HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-06 Correspondence SPR MOD 2/16/2017 Town of North Andover Mail-RE:North Andover Ash House Replacement Solid Waste Permit
NORTH ANDOVER
tutassachusetts Jean Enright<jenright@northandoverma.gov>
RE: North Andover s use Replacement Soli se Permit
1 message
Gary Collette <gcollette@wti energy.com> Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:57 PM
To: Tim Jones <tjones@techenv.com>, Richard Falk <rfalk@wtienergy.com>
Cc: Matt Hughes <mhughes@wtienergy.com>, Jean Enright <jenright@northandoverma.gov>
Tim,
I truly welcome and appreciate your review of the project and any opinion you may feel is warranted on behalf of the
Town.
Please let us know if you would like to review any addition documents and we will make them readily available.
3
Most appreciatively,
//K�
Wheelabrator
Gary Collette
Pleat Manager,
Wheelabrator North Andover
25 Holt Rd I North Andover, MA 01845
70 688 1661 � Cell 603 918 8450
www.wtienergy.com � Twitter @/VTIEnergy
https:Hm ai I.googl e.com/m ai I/u/0/?ui=2&i k=7c2eff6265&vi ew=pt&search=i nbox&th=15a487ebf75238af&si m l=15a487ebf75238af 1/3
2/16/2017 Town of North Andover Mail RE:North Andover Ash House Replacement Solid Waste Permit
.
' From: Tim]ones [maiko:tjones@techenv.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 20172:43 PM
To: Richard Falk
Cc: Matt Hughes; Gary Collette
Subject: RE: North Andover Ash House Replacement Solid Waste Permit
Hi Richard,
My pleasure to talk with you and Matt, appreciate you looping us in so we can understand the issues and review the
project scope.
Will stand by on making any contact with the Town and look forward to a deeper discussion when we meet next
week.
Talk soon,
Tim
From: Richard Fa|k [nn@flto:rfalk@vxtiHnergy,coDl]
Sent:Thursday, February 16, 28l7l:54PM
To:Tim Jones<tjOnes@teChenKOom>
Cc: Matt Hughes<rrnhughes@wfienergy,com>; Gary Collette<gcoUette@wtienergy.com>
Subject: North Andover Ash House Replacement Solid Waste Permit
Tim,
Thanks for taking the time to refresh you on the status of our ash house replacement. Attached is our solid waste
application to the DEP that isa good reference for your review.
Please let me know if you need any additional info, we can discuss during your review next Wednesday.
Richard
h«p ://nai|.goog|o.00mhnaiVu0/?u=2&ix=7oueff62s58*iow=pt&smaroh=inbo«&th=15u487om7n238af&sim|=1oa48robf7523@af 28
2/16/2017 Town of North Andover Mail-RE:North Andover Ash House Replacement Solid Waste Permit
Wheelabrator
Richard Falk
Manager, Air Quality
Wheelabrator Technologies
100 Arboretum Drive I Suite 310 1 Portsmouth NH 03801
Tel 603 929 3,153 1 Cell 978 807 1958
www.wtoenergy.com Twitter @WTIEnergy
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message originates from Wheelabrator Technologies Inc. This message and any
attachments are solely for the use of the intended recipients. They may contain privileged and/or confidential information
or other information protected from disclosure. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you
received this email in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any
attachment from your system.
https:Hm ai I.google.com/mai I/u/0/?ui=2&i k=7c2eff6265&view=pt&search=inbox&th=15a487ebf75238af&sim 1=15a487ebf75238af 3/3
REV.11 DATE2 6FSCRIPNON 1
CHECKED MPRWED
S-DR-I6 6Um FOR NFM AEVEn PJS
RENSEO PFR C,1FM CWA9NI5 Pb
RfliSfll PFR GllEN,[pl
IS-NW-I 1C41N NR PFAMR�� PJS
11119.71
E 5090.00 N 1794.66 NousE _\
E 525225 N DI
N 1755.55 sA T
N PROJECT LOCATION
N 168C.44
E 5707.9� .�
TA`
SECURITY FENCE
GRASS AREA 660.E GWlS`,AREA �
OUSE � 11z
SUMP SCALE MNN ASH STORAGE SECTION_ �*
T I
p0� GRA56 AREA WHITE GOODS ASH� EXISTING CARRIER � N 1584.90 � 4
ROLL-01E SCA CONJEYOR LE � �_ _ E 611928
S\
FERROUS ASH GRASS AREA
BULK AND HOUSE
GRASS AND, ac cprtR METALS NON `-TRUCK Y SECTION N 1540.72 F
CONCRETE MDR FERROUS E 6087.72 7 4
MEiA(S t;S `
W� mhn'mR YARD SUMP
DME PREP BUILDING STRUCTURE
G R� FABRIC FILTERS UNIT/2
US CONTACT WATER
LOCATION PLAN
(J, ASH M t5 STORAGE TANK
m BURIED GtSO
HOUSE WATER LINE
GRASS AREA nn ,RMTxort 1
WIDiNc SLOE
COMPRESSOR
z ROOM o_
BOA}2 ® 5\
Q
B01 LDING MISCELlPNE0U5
BE xm � � IaroowN/sroaACE
a S PRECIP UNIT N 9 SLO�E� E 61
373.40
2 17.24
N C-1 EN OSU WAL LEE N0. 8 Jm ® z
o5 g PAVEMENT
m •DECOMISSIOMIT
PRECIP U NR _ ENCLOSURE
N0.1 VALVE MOUSE
MCC ROOM
N 1260.00 PUMP ROOM ® GRASS AREA
E 5090DO SEA jl AND SUMP
N 1275.59
ENCLOSURE
— -- FABRIC FILTERS
E 6006.16
/
OVERHEAD I WALL UNIT1
WALI(WAY
' PRIMARY FIRE SECON.FIRE PROPOSED WORK SCOPE:
ADMEN
NRBINE ROOM SWITCHYARD PUMP OUS PUMP HOUSE
SWITCHGERR ROOMFm'nxG 51MCiuSY s,m A6N NaJSF m eE DFUIXl9E➢Aw A xFW P,s-G6T mxGf✓<TE nmcluRE wut ff FRELTEo w
BUILDING / SAND FlLTER F55FMWLY>NESwERO1PRIM-
BUI DING
2 THE p15,xc PeVAONED CLNIFYA PFEA WYl�BACNFlLLFD/PAYED!NO USG iiP CPA1k KCESS Na SEAGNC
uj S.IFLPoRMT OJNTA -—BE.—m ISgATE AGINE ASN—ILI.AffAt 09WNG Gg5,RUG,10x.
SECURITY
ROAD TRANSFORMER PENCE
CE /—SECURITY FENCE&
SECURITY FENCE PROPERTY UNE
THIS DRAWING IS FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY. THE BASE
N 103.04 N 1020.20 SHEET BASED ON VENTURE ENGINEERING DRAWING
E 5312.54 — GRAss AREA N 1O06.4 1131-01.22-0002. HIGHLANDER ENGINEERING HAS NOT PERFORMED
E 5565.6a SURVEY OF THE SITE OR VERIFICATION OF AS-BUILT INFORMATION
N 1046.02 N 1031.33 N 1048.38
E SOa9.35 sEcuRltt FENCE — -- / E 568S OS E 5758.64 AND BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS. SUCH INFORMATION IS BASED ON
THE ABOVE DRAWING AND REFERENCED DRAWINGS SO DESCRIBED
ON REFERENCE DRAWINGS. HIGHLANDER ENGINEERING IS NOT
RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS THAT MAY HAVE
BEEN INCORPORATED IN PREPARATION OF THE BASE SHEET.
SITE PLAN
m¢rmwxcPu�o,rs waca W,,,m WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
s Wn°NcrN'`"'E t RG NORTH ANDOVER, MA FACILITY
' Txc o6w iac cw,vm_°x eirr ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
NSG� sNT°mwN _ECl�iY G'u MTDI SITE PLAN
GH aADRR PJ9 11p p
FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY .�O""P0" ` PJSR 1-IX 46 M n6-,6
M+c M,�409
wfWM1NkaMe�m9.emn Iv.a me
t1.51&Elii9RR �P15 n}CC,-,R A5 rx,iEa D-M-116-16-1:EP-1 0
REV, WIEZ _ DfSCFIP,ION BY CHECKED 1PPFWID
-IXT-I6 SvhD NR WINf REY#W PJS PJS
6-OCI-i6 P£V6m Ppt.WEM WtwD115 PA
1-0Ci-I EV6m PCR WIXf CDNNEHS
D It-NW-I IDD CVAIRD 9L�Ip!NDIE.fARR¢T SF.CII B mU.,2NL P.IS Pb
�S-NW-, IS9iID FqV PERYx
N EXISTING CLARIFIER \
O O O O G (TO 8E ED/PAVED FOR LAYDOWN
ANDND CRANE SET—UP AREA.) \
Iz0._�s. T z0._�. ; so�. T •_�ws• SEE SECTION EP-3.3
— — -- O
J.
ID G�,(H RN4V
PPLCAm talc I CRmE FRmRO
--
NEw G,tH BM1S� %,
EXISTING METALS BUILDING
MAIN ASH STORAGE SECTION any m via aim
r
--- — -- ----- —-L -- --- S.z J
naaR�lx I
_ _ I 1 IX51NC RDLL-UP DDDR �,.
IXI6TING NaYDWR
I� ( CaM YDrt I
F-• WILL
n 5.5
moat ro IWIwuN amlxc nano our Ta
eas,e+c RD p Doal `B I mmx wtr scRueem.R�
a>cr aru cWccncx'�.
TRUCK BAY
SECTION rsnxD Rau-w DDDR
I I
carvnoR sxDRmlm ro El, Ewmxc Roo-uP DDDR
DIRER tD1➢IHID muaa
T.
6ianxc wFr scacseER EMWUm Pau.
rolPauxr ,mlmlr Elansurs,c BEroNPRism or�Hu ua.Tavmc o" 1"� ''c" mIE wrixoR reui mcciwxs No,swwX. NOET S:
�cDNPrasm or xravr PaY ora - ' as wNxEma PPaa I-,xE uux sroRwE s6cmn Wnc RE aaalam rxD
SIRUCIUft4 PPA4R14 FE-[DNmNCIm.AAi WIlL&laIDFD DIRECRY V110 mUCK6&iHF
PHASE I—MAIN ASH STORAGE SECTION m BTSRa N ENoaBm A d.
CONSTRUCTION PLAN VIEW 1.mE rnsrwc uEr/!S eu.1.Is wPP M NE IxDN IXlmxc asp
HW&.COET.LLSR DUn➢ uMVC6 DENOMIXIaONaPPELTK✓SIRUCiW.
RR/sN xW6E
ixB Ertn,+rGarnuc satin unnEa WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
stoutly an B W THE Ezcwsr,>:
oxtirwuR DW ffANC NORTH ANDOVER, MA FACILITY
TRUCK BAY L' DRavnxc w way[m x ua
xw,�urt SECTION FG�' ,vr PMi u+o ulr uruurHORlzm ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
6x¢BsuRE noon owr•I L,3�3 _ PROPOSED PLAN VIEW—PHASE
SHDWN fXE SBURIT PRCHIBBFD
gl�illil����FiR PJSR JDCf-i6�� ��¢�s �
SECTION A—A SECTION B—B FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY ,Ba 'Rw n wsR sa-,6 71.7
�xr isms
]12.19 Po ✓PJS�3-0.�-is I/e'=1'-0'D-M-1I6-16-1:EP-3.1 0
REV. MiEZ ESGRIPDON CHECKED AwROYc➢
T I6 159hD FCP WEM RErfW Pb PJS Ph
6-OCt-i6 �19D PEA WENT t'ALMENIS NIS
za-Dcr-I RLNRD P<A WExr mn�ons".. eJs Pa
D 11-NW-I ILO CVFIFlFD&CfroN NNE Pb PA
_ — 15-NW-1 651kD FUl PERMR Pb
N
A- T -- 3
i AYENEM ro
XIS N lffAAlKffw'9N \
(TO BE BAC ILLED/PAVED FOR LAYD WN \
II AND C ANE SET-UP AREA.)
xEw PMCI51 conx smuclURE MAIN ASH STORAGE SECTION - SEE ECTION EP-3.3
ry 2 I II
_ ---f—
xkW Gltx RISr./
EXISTING METALS BUILDING 1 I I LDwEN :� I
_ xor PANEwxr ro
r
SIWf i0 GiCN BARN /
II _ __ --i \ G II'RCP iO YAPO SUI®
A91 LOMMOR RE-FATFNBEO I � � � �\
Ei0 BCYx4R i ASN la SfORAOE PNE,
S,Z
YBM-TO MRECIIiflUfM _
— ROOfl DF/!N 1EIF]RAA( RWR GRUN WA IFR P
I
If-1 mm WEf SCRUBBfA,WGi.INB MOOD WRING BENOIffIGN dNp CDNStRUCBIXV.
