EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOF THE FINAL REPORT OF THE WEST BRIDGEWATER
CONSERVATION COMMISSION SLUDGE STUDY COMMITTEE
January 10, 2013
In April of 2010 many concerns were submitted to various Boards, Commissions, Departments and /or their staff of
the Town of West Bridgewater government. The Board of Health and the Conservation Commission staff
researched the subject to better understand sludge and to be able to answer the concerns of the residents. Meetings
were held and correspondence was exchanged with the concerned residents. In addition the staff of the Board of
Health and the Conservation Commission had numerous discussions with the DEP, the supplier and the user. It was
determined that sludge was a MA DEP permitted product and deemed to be safe to the public health and the
environment if produced and distributed and applied to the land in accordance with the permit that that was issued
by DEP.
Periodically thereafter the stockpiling and the use of the sludge would stir concerns with the residents. Complaints
would come into the Town Hall regarding the smell and health concerns from the spreading of the sludge.
At the request of the Board of Selectmen, the Conservation Commission presented them an outline of the sludge
problem on April 3, 2012. The outline presented a possible solution in the form of a bylaw. The outline listed the
goals of such action and the approach by which the bylaw would be developed. In the end, it could be presented for
consideration by the ATM members.
In June of 2012, the sludge was observed being spread in an area next to the Town River off Scotland Street that is
flooded by the river on a regular basis. As a result, the Conservation Commission felt that the environmental impact
needed to be determined and if any action needed to be taken accordingly. An August 7, 2012 memo was sent by
the Conservation Commission to all interested parties with an interest in Biosolids or sludge. It announced and
invited them to two separate informational meetings regarding the sludge. The meetings were held during the day
on the 23rd of August and the other was held in the evening of August 29 th.
After the second public meeting a list of concerns that the residents wanted addressed were determined. They were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Who oversees the use of the sludge?
What are the proper agricultural practices in its use
How does the sludge affect organic farmers who abut the fields
Do the fumes and dust affect people with respiratory illnesses
What are the long term impacts of the sludge on the soils and waters
The Commission voted on September 4, 2012 to establish a Sludge Study Committee consisting of interested
representatives from the Water Commission, the Board of Health, the Planning Board, the Conservation
Commission, the Agricultural Commission, the residents, and the farmers. Also invited to participate in the work of
the committee but not allowed to vote were representatives of the DEP, the supplier, and the NRCS (USDA). The
Conservation Commission’s Agent was appointed the facilitator of the meetings and would not have a vote either.
A memo dated September 17, 2012 was sent to the above noted Departments and posted on the Town Website. In
addition there were calls and emails sent to the people who had attended the informational meetings held in August.
They were all invited to attend a meeting on September 26, 2012 at which time a Sludge Study Committee would be
organized.
At the September 26, 2012 meeting, the Farmer members who volunteered to be on the committee were Clinton
(Clint) Howard III and Tim Demolles; the resident members were June Metcalf and Carol Ashton; the remaining
members who volunteered were Rick Krugger, Water Commission; Howard (Lance) Anderson, Planning Board;
1
January 10, 2013
John (Jack) Connolly, Conservation Commission; and Victoria (Vicky) Benea, Agricultural Commission. The
Board of Health did not attend. The supplier of the product, Mr. Robert Kelly, other West Bridgewater residents and
representatives of other agencies were welcomed participants but were not voting members of the committee. The
Chairperson selected for the committee was Vicky Benea, the Vice Chairperson selected was Clint Howard and the
Clerk selected was Jack Connolly.
The committee met for six meetings. The second meeting established a formal Committee Mission Statement and a
formal Strategic Plan. At the remaining meeting various documents were distributed and reviewed. There were
presentations made summarizing the documents and there was a field trip to the plant that manufactures the product.
The last meeting on December 20, 2012 resulted in a document reflecting the Committee’s opinion as to the findings
and the recommendation they would forward to the Conservation Commission.
The findings were as follows:
1.
Type 1 Sludge produced only by EarthSource, Inc., Raynham, MA in accordance with the conditions listed
in MA DEP BRPWP29, Permit #W227080 is an approved product for land application in West
Bridgewater.
2. Type 1 Sludge produced and distributed in accordance with the regulations of 310 CMR 32.00 et seq is an
approved product for land application in West Bridgewater.
