A Possible Solution to Chatham’s Wastewater Problem
Robert O. Cooling
Presented at the Summer Town Meeting on 5 August 2003
For the last three years we have been reporting to you on the deterioration of the salt water embayments around Chatham. The Chatham volunteer water watchers with Dr. Duncanson have measured and documented the adverse effect of nitrogen on the water that makes Chatham what it is.
Now the draft report by the State of Mass. Estuaries Project (MEP) which I hold in my hand confirms our findings. Brian Howe made a professional power point presentation to town officials and C.A.C. members on June 19th showing a need of nitrogen reduction in various watersheds running from 90% to 30%, In other words get rid of septic tanks in a similar ratio at least, The Oyster Pond, Oyster River, Stage Harbor, Mill Pond area is the worst and needs almost complete watershed nitrogen removal. Upper muddy creek is so bad he suggested a weir to isolate it from down stream converting the upper area to fresh water and protecting the salt water. The less damaged areas (30%) have less housing or better flushing,
Mr. Howe confirmed that 80-90% of the nitrogen came from septic tanks and that Title 5 systems do not reduce nitrogen. Community systems have engineering and processing problems including lack of steady flow, temperature control, aeration , constant modification of processing, supervision and land area for effulent disposal. The N.I.B.Y. factor is uppermost.
To initiate a discussion with you today, I would refer to the display here. The newspaper articles show nitrogen at work – sea-weed – algae – cloudy water – foam. Under water would show no eel grass – muddy bottoms – no marine life.
There is another problem associated with how we treat the environment here: all soaps and detergent go into the ground and eventually into fresh water ponds causing eutrophication. Harwich has seen this in Long Pond, and proposes to spend $300,000 to spread alum on the pond to precipitate the build up and drop it to the bottom. A well engineered sewer plant and collection system is a solution to this problem.
Fortunately there is a possible solution to all of these problems. A three stage sewer plant and a processed water distribution system would handle all Chatham’s future needs and eventually restore our embayments to pristine (pre 1900) conditions.
The problem is political and financial once there is complete awareness by all of us taxpayers of the situation. The people must decide what kind of environment they want to live in and can afford. They should consider the impact on real estate values, economy , tourism and their grandchildren. This calls for education and strong leadership.
In July 2000, I presented to the NVTAC board an estimate of the cost to correct the problem. The numbers are based on experience in two similar situations.
We have 105 miles of drinking water mains covering 95% of built up areas. If the final analysis calls for 80-90% sewering the cost of collection system would be about $50,000.000 with pipe and lift stations and controls running at $100-110 per foot.
105miles x 85% x 5280 x $105 =$49,802,200.
Chatham’s summer population of 30,000 discharge about 100 gallons per person per day which would dictate a 3,000,000 gallon plant. If storm water run off from downtown areas was included a storage tank might be needed to level out the flow.
The cost to up-date, enlarge, or re-build the plant to control nitrogen and phosphors and discharge processed water for irrigation or other safe discharge –6 t0 8 million dollars.
. Total cost of approx. $57,000,000 would be expended over a 5-8 year period and spread over 6882 residential properties, 323commercial, 86 industrial and 132 mixed use.
The plant would be paid out of real estate taxes and the pipes and collection system would be a betterment paid over 20 years averaging $360 plus interest per year. Hook up cost average $1500-$2000.
The plant could be underground or flush depending on the water table.
Processed water for irrigation could be piped when sewer lines are installed.
IMPORTANTLY these plants make money!!! The payoff in one situation took 5 years and is now supporting parks and recreational facilities. The selling price of processed water is 26cents/1000 gal. In bulk, up to 46cents/1000 gallons delivered to customers spray heads.
Obviously the cost will escalate but the numbers dealing with pipe requirements, plant capacity, mix of tax billed properties, and procedures for pay-off are valid today. Recent bids indicate a 2.8% escalation per year.
The report from Mass Estuaries project should be finalized and some engineering studies done to establish costs of pipe footage, lift station cost, and plant cost at least in ball park numbers so that the voters would get a grasp of the magnitude and need. At the present time it would appear we have a catch 22 situation between the C,A.C. and the M.E.P. team delaying the acceptance of the M.E.P. findings.
The job is doable particularly in today’s low interest rate environment if planning is expedited and strong leadership is employed.
On August 1,2003 at a meeting of the board it was moved that the Non-Voting Taxpayers Advisory Committee take the following position with respect to the waste water issue confronting Chatham:
“The Non-Voting Taxpayers Advisory Committee is leaning toward a sewer solution for all of Chatham. Even as alternative solutions are being evaluated, we recommend proceeding immediately with preparation of a specific plan for expanding the present sewer system. The plan should include the development of the estimated cost, time schedule, zoning change requirements and a proposal on how costs could be recovered, including yearly assessments to home owners.”
I hope you have many comments and questions which Dr. Duncanson or others can answer and comment on. Thank you for your interest.
| 