REtMaiE WEF GfAUBBEII OU(SIBE OF BUILDING ---
1 1 I
xGR FA4 urzA Eucna4 G mucK wr sErnca. --- 0 TRUCK BAY
_ I SECTION
� a
SING ROLL-UP
PROPOSED WORK SCOPE'
OENWSH N:D RELOx51flVC! ��, i.PHIS II-1Hf iRUtlt wT SELHD4 MLL BE➢EMOtIDIE➢0.4U
TRUCK wY SECiIIXi NG ASH C'OHVETOfl � FECP FUCtEO.A91 ISA1 BE SIGRD IN iNE NEW NWI ASx
E»t�W4 SLRIiBBEA fMHWS!FIN. SIOwGE SELIGY.A IGDFA W01 LGD OUi iRUCl6 PtUN TNI$
WmCPLLEItf BUIDNG. ENLL➢SLRE t9II:LVNGOGR FlNN LGGTGYS NOi SHOhN. A4V.
?,THE EMISTNG WER 6CMBl$A WILL BE ftF)MNID Rt011 114 AW
NGU4 0 NG CONSRiULRP4 A40 RE-INSfNtEp OIA50F.
BE C01&InSED OF NEAW PMY 0/ER UR
AOHCEM i0 DE Wfl SCRUBEEA FIx,ONCE ME TRICK eAY
GIRUCNRPL FwNNG. SECMN CON'IRMipN 5 LWRERD.
reoPiErnrsr DATA WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
m ssxcr w11LA
APE ixE Eza G
PHASE 11—TRUCK BAY SECTION` yRwwrvoFwcNLu9RBW>NEwINe NORTH ANDovER, MA FACILITY
SECTION C—C CONSTRUCTION PLAN VIEW P+�*�+o WUN.W0Rlzn ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
/",a,=„33,>'.. = 5u iaN a>xE s""T wmR PROPOSED PLAN VIEW-PHASE 11
WN ARE SNd.TLT PROHIWIED
FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY exwwm'Rw¢u ws� a-I6 � �Itfi-6
clE Nr Iz6oB "
1.510.Z32.1908 pJ5 3-acl-ifi t/B-=I'-a'D-M-it6-16-1:EP-3.2 D
REV. OPTEZ OESCRIPIION CHECKm MPgOVFD
6VED iqR COFM tSM&tt PJS
6-OCt-16 REIM1SED PER CIIEM COIIMEMS w" !
O
O O O O
( I I ADPE 10 GiCH q SIN \
Ew MQGSf , S ER
ca+caElE smucnraE (TO BE BACKFILLED/PAV D FOR LAYDOWN
AND CRANE SET UP AREA.)
— — — — � - —-- SEE SECTION TH DRAWING.
I
MAN AS STORAGE SECTION /
wu x
'T
�%ISTING METALS BUILDING � I � i xEw vPmlwr ro
�' I I smvE m urcx ewx /
Psr cwrvcoR I \
`
I I I \\
RouuP 000R
— — I
am
— — noon oRNx
I
RW„R DOUR
I I I
TRUCK BAY
SECTION ocoRv
� � � I RMLUP DOP2
Mf'a PREG51 Wx[RlE SRNCIME � SGbeBFlt RIN
�LMD�mN�rDR
GNEN,DMmN�
EuvPmn Ds't ucamo PERnLLIEq Di wEelEx
NM PAHNENf NFn GitM 9l%I
NOTES:
soPE Lo uml uPwl �_%oPE ro G.al FINAL PLAN VIEW I.urvuE.munaxs xo.sxowx.
z.LaGmn Dr RE-mulm wEr sau®m
I I 1AU W WISf ilH SU6�ER iU O4WCE
aLsm al fDME oEvcx.
- P y wgEq WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
_ mxovx eKxral.Pucm at uErs uro couvklm. R rear°wP�ummn�ic NORTH ANDOVER MA FACILITY
I I o
�' mnxcs.Puc gEVRoournox ED
,
ExLsiwc coxa[E[M9REq gmmu m REM.Ux. °'�" ��— G Pcnnr uuMoalzc ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
c 3B3�B�— umvPtwx aP nc 51f81EL?wmq
vEmra+iLn PwEs muwm w am»gxE,w SfPigPttai rJa+c. ��,,;•E snowx PVE mnrnr Pgoxlmim PROPOSED FINAL PLAN VIEW
za•qm.vrvu+r—A—sa Vz
HIGHLa✓1DER PJsm U-16}3�
a
PROPOSED BACKFILLED CLARIFIER FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY �mmgvaau x gasR na-1c M-IIb 16
SECTION LOOKING NORTH
ID9215m PJS n J-CCI-Ib I/8"=1'-O'O-M-I16-16-i:EP-3.3 0
REV. DATEZ OESCRIPItON ECKEO AaaeOVm
NOTE: - - Issuco FCR zm L..
THEORETICAL EGRESS PATHS SHOWN ARE CONSERVATIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE c 1z xw�,6 se+11 1.D.-SO—
FACT THAT THEY EXTEND BEYOND THE NORMAL EGRESS PATH. THE NORMAL
EGRESS PATH IS LIMITED BY THE ASH PILE SHOWN IN THE PLAN VIEW.
THEORETICAL EGRESS PATHS ARE SHOWN FOR INFORMATION ONLY TO ILLUSTRATE
THAT AT NO POINT IN THE ASH HOUSE ARE THE ALLOWABLE EGRESS PATH
TRAVEL PATH LENGTHS ARE EXCEEDED.
EGRESS LIGHTING PER SECTION 1006 OF IBC 2009 WILL BASED ON THE NORMAL
MAXIMUM EGRESS PATH AND NOT EXTEND OVER THE ASH PILE EXTENTS.
O O O O O O
T
- 3
N II
�\ RECONSTRUCTED ASH FIRE RATED ASSEMBLIES
HOUSE. APPROXIMATE TEP-1
\ AREA = 8,800 SF I ASSEMBLY HOURS
TEP-2 EGRESS LIGHTING PER
(( \\ \ SECTION 1006 OF IBC 2009 I x00F wws 0
\ j WILL NOT BE PLACED OVER 000ss N
THE ASH PILE o
----- - - - I----------i------- - ---- ! Z
j SYMBOL LEGEND:
x/u
TEP-3 \\ \ j j II .� nEw Furxcwa ucxr/o-lr slcx cwaalrunox.
\ j OF'H PLc.pRxr II t01 oaoR xuuacR.
ACTUAL EGRESS PATH
----- ----------—
NEP-111 PATH LENGTH THEORETICAL
EXISTING METAL \ \ j NEP-2 j EGRESS DURING NORMAL/ MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE
STORAGE STRUCTURE \ �\ I PATH OPERATIN[ CjNDIT10N5 PAT[ LEj GTH PATH LENGTH
- NEP TEP
_ 707
NEP-3 __.�___wll;ri rzr-, 11"
(� NEF-; 6
— — — — — — — — — -- —
I
r o e me s PA HsS CONSIDER W 111 OF E aR 000Hs Is 6mcKm.
tat
EGRESS WIDTHS
OF
euls�nlrsicoOUS wxEDN FEF[RU:QESN1 cEiaoi sE nooN oos.Eoc'UU-OY mTNEST mNKLo+
y Pw Oc
DOOR nz w. US—,
OCCUPANCY CAPACITY
,m a'-o' 1eo ocwsevR
'x/U'
1eo occuPAxls
I j , 16o acueA.Rs
—-S.4
- - sou-uP caves _-_ _ NOTE:
t02 I. TE➢HEauwENFIR3 THE 6tx Fgnox OF THE couuomiuL,x OF uAEvcxusEm'
ODE W R RRFNCES IBC R00 SEC M51 R OAROINO NVIn
'x NENNS OF ECNESS ARE-IF.IN iNAi iNE LOSS OF ANY ONE N.OF EGRESS
r R-Cm THE AVNUet£CAPACITY TO tFSY 1TUN 50 PERCENT OF THE
REOV Rm CAPACITY.
FE-1
�- SEE DRAWING LS-2 FOR CODE REVIEW NOTES
oPRiEraar onrA WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
PLAN VIEW RECONSTRUCTED ASH HOUSE R `�UODUU1 N+E
xxlxNiu.NOE,ENPN.1S NORTH ANDOVER, MA FACILITY
SWVKES,- R
eAs°N�"oc IAriY"UN uT°T,Roa'ZEU ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
nON S TTHIO PRoweITNENm LIFE SAFETY PLAN
FIRE EXTINGUISHER RANGE FIRE EXT. gGZIZ;.L.IVD-ER
UYNOER E'"'DtINL
NOW:DUE r0 THE HIGHLY CNROSNE ENNe 11-ON THE 0.5r HOUSE THE FlNE IXTINGOISHERS 0Y USS N SEFMCES,PLLC 7 0c01'R
LOCAL 60N60CAR0 IN NON-LOCKm V91NEi5 ON THE ExRAlOe OF THE 6reOCNHE Ai OOOH _i C Z_A 183 COONTY m"S. 16-0.1-16 M-,6-6
n TO AND 10]. _ _ ��IRndertngcom
rao Sla.23z-teas11
er IZ-T6 No E D-M-116-17-2:1-S-1 C
REV. DAiE2 OEBCRIPtION CHECKED APPRWED
CODE SUMMARY VARIANCE REQUEST SUMMARY s"r-' °FD � R�I�Y pJs p� s
a -Dv-Is REWsfD PER alExT 0—
A,,,'-"CDDES: BE PNCIEFFE N sY51EMs PLUMBING EUKIME EFOURNMENTS ME FOID—VARUNCE ARE BRAG RFWEStED
.,.TINS IBC S.ED,N.AUlOMATC SPNNHIER SYSIEUi: KABIE CODES: E5:248 CUR IRIO UNIFORM STATE PLUMBING
RINKLER SYSIEUR.1NOT REQUIRED FOR GROUP S-T Co.,SECRON 1D e,RESEE 1,AND S-IN 1D.1 D.ie.j.Cr
ENpMFN
.,..INS CODE OF ME—MONWFALM OF MASSAGE.—INCLUDING LOW lUZARDPiiORAGE OCWPANCIEi. a0 CMR IO.W:GRIFFIN STAGE PLUMBING COTE TNO(z)RESN R°oM FACIl WRH ONE TOILET,OnE UVANRT.ONE
IN, NS TO ME 1. WIERNA—BUILDING CODE. 45a CMR 3 W:NIIEiS W IxpUSiRW.FSrABUSXUFt✓ti OF FHFSE WILL ALSO BE EQUIPPED WRH A SHOWER,PER SIR CNA
MASSACHRSETTS GENERAL DAM,PART 1,TE%.1,CHAPTER IM FIRE PREVEMPR, xOM. 10.10.IB TABI£t.