3. Type 1 Sludge produced, distributed and applied to land in accordance with the regulations of 310 CMR
32.00 et seq will protect the health and the environment from possible contamination which could occur
from pathogens, metals or toxic chemical compounds is allowed for land application in West Bridgewater
for beneficial purposes
4. Type 1 Sludge produced in accordance with the regulations of 310 CMR 32.00, of which the concentrations
of substances it contains does not exceed the limits set forth in TABLE 32.12(2)(a) of 310 CMR 32.00 et
seq is a suitable product for land application in West Bridgewater provided it is applied in accordance with
310 CMR 32.51.
5. Type 1 Sludge produced in accordance with the regulations of 310 CMR 32.00 et seq and is sold and
distributed in accordance with 310 CMR 32.51(3) is an approved product for land application in West
Bridgewater.
6. EarthSource, Inc., Raynham, MA has demonstrated that it produces a product that does not exceed the
maximum limits of contaminants listed in 310 CMR 32.12 for Type 1 sludge.
7. Certain Agricultural activities related to normal use and the maintenance of land in agricultural use are
exempt from the MA Wetlands Protection Act.
8. In order to budget, supply and conserve nutrients for plant production; to minimize agricultural nonpoint
source pollution of surface and groundwater resources; to properly utilize manure or organic by-products as
a plant nutrient source; to protect air quality by reducing odors, nitrogen emissions (ammonia, oxides of
nitrogen), and the formation of atmospheric particulates; and to
maintain or improve the physical, chemical and biological condition of soil, nutrient application to land in
West Bridgewater must be done in accordance with the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) Conservation Practice Standard for Nutrient Management Code 590.
9. Broad weight of scientific evidence and opinion supports recycling biosolids to land as an environmentally
responsible method of reuse when managed utilizing best practices and in compliance with Part 503 of 40
CFR.
10. Like any nutrient –rich fertilizer, biosolids should be applied in ways that minimize risk of leaching of
nutrients or other constituents to groundwater or runoff to nearby surface waters.
11. Studies have concluded that there are no impacts on groundwater quality at properly managed biosolids
application sites.
2
January 10, 2013
12. No data has shown that odors from biosolids cause toxicological effects on individuals. Most odors are
cause by sulfur compounds that only cause toxic effects in concentrations vastly greater than that which
triggers a smell.
13. Professor Jordan Peccia, PhD, Yale University has determined that PM10 emitted during land application
(of Biosolids) resulted in a significantly greater cytotoxicity and inflammation potential to normalized
human bronchial epithelial cells than did PM10 derived from agricultural soil or animal manures.
14. There is growing agreement among scientist and environmentalist that the 503s (of 40 CFR) need serious
improvements. In 1997 the Cornell Waste Management Institute concluded that current regulations do not
protect human health, agricultural productivity and the environment.
15. In 2002 the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) warned that the scientific underpinning of the 503s was
based on outdated or nonexistent science. The NAS panel also warned that even if all of the contaminants
of this complex and unpredictable waste mixture were known, single agent risk assessment, and using
standard risk management strategies, would not be protective of human health.
The following recommendations to be submitted to the conservation Commission were approved as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That Type 1 Biosolids having received a MA DEP permit for its production and distribution for land
application and applied in accordance with the January 2012 NRCS Nutrient Management Standards
will be allowable in West Bridgewater, MA.
That Type 1 Biosolids having received a MA DEP permit for its production and distribution for land
application and applied in a manner to minimize drift of the Type 1 Biosolids dust will be allowable in
West Bridgewater, MA.
That Type 1 Biosolids having received a MA DEP permit for its production and distribution for land
application and applied to land in West Bridgewater must be documented with the Board of Health as
to the date, location and amounts applied to any given parcel.
That Type 1 Biosolids having received a MA DEP permit for its production and distribution for land
application can be applied to land in West Bridgewater provide the test results of the soil and the
recommended application rate as established by a third party are included with the data required in #3.
The Sludge Study Committee held a final meeting on January 10, 2012 for the purpose of approving any remaining
meeting minutes and voting on the final report and recommendation. The submission of this report and
recommendation to the Conservation Commission completes the work of the Sludge Study Committee.
Respectfully submitted for the Committee,
Victoria Benea, Chairperson
January 10, 2013
3
January 10, 2013