Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-10-21 Conservation Commission MinutesF) A,IA L READING CONSERVATION COMMISSION {~,ccfrm~~i~utes. fry; Minutes o October 21., 1991 Meeting Non 25 A NO1,D RGE O and. SEL ECTM : S MEETING O PRESENT: Chair Camille Anthony, Vice-Chair Jennifer Ltachmayr, James Biller, Edwin. Loschi, Joan Nickerson, M. Clifton- Proctor; Associate Member James Keigley; and Conserva- tion Administrator Donald Nadeau ABSENT: Harold Hulse, Associate Members Leo Kenney and. Jennifer Mi.ksen. 8::3 PM Meeting called to order. The Commission discussed the Request for Determination for Longview Road, RGB# 1991- 23 , and noted that, three lots are included., and the new bylaw is different than the bylaw in effect when a former filing was made. As site walk was scheduled. Regarding the Notice of Intent for the DPW water main, BGB# 1991-27, it was noted that the wetland areas are already disturbed, being paths. It was noted that no depths were proposed. :2?~_Ee-ng ~~,1 C,,~_ the Commis ion retired to the Selectmens Meeting Loom, to attend the Joint CPDC Public hearing on the hazardous waste site assessment for Carr' Representing the applicant were Peter Ogren, P.R., 0. Brad- ley Latham. Esq. „ Charles Arthur, Esc. and Kelley Maman. Kevin Greus and the applicant V'incen-t. Fantasia were present. K. Maman presented the report on the "MGL, Chapter 21E" site investigation report, stating tha.-t, there was no violation of the statute and no public health risk on the site; there was no significant contamination. Selenium in two test wells was, detected at slightly above the Safe Drinking Water Act standards, but since there were no private wells and the site would be serviced by public water, there was, no public health risk. Abutter Mark Bertelsen stated that he has a well and asked if the selenium will travel. K. Maman replied that no selenium was detected in the "riverbed" material, therefore it was not introduced. Also, it was not detected downgradient, but upgradi.ent of the riverbed material; therefore it flowed onto the site from off'-site. Abutter Mike McCaffrey listed several questions: Page 3, #5 concerning detection above State requirements after preliminary site investigation. K. M. replied that if more was found, then the provisions of Chapter 21E apply e-aada_n COD-Ser tion Cbtssicon mh-it of 10-211-91 Page 2 and the investigation is pursued. P. 5, #2 soil samples were not stored in the sampl.es were not immediately stored, the samples were tested for metals, there! not compromised. P. 10, par. 1 - heating oil tank contents,. contained #2 ail. a cooler. K, M. . but later were; 'ore the test was K. M.: the tank Soil samples taken continuously" were taken at 5 foot: 171_ tervals in some insl:ances. K. M.. that is continuously for structural sampling. 9:20 E. Loschi arrived. Section V: Conclusions no list of type or extent of fill. K. M, . it, is indicated in the logs; the rest is not relevant to the purpose. Logs chair of custody was not certified. K. M.: official signed logs can be provided if requested. M. Mc affery: as a copy sent to S![. P? , Ms not by her. M. Boyer, 19 Emerson. Road: were all fill sites tested.. K. M . : representative sites were tested. J. Biller: what was the method of location of the teats K. M. ; Following the groundwater flow south to north, with the "Mystic diver" fill at the south end, also old tests where the tank was removed and eastward in-line. The wells were located and elevations established by inference before Hayes; Engineering testing, but were confirmed. J. Nickerson: was the degraded pool tested? K. M.: MW #6 is on Lot 12 and was clean. C. Anthony: Hazardous Waste Committee report? Jonathan Edwards stated that it was not official, but Ed Pinette noted fire debris, which could contain household hazardous material or flourescent light tube ballasts, but there were no observable suspicious areas. J. Biller noted that only volati les , metals; and PCB's were tested, for, not the whole priority pollutant list. K, M. there was no reason, in terms, of what was tested. E. Loschi: were riverbed deposits and demolition debris records researched*? K„ }14. • yes, , but not in Chelsea, which was not an issue, the best history t~Tas _ora After it was determined that there were no more nixes=tioiis, the Conservation Commission returned to the Arnold Berger Room to resume their meeting. Reding Conservation W ssion tes o 0-21---91- Wee 3 AM-- Here ` I -O~2n) Motion duly made and seconded to enter Executive Session to discuss litigation. ROLL CALL VOTE; 6--0-0 Notion duly made afi<_S seconded to request an adjudicatory hearing to appeal 1010 Superseding Order of Conditions 270-233. VOTED 3-0-3 11:00 Motion duly made and seconded to adjourn VOTED 6-0-0 Respectfully Submitted.. Donald i . Nadeau Conservation Administrator