SA0
A 111BI T", % G AEOUIREs WNLOIxGS WHICH TOK In ME AGGREGATE,MORE M 1 St E WLLL BE fuK A—IUUu OCNPANEY OF]
OUANE FEET Ix FLOOR AREA BE PROTECTED MROURROUT PM AAL BUIIDINGS AND STRUCTURES OTHER THAN REGGENUL OWEWNGS EUPLmEEBMA
IM/ANSI:All 1].1-2DD3 ASEWAFFFSSIfM OF AUTOWIIC SPRINN ER IN ACORDANCE WM ME THAT ME INTENDED FOR OCCUPANCY SWML BE EQUIPPED WIrN
npN➢MG,BID STALE BU4➢MG cODE ME OWNER I—REDDEST AN I-111x WFUSTEM SARTARY—DR.AS OMUNEO IN 1.FAR t0.00. BE BE ME ASH HOUSE IS OCCUPIED INiFiMRIEMLY AND,
PROM ONB O ME
"I AN
AU ETTON SPRINKLER SYSTEM WUH ME AN,SEE VALANCE REQUEST PERSONNEL WORK IN R OTHER AREAS R ME PUNT,ME PERSONNEL
sUUUARY SECTOx ON MS SNEEi FOR ADgivNAL INFORMATION 2➢D:i0I£TS N xpJSMUL ESFABLBNUFNis USE ME IXISTYG REST ROOK FIGURES 11 ME Bg1FR HOUSE
pC SEC FO-.1 COW NAFARD STORAGES 2 LGW NAURD°CCUPANLY SNOW OF EGRE i. 2.01 TRITT FACUTES eyt svq xlt�ERS AUIOWiEG SPRNKLER SYSTFN NUUL PART
TPE
RAGE OF NONCCMBRSTBI.E MAGERAl ME OPERATORS OFGE LCH. AB ISM 265)EARE REOUDED WE TO ME BUILDING BEING
MS FACUtt NJ0.VES ME PARGUNG AND STORES OF POST COUBUSTIG ASN. IN,rABE F 11 NA%MUM FLOUR AREA NLOWNILES PER DEMPANN. ANTS,PERSONS HE ADM SEll".11 F PPUGGED TOGETHER,iEPFAO 15G0 sF E fH ASH HORSE WILL BE
IATIR R. WAIEft WENCNM AND PROCESSED N REMOYE METAL ELY ASN IS -.IN W SPACE FLOOR AREA SF PER OCCUPANT) FOR EACH SIX CAND SHALL BE PWxIY SO DES CxATED N,NEN TED O R.1 IN.CH xOn 11 I STBE
RPIM OP,Nm WM WATER ANB TRANSPORTED ON AN NCUNED BELT CCNVETOR ( ANT) PROuO AND ERN ST FED E SRME S-E S ALSO
x COMBVSRBLE AND rvEAi RELEf VRON ME SPq nKLFA
OTHER BOTTOM ASN TO BEBTO TRUCK NEE ASH NTE.ME SN AN LED ASN SNOFAGE AN... 5W SF GROSS ME U BER OF sFA15 SEAM.NOT BE LE55 MAN pMA TO EVERY 25 AEQURENENf IS BUNG REQUESTED. }
RUT UP THEEBFUL LORDED INTO TRUCKS A FRONT END LOUDER AND fUULID MPaO%uAIE BURT UG AqU B B00 si UP EST S ON F EGH N HEREOF BABm TPON ME W%IMUu xUUBER
OU THE
BULDhG. W ffASOxs Cf ERNER sE%EMPLOYED IT ONE TUE
CA cu ATFO OCCUPNR OAO a WATER MUSETE AND URNALS MRST BE REP IY ACESSBFTO ME L' L;I�TRUCROx E ANAL DUMPANTB WILL NCLUGE ME FD. .NO FREEHE FOR WHDSE USE THEY ARE DESIGNATED,N NO E MAY A FIREjF^
-1 (1)WAER O 1-1 LNOr ON RUIY NLL TIME N ME SMUCNRE) tOSEi B LOCATED uORE iNAu]00 gSTAxi m0u ME REGUTAc �C a5 ]` 4 }
nON TVE NUUARI (1)UuxtExAxCE MEGNANC/LABORER(HOT ON FBI FRLL THE N ME STRUCTURE) PUCE oFEWCRK OF ME PERSarvS FOR WHOSE USER S DEN21I yl @ B}
SHIFT OPERAnpn/Na N.cHr SH Fr v V R {1 5
NAME 60l f—F-E ()ME L10AE OPERATOR a H cOUMPART MILE f TRUCE DID BE MERE AFER SGS:WASHES FAL MEN:
WHERE TEN OR MORE MALES AND TEN OR MORE REMAIN ARE
PANTRY SMI—FLUME:O HWRs MEANS OF EGRESS SING: f.NPLmfD TOGETHER iEPAµMo WASHNG FAC MFS i—BE
PRPJOED FEE EACH SEA. SIULL BE P—DESLNAEO.
EFIENG BASED ON TABLE UPS I—
PAPARON GISTANCE BE..NEW ASH RI W WPANLY LOAD=0,000 SF/5W SF PER OCCUPANT=IB OCCUPnuiS. ME NUMBIN OF MASH BOI HIRING OR OMERTO
MPWNCES BxALL
TINS(trvE LIB Oz Pm CCUPAxi=t00 WcuPAxiS PFlt OWa uixlBIL 20-OF PFRSOnS FRTRN N USE ME SAVE Ai D'Attt
XouUTRUGG rvjis"tGEs TZsP`FT'u-e�ILpIxGS MEREAEMaE(3)DDONSINMEflEGONBMTG,EDASHHWeE PNERME. FIRE EXTINGUISHER MARKER
acuvancY s-2
N-WGRWC ECNFWOR WALLS:O NWR(BASED Ox FVRE ME REORNTEIIENTS OF SECRON I—A REGARDING MULTIPLE MEANS OF EGRESS ARE STD Br ONE WASH BOTH,SINK OR OTHER SUBAEE PPPUPNCE
SA N TUT ME LOSS OF AxY WE MEAN a EptE55 HAS OUT REDUCED ME OADED IN OR ADDEND TO EVERY TOILET ROOM.
SEARATON-A,,) AVAN9OF USAc11Y TO LESS TOUT 50 PERCENT BE ME REQUIRED GPA DYME OBTER SE E PR
ME REST RON E
NON-BEMING IMERIOR WALLS:N/A -IMF...ACCESS IRAVFL DIiTANCE_A.QBC rAeE 1016.1) SMESS WMA LO ME CALTBIGDNGANNSPECOME BE VMIANCE
FEWEST SUMMARY SEMON IN THIS SHEET FOR AODIRONAL
FLOOR CONSMUCTON.O HOURS NT MATER,
IBC SEGIION SOS,-II'M-PUTNWIS:
ROOF CONBMTCTON.0 XOURB EQUIPMENT PU RAS IN BUIDINGE iU L NOT WE CONSIDERED AS A PORTION OF ME S!2E OF ME NEW EAND THE IS ES I-U U SAME SI2E FlRE E%DNLUISNER DARKER
BU LO xG HOGN AND qfA L Rs T MEIARWE ME IXISRNG SMUCNRE AND E OPERATOIUL OCCUPAxm[E.
FAST Or
A ANDEr
AND MEW FROM
M,BNAIRSNALT HE NET MF/N DM PID AND
xAS.1 11 EOf.1EU IS NOT BONG I E FASFD Bf ME
ALLOWABLE HE-. IADOFRS P—RI ACCESS TO AN EOUIPMENT PLATFORM SHALL NDT SRIE AS A BEENUVCIP RUCRDN. EREFORE NO CHANCE IN DIWCHARCE TO THE
iNf MEAN OF EGR35 F0.0M ME eUINING.ME NET EOUIPMFM PLATFORM AL WASTE WATER THFATMENT FM]NY WILL DCCUR.
BE FABLE SEA: WHICH IS PRESENT IS THF INTEGRAL WUNNENANCE C 13B ON ME AM CONWCYOR,
GROUP S-2,BUSTRUCRON TTEE N-E 3 STORIES/55 —FFIFIRMY,
PRGPOSEO HEIGHT: ME FACIMY IS PRIP ELY OWNED AND AN AREA WHERE WORK CANNOT RF/SONABLT
OR—1 BE PERPCRMm BY PERSONS HAWNG PHKICAL APNRNENES F.M.
SiOar/50 Y R HEARING).THEREFORE ACCESSIBILITY REGUIREMENTS ARE NOT
ALLOWPeE ARE0. ATRESSED
IBC TABLE 503:
GROUP S-2,CONSFULBON TYPE N-8:MG00 SF BASE
FRISMARN N.MORGN ACCESS ON ME
NORM ANO FASiSBMEEWQiE PERMR THEM TO BE TANNED.
PRO'..AREA
BBOT IF wAWNG SURFACE
ME NEW SMUCiURE IS PRECAST CONCRETE(WALLS AND ROOF).ON
ME WEST SIDE OF ME SECWSTRUCTED AM HOUSE IS A T1'PE LIB
RDELD R a)i_2DLWP MfTAUST E FIRE EXTINGUISHER ELEVATION
BUDAT 1—RR METAL STOMGE BUILDING IS pPPRO%WAiET 5,I00 SF
N AREAANDRBE x AND P SGIE
FROUTY ATTANED uO ME HEW PRECAST STRUCNNE ON ME
WEST SIGE OF THE RECONSMUCTER AM HOSE.ME'EMINNED
AREA OF E METAL STORAGE F DING.1 THE gECONSTRUCiED
ASHW'F IS"PRE"""13 ME
N AREA IN TABLE 503,THIS IS A CONEBNA'T1r .1-BUILDING
AREA
oPAND T.. WHEELABRATOR TECHNOLOGIES INC
US
�°vN'"" ME z u'sry EN AGE THE°iFcLE
.H."a HIGNwcER pIpNEEeNL NORTH ANDOVER, MA FACILITY
ESSISM,PLLC EPROWCDON OF
ME"I o IN PROLE DeioRl- ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
S.M.AA.REIED
°STTRICT��a BINNNEFFED CODE ANALYSIS NOTES
MGM 4XMIICR..Pas z6-p USI—TD {3 a
182 COUNIT.R"E N P'Swm m.26-Oti-16
ARLYIE.NY USEEN _
51a 23218e9 m �28-OCT-IB NONE O-M-T 1Ei-B-2:15-2 B
-----------------
10 0�
SU
4,
T J�1�
IF
11
...........
LLL
NORTH ELEVATION
01 01 01 0�
---------------
z3
4
Z3
4
4
4
111111 11111117N IT,�iiiurnl lu![fd!
Iii J11 ifI[auilfl!j I[ul[MILLI]1111 1111]
F=
C
11—1-1EI. 1S1U1IY
THEELASIR—P TEC—L ES IN
n oc.1
0
-1 H.—1EI—PlEITT
TI 11�11111 Ill -.11 TH AOD SOUTH ELEVATIUNS
H-Ill
SOUTH ELEVATION
J--'L'� �
------- -71�7'—21
T _
° <
0
<
a
2
I
xr
�c vxu[o.w. �ncsm..wzrrsa moa �Avs.,suswrs ou,.,o- <vo.�_ "' wu os�«+,ssnw.,n IT Nz...
s,n
5
TT
l T as j
{i
,e,1aw«�.,tiT w,:rstia�O ,xi 1 I
�>
INTERFACE BETWEEN
>f{y 1 PERIMETER WALL AND BASIN
PLAN LAYOUT EXISTING ASH HOUSE AND CLARIFIER SOUTH SIDE OF EXISTING CLARIFER LOOKING WEST VIEW FROM NORTHEAST SIDE OF CLARIFIER LOOKING SOUTHWEST ^°"��"'•'Pig" '""^
O O O O O
7
a I�ZFI„.1`M`i a
t,
29 — E%ISTING CLARIFIER \O\\ \��\ 1,{ } x Z`S laTt�Eii {T��ttk�+£li j1{4T ;s� 4;{jll\
VIEW OF CATWALK AND ELECTRICAL ON SOUTHEAST SIDE VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST SIDE OF CLARIFIER LOOKING NORTHWEST
T
s c STORAGE SECT ON � �
I �S y
@
H
ti
Ill ors.rs.mIll
VIEW OF CATWALK AND WELL LOOKING NORTHEAST
E%ISTINGiRUCK BAY
sa --- —
E%iSTINGC°N°E1° ER NOTE: THE BASIN CONCRETE SHALL
NOT BE DISTURBED AND LEFT IN-PLACE.
wEETaeaATOR TECHNOLOGIES nJC
- NORTH AH-1 R.IJA FACILITY
_ - ASH HOIbE REPIACEIIENT PROJECT
CURff;ER SELECTIVE DEMOUTIOIe
x�a�.�x.PPax=no ,
PLAN LAYOUT_EXISTING ASH HOUSE AND CLARIFIER
I R ' r
man Fm —�I —s nl
REV. DAiE2 OfsCRIPiION BY CHECKED PPPROVOR I
9-DEC-1 F.T.FOR PEYIEW MPE
I
N C D E F G H
O GENERAL NOTES'
is
1 A —N FOR ININ PROIECt wltt BE PREFORMED IN(1)PH42E1.
D ( ( PiVSE I:THE MNN-,sELn�ON.1 E,0EN0�HED ANE EDLOus,RUl"P.
_—_.--_—__—_—_— __—.—_—_—_—._--_—_--_----- - _ - _ O AS wILL BE l-K MRE Y TOR s MGOIFlE D FD9a._ _ _ _ _ _—--__—_—_—_ _--_—_- PWS.1 BEES ORED O6 THE IN uWN ASH IN THE SEIN un u0C:F1En�CONUExOR.
