April 29, 2022 | Town Admin TOWN OF SUTTON Pillsbury Memorial Town Hall 93 Main Street Sutton Mills, NH Sutton Mills, NH 03221 Select Board April 18, 2022 @ 5:00 p.m. Dane Headley, Selectman, opened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance. Present at the meeting were: Dane Headley, Chair; Walter Baker, Jr., Selectman; Michael McManus, Selectman; Adam Hurst, Road Agent, Diego Solimine, Solid Waste Supervisor; Robert DeFelice, Budget Chair; Elizabeth Geraghty, Library Director; Nancy Glynn, Board Chair, Catherine Paden, Emily Cooper, Library Board of Trustees, Betsy Anderson, Alternate Library Trustee; Marge Division; Judith Houston, NHDES Permitting & Enforcement Engineer, Residuals Management Section; Wade Pelham, NHDES Wastewater Engineering Bureau; and Elly Phillips, Town Administrator. APPOINTMENTS: At 5:00 p.m., the board met with Judith Houston, NHDES Permitting & Enforcement Engineer, Residuals Management Section and Wade Pelham, NHDES Waste Water Engineering Bureau, to discuss the Sutton Septage Lagoons. Also participating in the discussion were Diego Solimine, Solid Waste Supervisor, Adam Hurst, Road Agent, Robert DeFelice, Budget Chair, and Elly Phillips, Town Administrator. The Board was interested in the pros and cons of maintaining the lagoons. Ms. Houston said that she had recently been advised that PFAS has recently been detected through DES sampling that occurs on a regular basis. Ms. Houston added that PFAS is a manufactured forever chemical. PFAS is an emergent contaminant with the EPA and DES. There are four contaminants that are being regulated by the EPA and State of NH with a part-trillion limitation. Ms. Houston referred to the site plan provided and pointed out the location of the septage lagoon monitoring wells. All three monitoring wells have tested beyond the limitation. Selectman McManus asked if the PFAS detected was coming from municipal septage. Ms. Houston acknowledged that septage was a potential source as well as the old landfill on site. Ms. Houston discussed the groundwater flow direction and said that the landfill was a possibility. Relative to the closure or non-closure, the DES will require the Town to do a “characterization of the solids.” Sampling will be done and analyzed by a laboratory to determine the level of PFAS. Ms. Houston advised that the DES has some planning and research funding available and were willing to do the testing for the Town. Diego Solimine said that he researched PFOA’s and spoke with Eastern Analytical who performs Sutton test analysis. Mr. Solimine was advised that PFOA’s are a problem that are being detected throughout NH. Mr. Solimine advised that the PFOA’s origins are mostly from 3M material such as Scotchguard and Teflon. A lot of Scotchguard is found in older furniture and carpeting. Mr. Solimine felt that the PFOA’s may have been present for some time. There was a discussion regarding the preparation of a required response from the DES concerning the detection of PFOA’s and that it was noted that on a couple of occasions some non-residential septage was dumped into the lagoons and the Town was in the process of initiating required testing of residential wells within 1,000 feet of the lagoons. The Town has performed two rounds of testing for PFAS, and it has been detected in the groundwater. The EPA has a standard that PFOA’s and PFOS can not be more the seventy parts per trillion. This is a recent requirement. The Groundwater Bureau has done risk assessments on four of the components including PFOA, PFOS pFHxs, PFNA. Mr. Pelham encouraged the town to make sure any future septage accepted is residential. Mr. Pelham said that sometimes it is difficult to determine what residential septage is and cited examples of non-residential septage from places such as schools. Mr. Pelham said that septage can be aggregated from various sources and that it is up to the town to ensure that the volume of septage that is being pumped is from a residential source only. Generally speaking, haulers take industrial septage to appropriate sites. Mr. Pelham said that the DES does sampling events throughout the State to test septage being hauled and are in the process of analyzing the data. Selectman Baker discussed a couple of incidences where grease from a restaurant was dumped. Mr. Solimine said that initially he was unaware that the Town could not accept nonresidential septage, because it had been accepted by some of his predecessors. Selectman McManus inquired about the possible effect and State requirements regarding radiation and chemotherapy from residential septage. Mr. McManus said that hospital waste is considered hazardous materials and asked about the State’s potential long term requirements for radiation and chemotherapy. Ms. Houston said that the larger treatment facilities have evolving treatment protocols to address the complicated chemical matrixes. Right now, the focus is on PFAS. However, at some point there will be other emergent chemicals. Ms. Houston discussed a problem in the past that the State had with MTEB’s. There is not a MTEB mitigation bureau which was established in response to a lawsuit that the State was in with EXXON etc., in which the State prevailed. There are funds available to assist communities and individual households