not apply to any facility owned and/or operated by the Town of Atkinson for the disposal of sewage/septage/sludge generated within the Town of Atkinson, New Hampshire. (1998)
I would like to see the test results that were done in the laboratory. Furthermore, the corn is being grown where the septage was dumped. Anyone driving by on that faithful day can attest to it. There is also a big difference between the scent of animal waste and human poop.
But what this all boils down to is that the folks monitoring this (state), really do not police it to make sure the procedure is done properly.
In addition, state law requires that if an application is being applied, that the surrounding neighbors be notified as well has posting it so the public can be informed. Has anyone seen this posted; I haven't. But certainly have seen the dumping done in practice.
I would encourage the state to publish to the general public the results from the soil samples taken as well as the time and location.
Post a Comment