- j�-In.x.4a'-o' I�M.H.ao•-o' j m�sRurno«ucxnnc aacolrs mu OBO TD EE uaF—FR ORRINO TRIF—EN
RO LDNwx ro BE REUR R RN ON IOR RF BM F TRYING G S—AND RE BE
� BRGsw ttPE PNY LONOUR ROUTED ON INTERIOR OF BONDING sHAlt DE SCNEOUtE
C ITPE ALL CONDOR BEENCS AND EN0.05UPR—BE NENA aN ME
I� ( RECONSTRUCTED ASH j EPxaisn cEOscxueeER c. REra ro FlEcTRT-SPELInrnnoxs aN—,E-9 PON AomnoNU lNOT—K
HOUSE. !APPROXIMATE smsc. w. D EDR—OlTO FOR THIS PROJECT.
AREA 8,800 SF j
DRAWING NOTES
new I'll IS sxeu BE Ex,wOEo moM N.zuINCrloN eox'a,rwr coxrMxs
(I NEW F1Eci.HFAIpi E>]RTING CIRLURS W ARE r0 BE RCG D FROM THS POINT.REFER TO DWG.
Axr woRR�A4DONu�ulm Rwnox,
UGH.OVER DOOR E O M IH I BE B i0 EY.ISRNG ISH CONVEYOR,,TP.,R
scftUBBER EMCl05 E I cHPnc cOVOvotS,flc.VMLL BE B<OixEAs.IXISTNG cIRRUMs fi THESE ItE>a
SHll1 REMAIN IN PULE.
ucenNO n END,Lcr IwsIBE
NEW SCRUBBER EMEHED BE
PELOGIED ESI$nNG
WET SCRUBBEfl
�Mx M.N.
EXISTING METAL
STORAGE STRUCTURE GM--H I I F. xErsnxc'
O EMG.UGHtING FlXNRE an t F1' '
CEMER COLUMN IF COWMN
S IN.Rn
I' .W-O' LEGEND
�r MH
—— — — — — — ---- — R -- S.2 ED
_ 0 0 aR 1 ,
------- — — — — — — — —
RN 8'-0'
RH 21 0 mmm atcnV v
--- --------- ----------------------------a-------------, •cam`---J mroM4RRON
--- --------------- -- - -------�-----------�-------------�----------- " - 3. � @ow ui6vac w uv 1-51
LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE
M.x. o' M.H.lo- ( M.N.2s'-D•-J M.x.is'-o'
FINTURE LAMPS ( `
r -u--- — zmu ¢M,H.40'-0� j M H.d0'-0 M.H.90'-0 M.N.40'-OH 0 «1 � �M.X.2.1'-0"�
(r a�'%c ki,mi wRN°To�[u ry xvxzvx x ROLL-UP DOOR -- ---"--S.4
102 / M.H.&-0'
j MH.10'-O'J
_ ...x.. HOLD
NEVjwmv
—0-
z
LIGHTING PLAN RECONSTRUCTED ASH HOUSE
ELAB
suown1VIL11 -111 WH NORTH
ANS TECHNOLOGIES INC
,No E BE R
E ixE FxcWs nc NORTH ANSWER, MA FACILITY
�I TIRE S.PLLG REPROD R IN OF
E�oluwlrvcN w otE OR IN auY ASH HOUSE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
r ANo uNauTHORIZEo
SF.,lcxE 1 SUBIEtr ETED ELECTRICAL LIGHTING PLAN
-- II xowN ARE srnlcnr PRowBFrcD
r � I HIGHLANDER ®Ptm a gml6 �
IGHU FNGINEEAIHG
���" EtmLR.PLLG
� `" 182 CWNtt ROUTE M GESF 09-OEL-I6
I M 1is t6
nr°9i lghl°ntler¢ng.t°m
t 5182J2.1988 GES 09-pEc-16 I/e'=1'-0'D-M-i 16-16-2-E-2 A
A
0- CE I cl) 0
C-
0, ---- -- - ---- - - - ---
-------------------------------
C,I ............ ------
lik �I
-T NOT-
X PROPOSED PIPE SUPPORT LOCATION.
N=1
-------------------------
L----------
ELEVATION VIEW OF COVER PLATE IN EAST WALL OF ASH
HOUSE �OR 30" DUCT TO PASS THROUGH
SRAT��TECH�LQGCS INC
11BY OF SCRj3BER RELO-1-
MASSACHUSETTS REFUSETECH, INC. EMISSIONS CONTROL PROJECT
NORTH ANDOVER, MA
Project Description
January 30, 1998
INDEX
1. Project Summary
11. Proposed Project Schedule
111. Description of Existing Facility
A. Site Description
B. Existing Facility Description
IV, Description of Proposed Project
A Decommissioning of the ESPs
B. Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction System
C. Spray Dryer Absorber& Lime Slurry Preparation System
D. Fabric Filter
E. Powdered Activated Carbon Injection System
F. Natural Gas Fired Auxiliary Burners
G. Continuous Emissions Monitoring System Modifications
H. Ash Handling and Fugitivc Emissions Controls
I. Water Supply System
J. Expanded Stormwater and Contact Water Collection
K. Stormwater Discharge System
L. Enclosures and Windwalls
M. Buildings and Building Modifications
A
'J
one-andvd-j 96458001 000.0imepa,mpk-426a.doc-96�ccgan 1
Project Summary
The proposed project is the addition of air emissions control equipment and the necessary
appurtenant structures at an existing waste-to-energy facility in North Andover, Massachusetts.
Massachusetts REFUSETECH, Inc. (MRI)operates the waste-to-energy facility under contract to
the 23 municipalities known as the North East Solid Waste Committee (NESWC). The facility
currently consists of two boilers equipped with electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) and dry sorbent
injection systems. The additional air emissions control equipment is being installed to comply
with federal requirements adopted pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
The emissions control project will be a multi-year effort involving permitting, equipment
purchase and construction. The construction will be phased to minimize disruption of services
for the NESWC communities. The design and permitting processes are being initiated now to
ensure project completion by the federally mandated compliance deadline of December 19, 2000.
The 40 CFR 60 Subpart Cb Emission Guidelines established by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency(EPA) in response to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require existing
municipal waste combustion facilities, such as the MRI Facility, to install additional air
emissions control systems. In response to these requirements, MRI will be replacing the existing
ESPs and dry sorbent injection systems with new air emissions control equipment consisting of
spray dryer absorbers (SDAs), fabric filters (FFs), a selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR)
system, a powdered activated carbon injection system (PACIS) and natural gas-fired auxiliary
burners. Additional continuous emission monitors (CEMs) will be added and the project will
include measures to reduce the potential for fugitive emissions.
Each of the proposed systems currently operates successfully at similar facilities. Acid gases
(hydrogen chloride, sulfur dioxide), particulate matter, metals (lead, cadmium, mercury), and
organics(dioxins/furans) will be controlled by the SDAs and FFs. Oxides of nitrogen(NOS) will
be reduced using the SNCR system. The powdered activated carbon injection system will
provide enhanced control of mercury and dioxin/furans. The natural gas-fired auxiliary burners
will be used to preheat the boilers during start-up, and to maintain furnace temperatures when the
boilers are being shut down. This will reduce potential emissions of carbon monoxide (CO)
during periods of start-up and shutdown.
The project is being implemented to reduce air emissions from the existing combustion process
and potential fugitive emissions from the ash handling activities. The emission rates for acid
F gases, particulate matter, metals and organics will be reduced as a result of the project. Except
for the addition of the auxiliary gas burners, there are no modifications which would affect the
combustion parameters or combustion process of the existing facility. There will be no changes
(increases or decreases) to the facility's capacity or throughput. The proposed changes will not
extend the life of the facility. The sole purpose of the project is to reduce potential air emissions
from the facility.
The changes to the ash handling and storage systems are designed to minimize the potential for
fugitive ash emissions. The changes to the ash handling system will utilize the existing ash
handling equipment and building as much as possible. The existing ash storage shed (three
ene-andvd-jA86438001 009',Olmcpa"mpk426n doc-96:cegan I
sided) will be extended and enclosed to create a storage building of sufficient size to allow for
drive through truck access. All ash trucks will be loaded within the building. A dust collection
system will be installed in this building and a new enclosed conveyor gallery will be constructed
from the plant to the ash/metals storage building.
Bottom ash will be handled in the same way it is currently handled. Oversized materials will
continue to be separated by the grizzly/scapler and will be stored in a new building prior to
shipment offsite for recycling.
Flyash and scrubber residue collected by the new air emissions control equipment (the SDA/FF)
will be directed by enclosed conveyors to the ash conditioning building. The ash conditioning
building will be refurbished and the conditioning system will be modified slightly to
accommodate the new conveyors and upgraded conditioners. Bottom ash will be combined with
flyash/scrubber residue and will be conveyed in enclosed conveyors to a storage bay in the
ash/metals storage building. The storage bay will be sufficiently sized for ash storage and active
truck loading.
The stormwater management system will be also modified to allow for collection, storage, and
reuse of washdown water and stormwater collected from the new SDA, lime preparation and
fabric filter areas. The water will be collected in a system of u-drains and sumps, stored in a new
contact water storage tank and used primarily as slurry dilution water in the SDAs. The new
water reuse system will include associated pumps and piping.
Several other auxiliary upgrades are required to support the operation of the new emissions
control equipment. These include new air compressors for the SDAs, a urea storage tank- for the
SNCR system, reagent storage silos for the SDAs and PACIS system, additional controls and
instrumentation,and modifications or replacement of the existing induced draft fans.
11. Proposed Project Schedule
The CAAA mandated the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop
emission guidelines for existing municipal waste combustors. In response to this requirement,
the EPA promulgated 40 CFR 60 Subpart Cb Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times far
Municipal Wa�jg--Combustors That are Constructed on or Before DecembeLJ9 995. The
Commonwealth of Massachusetts is required to develop a State Plan/regulations which
implement the Emissions Guidelines and submit the plan/regulations to the EPA for approval.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, acting through the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP), has announced its intent to adopt new regulations (3 10 CMR
7.08(2)) which will implement the Subpart Cb requirements in Massachusetts. These
implementing regulations will form the basis for the State Plan. In October 1997, the DEP
informally circulated proposed draft regulations which were at least as stringent as the Subpart
Cb requirements. Under the CAAA, if the state has not adopted a plan at least as stringent as the
federal requirements by December 19, 1997, EPA is required to impose a Federal
Implementation Plan on the state to ensure compliance ,vith the federal requirements. EPA
issued a draft Federal Plan on January 23, 1998. Both the draft Federal Plan and the draft
proposed state regulations require compliance by no later than December 19,2000.
cne-and%,r I-jA8645800 1.000',0 1 mcpa�.Mpk426a.doc-96,cegan-1 3
The project including design, permitting procurement and construction, has been scheduled to
achieve compliance with the December 19, 2000 deadline. Initial permitting discussions have
been held, design work has commenced and procurement will begin as soon as permitting is
completed. Construction will be staged to minimize disruption of services to the NESWC
communities. A project schedule is included as Figure 1.
A Notice to Proceed will be issued to a design engineering company when the required permits
and approvals have been obtained. The detailed engineering and equipment procurement phase
of the project will last approximately twelve months. Field construction forces will be mobilized
as soon as possible after the Notice to Proceed is issued.' Initial construction activities will
involve site preparation, demolition and the relocation of existing structures that will conflict
with the new construction. In order to maximize system availability for the NESWC
communities the boiler units will be taken off-line and retrofitted sequentially. New equipment
and systems will be installed with the facility in full operation, and the individual units will be
shut down only while the actual system tie-ins are occurring. The need to complete the
construction while the facility is operating complicates the site construction activities and
extends the construction schedule, when compared to new construction at"green-field"sites.
Planning and scheduling efforts will be made to minimize disruptions to the operations of the
facility. Critical system tie-ins will be identified early. When possible, these tie-ins will be
accomplished during regularly scheduled maintenance outages. It is estimated that each unit will
be off-line for approximately four weeks to allow for the required modifications and system tie-
ins.
Following the demolition and relocation activities, construction will start with the Unit #2 train
and the common plant systems on the north side of the site. This work will entail contact water
storage tank erection, ash handling system modifications, lime preparation system installation,
electrical modifications, SNCR and PACIS component installations and Unit #2 SDA/FF
erection. The Unit #1 train construction will be staggered to follow the various erection phases
of Unit #2 (e.g. foundations, structural steel erection, equipment installation etc.). The natural
gas-fired boilers will be installed as early in the construction schedule as practicable, based on
the outage schedules for each unit.