that had problems with that chemical. Mr. Pelham agreed that there was always going to be the next big thing if you look at the history over the last twenty years. Ms. Houston and Mr. Pelham advised that a number of communities were closing there small septage facilities. Selectman Baker said that the Town has been considering the potential for closure over the last five years and has established a capital reserve for that purpose and has set aside about $30,000 for either closure or maintenance purposes. Ms. Houston said that should the Town decide to close the lagoons, you could test the material and explained the options that the Town has and available guidance documents for the closure process. The PFAS team is working with the DES and evaluating treatment processes on a nation-wide basis. New Hampshire is ahead of the curve in dealing with PFAS. Ms. Houston said regardless of how the lagoons are closed, PFAS are still going to be a problem. Mr. McManus said that if the town does multiple tests, and they come up negative. It would be a pretty clear indication that the source would be from the old landfill. Ms. Houston said that after the lagoons are tested the Town should discuss next steps with the drinking water bureau. Selectman Headley discussed the problem that occurred with PFAS at the schools. Mr. Pelham said that the Town will have a lot of good information as a result of testing to guide the Board with what the next steps are going to be. He said that the Town should be sure to set rates to not only cover operational costs but also future requirements. Selectman Headley asked about an estimate for closure costs and was advised that it depends on what is required. Smaller facilities can handle the project in-house with the assistance of a contracted testing company. The Board requested that the DES perform the testing if the testing request is approved. Mr. Solimine advised that at the current time the Town was not accepting septage. They are getting ready to perform annual maintenance in conformance with DES requirements and have done preliminary site work. The lagoons are relatively dry right now, because no septage for about a year-and-a-half. Selectman Baker discussed maintenance history at the lagoons. Mr. Solimine said the lagoons are working very well. Ms. Houston requested that the Town not accept any more septage until after sampling is performed. Ms. Houston said the DES will inspect the lagoons prior to any testing and that the sampling has to be done in conformance with rigorous protocols. A question was asked regarding the DES long-term testing requirements. Ms. Houston said that continuation of testing is decided through the constituents found in testing and to follow up with the appropriate bureau, hazardous waste or drinking water bureau. The Town was considering the ash landfill site for storage of highway materials but wanted to be sure that this would be acceptable with the DES. Selectman Baker reiterated that even if the lagoons were closed, the Town would have to ensure that funding is available for future testing. There was a general discussion regarding the Town’s response action plan. The Town is working with John Whaland of the Drinking Water Bureau to follow up on the response plan. The DES notify residences within five hundred feet of the groundwater contamination. Ms. Houston requested copies of the certified mailings that the Town issued in May. Ms. Houston summarized that the next steps are to get the four residential wells tested and the DES will provided the sampling schedule for the lagoons to Mr. Solimine. After the results are obtained, the DES will be looking for a timeline for action on the part of the Town. The Town would conduct a public hearing prior to making a final decision regarding the lagoons. Criteria for sampling the residential wells was discussed. The residential well tests can be conducted by either Eastern Analytical or the DES. Ms. Houston will explore whether DES funding is available for the residential well testing. Selectman Headley opined that aside from the revenue, there does not appear to be many benefits from operating the lagoons. Ms. Houston said that depending on the results the Town’s choice will be to treat, contain or continue. Mr. Pelham advised that if the Town does decide to close, a written agreement with a receptor facility will be required as a backstop. The agreement would not restrict the haulers who are free to choose which receptor facility they use. On behalf of the Select Board, Selectman Headley thanked Ms. Houston and Mr. Pelham for their time and fulsome explanation of DES requirements pertaining to the lagoons. At 6:00 p.m. Selectman Headley opened a Public Informational Meeting regarding the Sutton Free Library’s proposed Message Board. Elizabeth Geraghty, Library Director, said that the library had received a grant to purchase a message board for the outside of the library. It is going to be placed near the backdoor. The message board is a one-sided message board made out of plastic. The Trustees previously asked for permission to erect the message board from both the Select Board and Planning Board. Marge Davison asked for a better idea of where the Board was going to be located and said that she would review the handout