It is anticipated that it will take approximately 24 months to complete the construction activities.
The facility will be subjected to a series of preliminary operational and environmental
compliance tests over a period of approximately six months, following completion of
construction. The new air emissions control equipment must be in operation by December 19,
2000.
III. Description of Existing Faeility
A. Site Description
The facility is located on approximately 14.6 acres of land in North Andover, Massachusetts, in
an 1-2 industrially zoned area with access from Rt. 125 via Holt Road. Entrance to the site is
3
from 285 Holt Road, formerly referred to as Clark Street. Figure 3 - Site Location, is a copy of a
ene-andvrt-j.\86458001.000\Otmcpa\mpk426a.doe-96tccgan 1 4
portion of the USGS topographic quadrangle showing the location of the site relative to its
immediate surroundings. Site buildings, structures, and property boundaries are depicted on
Figure 7 - Existing Site Plan.
The primary feature of the facility site is the main boiler building (main building), a large fully
enclosed building which houses the municipal waste receiving area (tipping floor), refuse pit,
boilers, turbine generator, ash handling, and other ancillary functions. Outdoor storage bunkers
for recovered bulk materials and ferrous metals are located north of the main building. Adjacent
to these bunkers is a roofed, three-sided building which is used for temporary storage of
combined ash, A separate administration building is situated southwest of the main building.
An employee, visitor and plant vehicle parking area is located near the receiving area and
administration building. Ancillary equipment including a switchyard, cooling tower, multimedia
filter house, fire pumps storage tanks, warehouse and chlorine buildings are located east of the
main building.
The overall dimensions of the main building are roughly 300' x 300'. Specific dimensional
variations are shown on Figure 7. The tallest portion of the building is in the boiler area, which
is approximately 123 feet above grade. The tallest facility structure is the stack which is
approximately 230 feet tall. The existing electrostatic precipitators, ductwork and associated
induced draft fans are located between the main building and stack.
The facility is surrounded by a perimeter access road. The area inside the road is primarily paved
or covered with crushed stone. The remaining portions of the site within the perimeter road are
landscaped. Outside of the perimeter road and paved surfaces to the north and east sides of the
site, are unrnowed grass, bushes, trees and low lying areas.
Approximately 9 acres (530/4) of the site is currently developed with buildings, structures and/or
paving. Existing buildings and structures account for 2 1%of the site coverage. Nearly all of the
site was previously disturbed or filled during original construction. No previously undisturbed
areas will be disturbed as part of the proposed project.
B. Existing Facility Design
The facility includes two dedicated municipal waste combustor process trains each permitted to
process up to 33.48 tons per hour of municipal solid waste (MSW). MSW is delivered to the
refuse storage pit within the tipping floor area, where it is transferred by grapple/crane to the
furnace feed hoppers of each train. In the furnaces the refuse is fed down multi-zone,
reciprocating grates where it is combusted at temperatures approaching 2500 degrees Fahrenheit.
The hot gases produced by the combustion process pass through a waterwall furnace and
convection surfaces capable of producing an average 173,000 pounds per hour of steam at 612
psig/750°F. The steam is piped to a steam turbine-generator to produce electrical power for
distribution to the local electrical grid. The two trains combined can produce a nominal 40
megawatts of electrical power.
L-3
Presently particulate removal is achieved from each process train using a dedicated electrostatic
precipitator(ESP). Flue gases exit the facility via the 230 foot tall dual flue stack.
I q
cne-andvrl-j;',,86458001.00&1,01 mcpa',mpk426a.dac-Wccgan:1 5
Flyash collected from the ESPs and from the boiler convection passes and bottom ash are fed to
an ash conditioning area where the ash is conditioned prior to being conveyed outside the
building to the temporary storage areas. Bottom ash is wet and less-susceptible to dusting.
Flyash is dry and,therefore, it is wetted prior to being combined with the bottom ash. In addition
to wetting with water, the ash is also conditioned using a proprietary ash stabilization process
which reduces potential leachability. Metals are recovered from the bottom ash before the ash
streams are combined and directed to the ash storage building. In the ash storage area trucks are
loaded on a single shift basis, three to five days per week. Ash is transported from the MRI
facility to the permitted disposal facility, in covered, leak resistant trucks.
Water supply at the facility consists of three external sources: municipal water from the Town of
North Andover, Greater Lawrence Sanitary District (GLSD) secondary treated effluent, and
collected stormwater. Municipal water is currently used primarily for sanitary purposes, boiler
make-up and washdown purposes. GLSD treated effluent is typically filtered and used primarily
as makeup to the cooling tower for the condensing of steam used in the power generation
process. GLSD treated effluent is also utilized as washdown water, when possible. Collected
stormwater is either recycled in facility processes,or neutralized and discharged to the GLSD.
The typical total daily demand from the municipal water system currently averages 37,500
gallons per day (gpd). Currently the facility's typical demand for GLSD treated effluent
averages 588,000 gpd. After filtration, the treated effluent is directed to the cooling tower basin
or used for other process purposes. The GLSD treated effluent is conveyed to the MRI facility
via a dedicated private pipeline.
Storrnwater falling onto the ash handling areas on the north and northeast sides of the site is
collected and recycled within the facility to offset demands from GLSD and the municipal water
supply. Based on the areas and average rainfall data, this source typically contributes an average
of 8,600 gpd to the facility's overall water inventory.
Reuse of internal process waters to minimize overall demand is a key component of the MRI
facility design. Collected process wastewaters consist primarily of cooling tower and boiler
blowdown, washwaters, and demineralization wastewater. These process wastewater streams
and other contact water streams, including stormwater collected from the ash handling areas, is
directed to an existing 125,000 gallon clarifier for reuse in the facility. The water reclamation
system reduces water demand from outside sources.
The process water that is not reused in the facility is discharged to the GLSD pursuant to an
existing permit. MRI currently discharges an average of approximately 51,000 gpd of process
water to GLSD. Sanitary wastewater is segregated from process waters and is discharged
separately to the GLSD return line for treatment.
Clean stormwater from roof drains and non-contact stormwater is discharged in accordance with
the facility's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP identifies potential
sources at the facility that may affect the quality of stormwater discharges and describes the Best
Management Practices implemented on-site to minimize the potential contamination of the
facility's stormwater discharges.
cne-andvri-j.'�86458001,000'�.oimcpa,.mpk426adoc-96,,ccgan 1 6
The areas for which stormwater is managed under the MRI SWPPP include the main building,
warehouse, chlorine building, ash storage building, administration building, parking lot,
driveways, other paved areas, and several outside structures. These areas are divided into four
drainage areas. Three of these have designated stormwater outfalls; the fourth drainage area, on
the northeast side of the site, is tied into the existing plant water reclamation system. This
reclamation system collects and stores contact waters prior to reuse or discharge to GLSD.
IV. Description of Proposed Project
The primary components of the proposed air emissions control project include the
decommissioning and potential demolition of the existing ESPs and associated duct-work, and the
installation of the following new components:
a a selective non-catalytic reduction(SNCR)system to control the emission of NO,
a spray dryer absorber (SDA) on each of the two process trains and a lime slurry
preparation system to control acid gases
a fabric filter (FF) on each of the two process trains for control of particulate, metals
and organics (dioxins/furans)
a powdered activated carbon injection system (PACIS) to enhance control of mercury
and organics
natural gas fired auxiliary burners for start-up and shutdown
continuous emissions monitoring system(GEMS) modifications
a modified ash handling and conditioning system, and fugitive emissions controls
a water collection system to allow for the collection, storage, and reuse of any water,
including stormwater,collected from under the new SDA, lime preparation area, fabric
filter and ash handling areas
screen walls and enclosures of the areas which contain new emissions control
equipment and ash and metals handling equipment.
Several other pieces of ancillary equipment are included in the proposed project to support
the operation of the major components. These include new air compressors for supplying
the atomizing air for the lime slurry spray nozzles, a new 100,000 to 200,000 gallon tank to
store contact water for use in the scrubbers and ash conditioning systems, a new urea tank-
for the SNCR system, a carbon storage silo, and various controls and instrumentation for
proper operation of the equipment including additional continuous emissions monitor
(CEM) analyzers. Additionally, because of the higher system resistance requirements of
the proposed spray dryer absorber and fabric filter, the existing induced draft(ID) fans will
be replaced or modified to handle the post-retrofit flue gas conditions. Appropriate noise
enc-andvri j:*,.86458001,000\01 mcpa,mpk-426a.dcc-96%,CeEan,1 7
controls will be installed, as necessary, to meet applicable MADEP noise standards.
Electrical system modifications(including transformer and motor control additions) will be
provided as necessary to support the new equipment.
The location of each major piece of proposed equipment is depicted on Figure 5 - Air
Pollution Control System Retrofit General Arrangement Plan and Figure 6 - Air Pollution
Control System Retrofit General Arrangement Elevation A discussion of each of the
proposed components/modifications is provided below.
A. Decommissioning of the ESPs
The project may include demolition of the existing ESPs and associated ductwork. The
equipment and ductwork would be cleaned prior to demolition, and following
demolition it would either be recycled as scrap metal or disposed of in a solid waste
facility permitted to accept such wastes. The project could generate up to
approximately 500 tons of construction and demolition debris.
B. Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction Svstcm
Emissions of NOX will be controlled using SNCR, which will reduce NO, emissions to
no greater than 205 ppmdv at 7% 02, based on a 24 hour block average. The SNCR
process involves the injection of an aqueous solution containing a urea based reagent
into the furnaces. Injection nozzles will be strategically located at various levels in the
opposing walls of each furnace to inject the reagent into the proper temperature zones
(1600 to 20000F). When the reagent is injected into the furnace, the urea quickly
decomposes to ammonia, which reacts with the NOx present to form molecular nitrogen
and water. Inherently, trace amounts of the ammonia remain unreacted and exit the
system. This is commonly referred to as ammonia slip and is generally controlled to
less than 50 ppmdv at 7% 02 . The SNCR system proposed for the MRI facility has
been demonstrated to be highly successful at numerous waste-to-energy facilities
throughout the world, including several Wheelabrator facilities.
C. Spray Dryer Absorber&Lime Slurry Prel2aratiQn System
Acid gases will be controlled using a down flow spray dryer absorber with lime slurry
injection for each emissions control train. It is anticipated that the spray dryer absorber
vessel will be approximately 28 feet in diameter and approximately 80 feet in overall
height. Each spray dryer vessel will be fabricated from carbon steel plate and will
include a conical heat-traced hopper, live bottom with double slide gate valves and drag
conveyor for ash removal. Lime slurry will be injected using three two-fluid nozzle
assemblies located around the perimeter of the inlet. Atomization of the lime slurry will
be accomplished using compressed air.
It is anticipated that the lime slurry preparation system will include two lime storage
silos for storage of pebble lime (CaO). Two redundant lime slakers will be installed.
Each will be capable of slaking all the lime required for both spray dryer absorbers.
ene-andvrl.j:N8645800[,OOONOlmcpa\mpk426a.doc-96\ccgan 1 8
Each slaker will discharge across a vibrating grit screen to an agitated lime Slurry tank.
The system includes four lime slurry pumps., two dilution water pumps and a dilution
water storage tank. The silos will include a single roof-mounted bin vent filter for
control of dust which could be emitted during silo loading,
While the SDAs will be installed primarily to control acid gases they also enhance
removal of other contaminants, including metals and organics. The performance of a
FF is enhanced when it is used in conjunction with an SDA because finer particals tend
to agglomerate into larger particles in the SDA, which increases their collection in the
FF. In addition, metals (such as mercury) and organics, which may be present in the
flue gas as vapors, condense when the gases cool in the SDA and are collected in the
FF.
D. Fabric Filter
Each emission control train will include an eight compartment pulse jet fabric filter
collector. The fabric filters will serve to collect particulate matter and reaction products
in the flue gas leaving the spray dryer absorber. Cleaning of the bags will be
accomplished by bursts of compressed air. It is anticipated that each compartment will
contain approximately 240 bags, each 5" diameter and 275" in length. The projected
gross air-to-cloth ratio will be 3.31 with a net air-to-cloth ratio of 3.78 during
maintenance (one module off-line maintenance). Hoppers will include double dump
valves and screw conveyors for ash removal.
E. Powdered Activated Carbon Injection System
The emission control project will include a powdered activated carbon injection system
to enhance control of mercury and organics (dioxin/furans). The powdered activated
carbon will be delivered pneumatically to the economizer outlet duct upstream of the
spray dryer absorbers. It is anticipated that the activated carbon will be stored in a
single silo sized to serve both emissions control trains. The silo will include a vent filter
for dust control as well as control panel, blowers feeders.leductors and piping located in
the enclosed skirt below the silo.
F. Natural Gas Fired Auxiliary Burners
Each boiler will be furnished with two (40 MMBtu/hr each) natural gas-fired burners.
These burners will be designed to preheat the furnace prior to the introduction of solid
wastes during start-up and to ensure efficient combustion during transient periods,
including shutdown. The existing gas supply piping and metering equipment will be
extended and upgraded to provide gas for the burners. The furnace waterwalls will be
J
modified to accommodate the new burners.
ene-and�rl-j:,,86458001.000\Olmcpn�.mpk-426ELdoc-96\cepan 1
G. Continuous Emissions Monitorine Svstem Modifications
There is an existing continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) at the facility, two
independent systems, one per unit train. The CEMS is the extractive type and includes
instruments to monitor the following parameters.
ESP Outlet- Nitrogen Oxides- (NO,)
Carbon Monoxide- (CO)
J
Sulfur Dioxide-(SO2)
Carbon Dioxide- (CO2,diluent)
Opacity(in-situ)
The CEMS system will be upgraded and expanded to include an individual inlet CEMS
system for each flue gas stream. It is anticipated that the inlet CEMS will consist of
new sampling probes with sample conditioning units for each sample point and new
insulated umbilical sample lines to carry the samples to the existing CEMS enclosure.
The outlet CEMS will consist of two upgraded sampling probes and sample
conditioning units for each sample point and new insulated umbilical sample lines to
carry the samples to the existing CEMS enclosure. It is anticipated the existing SO,,
CO and NO', analyzers will be reused on the fabric filter outlet duct. The existing Nox
analyzers may be upgraded with low temperature catalytic converters. The opacity
n.
monitors may need to be replaced to meet pending revised 40 CFR 60 Appendix B
Performance Specification (PS 1) requirements, It is anticipated that the new analyzers
will consist of.
SDA Inlet- Oxygen-(02)
Sulfur Dioxide-(SO2)
n
FF Outlet- Oxygen- (02)
Each boiler train will have its own dedicated CEMS system that will meet the
applicable state and federal regulatory requirements.
Test ports, at the inlet to the SDA will be located in the duct work upstream of the SDA.
A test port access platform with stairway will be provided at the FF outlet.
A new data acquisition system will be installed, complete with software to meet all
Subpart Cb/Eb data acquisition and reporting requirements. It will have the capabilities
necessary to produce the periodic reports to be submitted to the regulatory agencies.
11. Ash B an d I i n cLgn_d F u tive jiissio-sCojur gt -FR- on ns
L3
In order to manage the ash residue from the new equipment, a modified ash handling
system is proposed as part of the emission control project. Drag and screw conveyors
will transport the ash from the spray dyer absorbers and fabric filter hoppers to a
modified ash conditioning system. Prior to the proposed project it is anticipated that
ene-andw]+%8645800 1.000\01 mepdumpk426a.doc-961ccgim 1 10
one of the existing two ash conditioners (screw-type mixers) will be removed and
replaced with a new pugmill type conditioner to improve the performance of the system.
An additional, second pugmill type conditioner will replace the remaining conditioner
during project construction. The existing superheater and economizer ash handling
chutes will also be replaced with new chutes and screw conveyors to effectively direct
this ash to the flyash collection conveyor and conditioners. A new belt conveyor will be
utilized to direct combined bottom ash and flyash from the ash conditioning area to the
modified Ash/Metals Storage Building. A belt conveyor will also be used to send the
ferrous metal collected by the magnetic separator out to the Ash/Metals Storage
Building. These conveyors will be housed within an enclosed conveyor gallery.
The proposed project will utilize several measures to reduce and minimize the potential
for fugitive dust emissions. The primary step will be that all ash handling, storage and
loadout will be done within enclosed buildings. Much of this is currently done outdoors
and with partially covered conveyors. All new conveyors will be totally enclosed,
either within their own housings or located indoors.
Additionally, areas that may be susceptible to ash, powdered carbon or lime spillage
will have concrete curbs and windwall enclosures.
The concrete slabs will have u-drains and collection sumps for washdown water.
The enclosed Ash/Metals Storage Building will be provided with ventilation to reduce
A
indoor dusting from ash and metals handling operations. A dust collection scrubber will
be provided on the ventilation system discharge of the AshIMetals Storage Building and
conveyor gallery to control potential dust emissions from the building.
1. Water Supply System
Sources of water at the MRI facility will remain essentially unchanged to meet post-
retrofit conditions.
Construction water supply needs are anticipated to be minimal and will be supplied by
the municipal and the existing facility's water recycle systems. Water uses during
construction will consist of dust suppression, hydrostatic testing, equipment flushing,
and washdown waters. Other than dust suppression, all contact waters will be collected
and reused at the facility or hauled off-site by a licensed contractor for recycle or
disposal.
No increase in facility capacity or throughput is proposed as a result of the emissions
control project. Therefore, no alteration in the power generation cycle will occur and
associated cooling water requirements will remain essentially unchanged. Water
requirements associated with most other existing aspects of facility operation will
i U remain unchanged as well.
enc-andw 1 j)86458001.000'01mepa'npk426a-doc-96',ceganA
It
IJ
There will, however, be additional water requirements associated with the new
emissions control system. The majority of the additional demand is associated with the
SDAs, which require water for lime slaking and dilution purposes. The dust collection
scrubber on the Ash/Metals Storage Building will also required limited additional water
(approximately 2-4 gpm). The additional water demand for the emissions control
equipment will be fulfilled in the following order of preference, first, from the expanded
stormwater and contact water collection systems, second from GLSD secondary treated
effluent and third from the municipal water system.
The most significant increased demand for water is related to dilution water, which is
used for secondary slaking and thinning the lime slurry mixture. Approximately 87,700
gpd will be required for dilution water. Much of the dilution water will be supplied
through the use of collected and recycled stormwater and contact water. The facility
currently discharges over 50,000 gallons per day of contact water to the GLSD.
Following the proposed project, approximately 90% of that water will be recycled as
dilution water. The recycled contact water supply will be supplemented with increase
treated effluent from GLSD to satisfy the requirements of the emissions control project.
The MR] facility currently uses approximately 588,000 gpd of treated effluent from
GLSD. The demand for treated effluent will increase to approximately 638,500 gpd as
a result of the project. The increased demand for treated effluent from GLSD is
insignificant when compared to the 25 to 30 million gpd of treated effluent that the
GLSD currently discharges to the Merrimack River.
While the vast majority of the increased project water supply needs can be met with the
increased use of recycled contact water and treated effluent from the GLSD, there are
some new water supply needs that require a higher quality water than will be generally
achievable by treating and recycling the GLSD and facility contact waters. The largest
of these uses is primary slaking water.
The facility currently uses an average of approximately 37,500 gpd of potable water
from the Town of North Andover public water system. Primary lime slaking could
utilize up to 8,800 gpd of municipal water. To help offset the increased demand for
potable water, the water source for the existing ash conditioners and washdown water
will be switched to utilize recycled contact water. With these changes, the increased
municipal water demand is expect to be only a 2.1% increase or 800 gpd over current
usage rates. Once the SDA systems are in operations, trial runs will be made utilizing
GLSD water for primary slaking. If deemed successful, this could reduce the demand
for potable water to levels below the current usage rates.
J. Exoanded Ston-nwater and Contact Wate
r-CaUCcJ:tDn
The existing stormwater and contact water collection system will be expanded to collect
contact stormwater from around the new SDAs, lime preparation area, fabric filters and
ash handling areas, New SDA/FF area sumps will be added to supplement the existing
boiler area material recovery sump (MR Sump). The new sumps will collect contact
enc-andvri-jA86438001.000'.0 1 mepa�.mpk426a doc-96',cegaw 1 12
'T
stormwater, inadvertent spillage and washdown water from the SDA/FF areas. Two
redundant sump pumps will be provided. These pumps will be capable of directing
collected water to the MR sump or directly to the new contact water storage tank.
Contact water collected in the new and existing sumps will be stored in the new contact
water storage tank- prior to use. Two new contact water pumps will also be provided.
These pumps will be the primary makeup source to the SDA dilution water storage tank,
ash conditioners, dust collection ventilation scrubber(s) and ram de-ashers.
K. StQrM-vvater Discharge System
Appropriate stormwater and erosion control management techniques will be utilized
during construction of the proposed project. Disturbed areas, including construction
staging and laydown areas, will be re-graded to approximate the existing overland
runoff drainage patterns. The project will result in one minor change to the design of
the current stormwater discharge system. The surface area subject to runoff(near Unit
91) will be reduced by approximately 2,000 sq. ft. due to the construction of Unit #1
fabric filter. Stormwater runoff from the 2000 sq. ft. area will be collected in the
expanded stormwater and contact water collection system, therefore, the runoff to the
existing stormwater catch basin will be reduced.
Underground drain lines presently connected to the boiler building roof drains will be
modified to direct the roof run-off directly to the existing stormwater catch basin. This
piping will be designed and installed in conjunction with Unit I SDA/FF foundations.
L. Enclosure,s and Windwalls
Enclosures or windwalls will be designed to surround the base of the new emissions
control equipment components to minimize the potential for fugitive dust emissions and
to provide weather protection for the components. The areas beneath the SDAs, FFs
and PACIS silo will be enclosed. The enclosures will extend from grade up to the
hopper level enclosing the base of the new emissions control structures. The walls will
extend to a height of approximately 20 feet, and will be constructed of a material similar
to the existing siding,with a color compatible with that of the existing facility facade.
M.Buildings and Buildings Modifications
A number of new buildings will be added as part of the project. Some existing
buildings will also be renovated and/or expanded. The new buildings will include:
Recovered Materials Building - This new enclosure will be added onto the north
side of the boiler building where oversize material is separated out of the bottom ash
stream by the grizzly/scalper. The building will be approximately 20' x 40' and will
enclose the concrete pad and pushwalls at the scalper discharge.
j,
enc-andvrI-j',,86458001.000'*I mcpd^npk426a doc-Wcegan:1
'Ji
& Comi2ressor/MCC Buildi A new building, approximately 20' x 35', will be
added to house the atomizing air compressors and the electrical motor control
centers (MCC's) associated with the proposed emissions control equipment.
@ Lime Preparation Building - The area at the base of the lime silos will be enclosed
with a building approximately 36' x 30'. This area will house the pumps, sumps and
other components associated with the SDA slurry system.
Conveyor G_aEgj:y - The inclined belt conveyors for ferrous metals and combined
ash will be totally enclosed in this building, which will connect the ash conditioning
area to the Ash/Metals Storage Building. It will be approximately 25'x 70'.
Existing buildings that will be modified as part of the proposed Project include:
Ash/Metals Storage Building - To the extent possible, the existing three-sided ash
storage enclosure,the foundations, pushwalls and metals bunkers will be utilized for
the expanded, totally enclosed ash and metals storage and loadout area. This
building will have three storage areas for bulk metals, ferrous metals and combined
ash. A truck aisle for the indoor loading of ash and metals will be incorporated
along the south side of the structure. The modified building will be approximately
175' x 100' overall.
Ash Conditioning Building -This existing building will be refurbished and modified
as necessary to accommodate the new conveyor system layouts. An evaluation of
the condition of the existing siding and structural steel will be done; it is anticipated
that a limited amount of reconditioning or replacement will be done. The overall
area of the building will not change significantly.
rt
ene-andw]-j�86458001,000101 mepai,rnpk426a.dDc-96.ceg3n 1 14
ATTACHMENT 2
WETLAND RESOURCE AREA
DELINEATION REPORT
RECEIVED
y� DEC 19 1997
NtoneHill
4. Environmental, Inc. CON MASSACHUS 600 statc strcct,su'tc 2
B Portsmouth,NH 03801
tc1543-433-1935
fix 603433.194Z
� J
December 18, 1997 StoneHill Project No. 97104
Mr. James Connolly
EMCON
3 Riverside Drive
Andover,MA 01810
Dear Mr. Connolly:
At your request, on October 30, and November 4, 1997, a representative of StoneHiIl Environmental,
Inc. (StoneHill)visited the Massachusetts REFUSETECH INC., facility located in North Andover,MA
to delineate the Massachusetts and Town of North Andover jurisdictional wetland resource areas on the
property(Site). During the site visits, one series of wetland boundary flags was placed in the field. Due
to the presence of several alternating wetland resources types along the same wetland boundary one
wetland flag line was placed on the Site which delineates the upper extent of Bordering Vegetated
Wetland (BVW), as defined by section 310 CMR 10.55 Massachusetts Wetland Protection Regulations
(MWPR),or Bank as defined by 310 CMR 10.54 of the MWPR, or wetlands as defined by the North
_ Andover Wetlands Protection By-Law and Wetlands Regulations. The wetland flag Iine represents the
upper most limit of wetland resources found on the site.