provided by the library. The Planning Board recommended that the Board be well secured because it is made of plastic. The Trustees received one email from JoAnna Murphy seeking clarification regarding the proposed message board. Ms. Glynn said that after the Story Walk, Ms. Murphy was curious as to what else was going to be placed on the library grounds and was not aware of the parameters of what the library was proposing. Ms. Glynn said that the Public Hearing was being conducted in response to feedback from the community because the Story Walk was a surprise, the trustees wanted to be sure that they took every opportunity to communicate what their plans were for the message board. Mr. DeFelice asked what materials were going to be in the message board. Would it only be library material or would other informational material be displayed and who decides what material will go in there? Ms. Geraghty responded that for the most part the materials would pertain to the library. If there is room for other materials, posting would be at the discretion of the Library Director. Selectman Baker said that he had an inquiry about the message board and in turn about the look of the Storywalk. Selectman Baker asked about the Library’s plans to paint the Storywalk posts. Ms. Geraghty replied that the library was waiting for them to be properly weathered, and then they will be painted. Selectman Headley thanked the Trustees for coming in to speak at the Public Information Session. There being no further questions, Selectman Headley closed the information session. Ms. Geraghty inquired about library funding and was advised that the library would be receiving their appropriation on Tuesday. There will be a discussion regarding the MOU on a future date. Ms. Glynn provided the Select Board with copies of the MOU and recent correspondence pertaining to the MOU. The minutes from April 11, 2022, were approved as written. The Board reviewed and approved the following manifests: Vendor Manifest: $40,539.45 Payroll Manifest: $13,182.22 BUILDING PERMIT: The Board approved a building permit for Sheila Hofman, 04-319-079, Route 114, for a deck. GRAVEL TAX LEVY: The Board issued an excavation tax for Christopher and Harold(s) Rowe, 08-270-221, for 800cy, in the amount of $16.00. INTENT TO CUT: The Board issued an intent to cut for Peter Teloian, Map 08-874-095 & 882-178, Baker Hill Road for 19.5 acres out of 23.7. OLD BUSINESS: The Board reviewed an agreement with Mike Vignale, KV Partners LLC, for Bid Documents and Bidding Services for the Grist Mill Parking Area. Selectman Headley summarized the next steps for the project. Funds were encumbered from 2021 to complete the engineering and compile the bid. Selectman McManus wondered if some of the project could be done in-house. Selectman Baker explained the need to have an engineered design and an engineer develop the bid. Selectman Baker made a motion to enter into an agreement with KV Partners for Bid Documents and Bidding Services for the Grist Mill Parking Area. Selectman Headley seconded the motion. The motion passed by a unanimous affirmative vote. The Board discussed and deferred action on adopting the Code of Conduct Policy in order to incorporate some final changes to the policy. NEW BUSINESS: In conjunction with the 2021 audit, Selectman Headley signed the Management Representation Letter on behalf of the Board. The Select Board reviewed the 2021 Draft Audit Report, and Selectman Headley executed the Management Representation letter on behalf of the Board. The Board executed the 2021 Management Discussion & Analysis (MD&A) in conjunction with the annual audit. REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE: The Board noted Email correspondence from Ira and Danielle Thomas regarding Planning Board Hearing 4/12/2022 – response from Cheri Parker The Board received SELECTMEN’S COMMENTS: Selectman McManus discussed the need for a facility and grounds person position to monitor facility needs, perform or organize repairs. The position could fall under the Highway Department. The Board agreed to review job descriptions from other Towns for a similar position. Mr. DeFelice stated that there was money appropriated within departments that could be reallocated for this position. Mr. McManus wondered whether there was an employee currently on staff that could fulfill this function. There could be a wage incentive offered for the opportunity. Mr. McManus described how the Town of Warner utilizes this employee. Mr. DeFelice said that this could possibly a full-time opportunity in the future. Selectman Headley said that Bill Curless was promoting such a position when he was on the Select Board. The Board and Mr. DeFelice supported the concept. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mr. DeFelice asked whether the MOU had a remedy for appeal of a complaint against the Select Board. Selectman Headley said that it was addressed in the policy. Mr. DeFelice suggested that the complaint could be brought before the Chairs of Town Board’s and Committees. Selectman Headley said that when the document is presented to the Chairs, the Select Board will take comment and would have an opportunity to amend the policy. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elly Phillips Town Administrator