The wetland delineation placed in the field is demarcated by pink survey flagging, numbered Al
through flag A36. The BVW and Bank areas delineated are associated with a small unnamed stream
which is shown as intermittent on the 1987 Lawrence Massachusetts - New Hampshire U.S.G.S.
Topographic Quadrangle. According to the Massachusetts Rivers Protection Act Regulations(310 CMR
10.58(2)(a)(1)(a)(1)), a stream shown as intermittent on the current U.S.G.S. quadrangle is presumed
intermittent unless conclusive evidence is provided otherwise and is not subject to regulation pursuant
to the Rivers Protection Act Regulations. Since this is the case at the Site, in lieu of conclusive
contradictory evidence, the Rivers Protection Act Regulations are not applicable with respect to the
3 current conditions at the Site.
- Site Description
The Site is approximately 62 percent developed. The facility buildings and associated parking and
roadway areas primarily occupy the western and central portions of the property. The remaining
undeveloped portion of the Site is generally divided between the maintained side slope areas adjacent
to the existing pavement edges,and the eastern portion of the Site which is a mixed wooded upland and
Hydrogeologists°Soil Scientists°Environmental Specialists
Stone ill Environmental, Inc.
f wooded wetland swamp associated with the intermittent stream shown on the U.S.G.S. Topographic
Quadrangle.
Wetland Delineation
The basis for the BVW delineation on the Site was the predominance of wetland indicator species in
association with wetland hydrology features including evidence of seasonal saturation or flow,
groundwater breakout, and the presence of hydric soils. Where portions of the delineation represent
Bank, the flag line was placed at the first observable break in slope along the intermittent stream. There
are also three small man made ditches associated with storm drain outlets on the eastern portion of the
Site which terminate at the intermittent stream. The upper portions of these channels are concrete lined
while the lower portions are generally scoured gravel. Flow was not observed in any of these channels
during the site visits. The lower portions of the two southernmost channels have been incorporated into
the wetland delineation due to the presence of areas of wetland vegetation along with hydric soils.The
northernmost channel was not delineated due to the lack of hydric soils and the lack of a predominance
of wetland vegetation within the channel.
DEP Bordering Vegetated Wetland Field Data Forms verifying the placement of the wetland boundary
on the Site have been prepared and are attached to this report. One transect was placed along the A flag
line,approximately at flag A 17,at a location representative of the transition between the wooded upland
'A and wooded wetland communities on a whole. The characteristics of the soils, vegetation, and
hydrologic conditions were noted at each respective data plot location. A detailed description of the
vegetation and soil conditions immediately inside and outside of the wetland boundary can be found on
the Field Data Forms.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions regarding the report or if you require any further
assistance.
Sincerely,
Stone ffill Environmental, Inc.
Patrick D. Seekamp, PWS
Senior Wetland Scientist
Attachment: Field Data Forms
97104/RVr#Z.RPT
U
Page 2 of 2
December 18, 1997
Project No.97104
U
7=,
DEP Bordering Vegetated Wetland (310 CMR 10.55) Delineation Field Data Form
roject location* X; 0 DEP File N:
Appllcant:_2rI�v __ Prepared by. P
M '.Check all that apply:
A 0 Vegetatian alone presumed adequate to delineate BVW boundary: fill out Section I only
Vegetation and other Indicators of hydrology used to delineate BVW boundary:fill out Sections I and It
Method other than dominance test used(attach additional Information)
o 4tion.i. Vegetation Observation Plot Number.
Transact Number. Date of Delineation:. - I
.�Sampls Layer and Plant Species - zt.rtiit 9. Percent Cover C.Percent D. Dominant Plant E. Wetland
(by commonfactentific name) (or basal area) Dominan a (yes or no) Indicator
zie-9, 497-5 Category*
0" Af- C.
X 91V
/VO
Ye
�-4d-����1:::;_141 —14 Yf,--5 z——A C_a—
_5'
7
6/n�•�;/�'® � SIC
A
;
' Use an asterisk to mark wetland Indicator plants: plant species listed In the Wetlands Protection Act(MGL c.131, s.40);plants In the genus Sphagnum.plants listed as
FAC,FAC+, FACW-, FACW, FACW+, or 08L; or plants with physiological or morphological adaptations. 11 any plants are Identified as wetland Indicator plants due to
I physiological or morphological adaptations, describe the adaptation-next to the asterisk.
Vegetation conclusion:
Number of dominant wetland Indicator plants: -Number of dominant non-wetland Indicittor plants:
Is the number of dominant wetland plants equal to or greater than the number of dominant non-wetland plants? yes no
If vegetation alone Is presumed adequate to delineate the aWboundary,submit this form with the Request torneterminallon of Applicability or Notko of Intent. MA DEP-,3195
-Section If. Indicators of Hydrology Other Indicators of Hydrology: (check all that apply and describe).
13.
Hydric Solf Interpretation 1 Siteinundated:
A1, ,
Depth to free water In observation hole:
Soil Survey Depth-to soil saturation In opservation hole:
M a ther a published a -no-- .
' *%-e ublihd soil survey for this sc110?; (�� 1 1 13 Watermarks:—.
13 c Drift lines:
"arr number. !�3,tr rik-,c;
�mapped: ((��
a? 'ICAo,
oil typ Sediment deposits.
V1-
hydri'soil Inclusions:
, .1
Drainage pqttems in BVW:
4 ..,Ate field observations consistent with soil survey? yes no Cl Oxidized rhizospheres:
Remarks:
13 Wat6r-stalned leaves-._
13 Recorded data(stream, take,or Mal gauge;aerial photo;other)
2. Sol[Description
Horizon Depth Matfly,.Color Mottles Color '13 Other.
0
Vegetation and Hydrology Conclusion
A�T_P_ &no
1_4 Number of wetland Indicator plants yes
A_ - 2G 4;161
> number of non-wetland Indicator plants
416,YR tv'sz,
Remarks:' Weiland hydrology present:
hydric soil present
3. Other other Indicators of hydrology
L
present
BVW
Conclusion: Is soil hydri c? yes no
Sample location Is Ina
Submit this form with the Request forDetermination otApplicabilify orNatice of Inten.r.
DEP Bordering Vegetated Wetl5ad (310 CMR 10.55) Delineation Field Data Form
Applicant:— C.W Prepared by:- Project location: DEP File H:
CL CL Check all that apply:
< 0 Vegetation alone presumed adequate to delineate BVW boundary: fill out section I only
y:fill out Sections I and 11
0 Vegetation and other Indicators of hydrology used to delineate BVW bounder
0 Method other than dominance test used (attach additional Information)
--- Af r,/4 P A 7
. ection 1. Vegetation Observation Plot Number ::e 4-- Transact Number. Date of Delineation:
S
-A.Sample Layer and Plant Species B. Percent Cover C. Percent 0. Dominant Plant E. Wetland
`Y- (yes or no)(by common/setentific name) (or basal area) Dominance Indicator
s - �� f ?��i,Z,�113��(4�r h•6..�rr� a-2Z1 176-4 7. le5 Category*
(Z,-?Yt -e7laA leo )le-5 C-q
17 Iz
V5
-7
641
C', oll 1117u"^ /ey�W;4wy 1311 Af-5
A z-
Use an asterisk to mark wetland Indicator plants: plant species listed In the Wetlands Protection Act(MGL c.131, s.40);plants In the genus Sphagnurrr, plants listed as
FAC, FAC+, FACW-, FACW, FACW+, or OBL:or plants with physiological or morphological adaptations. It any plants are identified as wetland Indicator plants due to
physiological or morphological adaptations, describe the adaptallon.next to the asterisk.
3.
Vegetation conclusion:
Number of dominant wetland Indicator plants: 4 Number of dominant non-wetland Indicator plants:'
Is the number of dominant wetland plants equal to or greater than the number of dominant non-wetland plant!�yes no
li'vegetallon alone is presumed adequate to delineate the BVW boundary,submit this farm with the Request for Delenninallon otApplicablilly or Notice of Intent. MA DEP;3195
2�z
C
Section 11. Indicators of Hydrology Other Indicators of Hydrology: (check all that apply and describe).
Hydric Soil Interpretation El Site Inundate.d-
Depth to free water In observation hole:
I. Soil Survey A/0 1 0 Depth to soil saturation In observation hole:
.—Js there a published soil survey for this site? yes no
Water marks: llrl'111�
e/date:
Drift lines:
Map number
'`soil type mapped: k.1 Sediment deposits:...
hydric soil Inclusions: Drainage patterns In BVW:
Are field observations consistent with soil survey? yes no Oxidized rhizospheres:-
Remarks:
Water-stained leaves'
aw,
Recorded data(stream, lake,or tidal gauge;aerial photo;other)
2. Soil Description
'Horizon Depth Matrix Color Mottles Color Other
YA-1
Y Vegetation and Hydrology Conclusion
X XY2
Y -0- yes no
✓ Number of wetland Indicator plants
A "F.:�Ce [2/
�;-0 > number of non-wetland Indicator plants
61.Z
71
Remarks: C"rso� 6YR Wetland hydrology present:
hydric soil present
ED/ El
e vpe
other Indicators of hydrology
0 1 3. Other. Ant'.
2. i -- present El
2. ez�j'
Sample location Is In a BVW
Conclusion: Is soil hydric? yes no
Submit this form with the Request for Determination otAppikabifilyorNatice of Intent.
i1e.
Nl-
cq
R
BULy\ METALS ASH
FERROUS
METALS
?
1Ryr,Y, AISLEI _ �
I CO UME co \4gnp,
WCO,
t',
S
;aolr
SJO
C.3
"POW
ROO?-
iw-
or
FNj
IAO. -ter S OF,�
-,v\ y,1vAG
UAW,
ct G
XN&D"
N1
19
1010
( €
{c
t
r his
a
4
�g1
a
6 t t{
ti
a
t
2
* The North An d over 47,acld Nty began operat'gons In 1, 985
* Processes 460,000 tons of refuse each year
* GenGratess 282,000 magaiwaft of aleclxicRy poiwering sapproxinrmtely 41.0,000 home
and businesses,
* Returns approximately $2m!i �n Host Comm u n ity 'j"oe's aeind `ctaxss, each year
* Underwent major smilsslons ratroflt circa. 2000
Tom Parma, Corporate Civil Engineenng Manager
* Matt Hughes, Regionall Environrnental IN"Janager
* Kevin Beauregard, Site :11--nAronmentai Hsaith and Safcsty Manager
* Gary Collette, Plant Manager
Wheelabrator North Andover Fac'M'ty,
Zone 3 Industrial 285 Holt RD
101
1 t
X
;zt � �" a � �•� ,,,Nit ��''�� �
tl 'ie �✓ fi
Ing ON
2 i t
PP
-Him MEM
t t
�� 'per
}.`G; � �f \tR l F tti`tl l t} � ?� Y\f 7 ��f ✓5ys�� �Y�4;}V�� f ' �rf:'�I�� 1
V
�II
!1
As,h enclosure!
� �-,.
$
,M M�`
ji }}
< � ater Clarifier
Im"M III
4
t
7 �t�
0
jt
t�
r
0
Pr ject
01
Goal' s
-A/
t
T'CI1110 L 0 G Ir5
* Identify and utilize materials resistant to the corrosive properties of ash
* Eliminate the use of carbon steel materials
combustible* Eliminate the use of materials
* Relocate any mechanical auxilianj componentsouLrside of the enclosure
Minimize* Construct �n a manner w, hich maintains an anclosure envelope
the constructionUmeflne
Minimizetry .
�—
' ; 4qn r 1 ft IN
c`\
6ati
\i<
az
110
y
�y
,
a
}
tg
�i
S'
t{?
d 1
a
l i
4 � oil
4EWA
t
i
x
UNA W
t x a�1 i �t,t` �x� Stlilf a}' t tilt aar {S� ut`� t
st
a
kas
.j
ti
y,
r„
t
t
e e
Steel
Superstructure
Concrete � � t -
�T
�� " A-��1=
Sunker-walls
Steel and
ys;, r U ;,�
,�dt���'�t{ts���d`�i{�{71Si1�`t�'�til'��. r cil�} �f �}�., � tk .'
{ kit't{ ,S 'l �t� �� {aas"��'; t�kt }t s,�`. FRP
MY '+'ii ^�`��rti}t'{ Panels
,t+h {tit
� s
m n
rt
x`
{
i
,e o
��f
r
s x t,t,Ffi .s`rart�r
r
Ash Conveyor rt
Bunker Wall
}
Pk�
Foundations
t
YJ
"Airy` r� � t �ekktkti$�� k t~x }ri rti to
m
All 0,r~z.
t
sk a t
}
{
s
k'.
k'
S
t.
}
s
�' rr
1 I No
J
i l tl
4, Vol v WO VIP
low
SEall
jWy
am
IL
-MAYTO
A,1,
st £�
j
JF�S`i ak SiS �5 £
4 1KAI
: kZrri S;�sKN i,sr,� £x r`;{z21g,"gg" kas} Igh
iS 3'y i £�
ty �Js S x tS \
J
�xt
f
�s
irk
{
�t
°i
tl b
s A
� a
laws
t�t IWO
1
k' } .
{
t At 3 21 t
�t� �a t
S l
04
17
z )
}t { ' os
u
yy
zv
ti t
v.
a
{ l t
} � u t ut C� e t � 7 t � �N l� t
�j
a sa
s
t
44Ft-
d
e
p� !
P
y
r
6
k
i
0
W �
Preliminary Drawings
'Vl�,/\J9}3\23 d
TECHNOLOGIES
� . \
. : .. . : . . _ . = : , .a.. . <.m.. . � � . d
SITE PLAN APPROVAL/SPECIAL PERMIT
MASSACHUSETTS REFUSETECH,.INC.
z EMISSIONS CONTROL PROJECT
Background
The Planning Board hereby approves with conditions the Special Permit/Site Plan Review
for the construction of emissions control equipment("the Project") at the existing solid waste
incinerator located off of Holt Road and owned and operated by Massachusetts Refusetech, Inc.
("MRI"). The locus of this incinerator is 285 Holt Road, Assessors Map 34, Lot 21. The land is
owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and has been leased to MRI.
MRI applied for a Special Permit/Site Plan Approval on or about May 15, 1998. The
project involves the installation of air pollution control equipment required by the Clean Air Act
and the regulations promulgated thereunder. MRI proposes to replace the existing electrostatic
precipitator and dry sorbent injections systems with new equipment consisting of spray dryer
absorbers, fabric filters, a selective non-catalytic reduction system, a powdered activated carbon
injection system, and natural gas-fired auxiliary burners. The project also involves enclosing the
existing ash storage shed to better control potential fugitive emissions from the ash pile.
i
The Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing on the project on June 10h, 1998,
and continued that hearing to August 0, 1998. The Planning Board closed the public hearing on
August 4'h, and voted on the application on August 18, 1998. In addition to hearing testimony
from MRI and its consultants and members from the public, the Planning Board also received
independent expert analyses from the following individuals: 1) David Minott of Alternative
Resources, Inc., who presented a written report and oral testimony regarding air emissions from
the facility and potential public health impacts;2) Stephen Ambrose, who presented a written
report and oral testimony regarding noise impacts; and 3)Paul Hajec of Hajec Associates, who
presented a written report and oral testimony regarding traffic. impacts. While this application
was pending before the Planning Board, the North Andover Board of Health also held three
public meetings to hear testimony on the potential health effects of the facility. At the conclusion
of these public meetings, the Board of Health voted unanimously to inform the Planning Board
that on the basis of its review, the facility would not cause adverse public health effects. The
chairman of the Board of Health sent a letter to the Planning Board so indicating.
Findings
The'Planning Board has evaluated the application with respect to all relevant review
criteria and design guidelines set forth in Section 8.3.6 of the Zoning Bylaw and the special permit
criteria set forth in Section 10.3 of the Zoning Bylaw. On the basis of this extensive review, the
Planning Board makes the following findings as required by the North Andover Zoning Bylaw §§
8.3 and 10.3.
i
i
t
i
f
1. The site is an appropriate location for the project. The site is within the Industrial
2 zone, and resource recovery facilities are allowed as of right in that district. In addition, the
,r facility has been operating at this site since the mid-1980's.
2. Provided that MRI complies with all conditions to this approval, the Project will
not cause any adverse effects on the neighborhood. The visual impacts are minimal, as the new
structures are lower than existing structures, and will be placed within the existing developed
footprint of the facility. The noise impacts can be controlled to acceptable levels with proper
design and engineering. Most importantly, the MRI facility will emit significantly lower
concentrations of pollutants as a result of the Project. t
I
3. There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or pedestrians. The Project
will cause a minimal increase in truck traffic on Route 125 and Holt Road, and these minimal
impacts will be more than mitigated by conditions imposed on this permit.
4. NIRI's plans provide for adequate and appropriate facilities for the proper
operation of the facility. As noted, this is an existing facility, and the existing infrastructure is
adequate and appropriate. To the extent the Project imposes additional demands upon
infrastructure, MRI has appropriately addressed these additional demands in its application.
5. The Project is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Bylaw. As
noted, this type of use is allowed as of right in•the Industrial District. Also, the Project will result
in lower emissions of pollutants, thereby providing a healthier and safer environment for the
1 residents of North Andover, compared to existing conditions.
6. NM has submitted'all,infomiation required by Section 8.3.5 of the Zoning Bylaw.
7. The Planning Board further finds that the Project should satisfy all relevant review
criteria and design requirements set forth in section 8.3 of the Bylaw.
I
8. The Planning Board finds that conditions are required in order to ensure full
compliance with Sections 8.3 and 10.3 of the Bylaw. The Planning Board hereby grants an
approval to MRI subject to the following conditions.
Special Conditions
I
I
1) Truck Routes/Traffic i
I
a) The Planning Board finds that the appropriate route for trash trucks entering and exiting
the MRI facility is as follows: 1) enter the facility via Route 495, to the Route 125[Ward
Hill Connector, to Route 125 South, to Holt Road, and 2) exit the facility via Route 125
North, to the Route 125/Ward Hill Connector, to Route 495 (hereafter referred to as"the
Designated Route").
E
2
_ 1
i
• b) Commencing upon the date of filing this decision with the Town Clerk, MRI shall assist in
ensuring compliance with the Designated Route by placing language in all new contracts
with MRI, and in all renewals of existing contracts between MRI, and municipal solid
waste haulers,ash haulers, and metals haulers(collectively referred to as"NM Contract
Haulers") requiring such haulers to use the Designated Route, and any applicable truck
route regulations that may be issued by the Board of Health. This condition will apply to
all contracts that MRI enters into directly with the haulers. To the extent that equivalent
provisions do not already exist in the existing contracts,MRI will use its best efforts to
incorporate the above requirements in the existing contracts by January 31, 1999. The
term best efforts includes, but is not limited to, sending to such haulers a copy of this
decision and a written request that the contract be amended to incorporate the above
requirements. A copy of any such written request shall be copied to the Town Manager,
and ME shall follow up the written request with additional efforts should the Town
Manager request it.
c) With respect to the hauling of municipal solid waste that is collected within North
Andover, the Planning Board did not hear testimony on whether it is practical to require
haulers to use the Designated Route. However, the Planning Board understands that the
Board of Health is in the process of promulgating comprehensive regulations designed to
address trash truck traffic, and the Board of Health regulations are expected to determine
the proper route for waste haulers to use for waste collected in North Andover. Once the
issue of North Andover trash trucks-are addressed by the Board of Health, MRI shall
place language in all new contracts, and in all renewals of existing contracts, requiring
MRI Contract Haulers to comply with any applicable truck route regulations that may be
issued by the Board of Health for such trash trucks. To the extent that there is any
conflict between the Designated Route and the Board of Health regulations, the latter shall
control.
j
d) Within thirty days of the date of filing of this decision with the Town Clerk, and at least
annually thereafter, and whenever requested by the Town Manager, MRI shall send to
MRI Contract Haulers reminders of the Designated Route with a reminder that failure to
comply with the route restrictions may result in revocation of the contract or suspension
of tipping privileges. NM shall promptly send copies of such reminders to the Town
Manager.
e) Within five days of learning of a violation of the above route restriction, MRI shall provide
written warnings to any MRl Contract Hauler that MRI determines has violated the route
restriction notifying the hauler that failure to comply with the route restrictions may result
in revocation of the contract or suspension of tipping privileges. MRI shall promptly send
copies of such warnings to the Town Manager.
i
f) Within thirty days of the date of filing of this decision with the Town Clerk, and at least
annually and whenever requested by the Town Manager, MRI shall send reminders of the
route restrictions to NESWC with a request that NESWC advise its member communities
E about the route restrictions. MRl shall promptly send copies of such reminders to the
3
Town Manager.
t
i
3
i
I
i
f. 't g) MRI shall propose and fund the installation of truck turn warning signage along.Route j
125 northbound,just prior to the Route 125/Holt Road intersection, subject to approval
and implementation by the Massachusetts Highway Department.
1
h) MRI shall propose and fund center and shoulder-line painting along Halt Road between
Route 125 and the MRI facility, subject to approval and implementation by the North
Andover Department of Public Works,
i
i) MRI shall propose and fund installation of a YIELD sign for right turns from Holt Road
onto Route 125 nouhbound, subject to approval and implementation by the Massachusetts
Highway Department and the North Andover Department of Public Works.
j) MRI shall apply for approvals of the Massachusetts Highway Department and the North
Andover Department of Public Works no later than October 31, 1998, and shall make
best efforts to ensure that the conditions g, h, and i are 'implemented no later than March
1, 1999"
2) Air Quality Monitoring and Access to Data and Records
a) Public Access to Compliance Data in Real Time. Prior to operation of the Project, MRI
shall arrange for public access to Plant data by establishing an Internet website accessible
-`_ using common web browser software such as Netscape or Microsoft Explorer. Data
from MRI's database computer shall be downloaded to the website for the purpose of
providing public access to continuous emissions and operational operating data, suitably
time-averaged for compliance demonstration as defined by DEP and US EPA permit
conditions, regulations and guidelines. Public access in this regard shall be unrestricted as
to who may access the data, and as to time of day or day of the week. MRI shall provide
the data to the website continuously throughout each day on a basis as near to a real time
as is reasonably practical, but not more than twelve hours following the end of the data
time-averaging period required for compliance demonstration. MRI shall install a
computer, modem telephone line, and modem in the Town's library to facilitate ready
public access to the data.
f
`The Planning Board recognizes that there is case law to the effect that a local board may not
impose conditions that require the approval of other agencies, such as the Massachusetts Highway
Department. Should a court determine that Conditions g, h,I, and j are invalid on that basis, it is
the Planning Board's intent that those conditions be deemed severable from the remainder of this
# decision. The annulment of those conditions would not affect the Planning Board's ultimate
determination that the Project meets the criteria in the bylaw, including traffic-related criteria.
4
b) The specific continuous monitoring data to be made publicly available is as follows:
i) Most Recent Compliance Data: The latest monitored emissions and operating levels,
compared with permit limits (graphical format), specifically:
(1) Sulfur Dioxide, 24-hour average geometric mean concentration and the removal
efficiency
(2) Nitrogen Oxides, 24-hour daily arithmetic average concentration
(3) Opacity, 6-minute average percentage values, daily summary s
(4) Carbon Monoxide, 4-hour block arithmetic average
(S) Flue Eras Temperature at the fabric filter inlet, 4-hour block arithmetic average
(6) Mercury, Dioxin, and any other parameter that is tested but not subject to
continuous emissions monitoring data, the latest test results. MRI shall test
quarterly for dioxin. The Planning Board reserves the right to amend this
condition and allow less frequent testing if the test results during the first year of
operation reveal levels of dioxin substantially below the permitted limits.
ii) Summaries of Historical Compliance with Applicable Limits:
(1) For each continuously monitored parameter above, an historical compliance
summary shall be provided that includes, at a minimum, the prior week's data and 1
the last six months' data. The format, graphical or tabular, shall clearly convey the
number, dates, and magnitudes of any exceedances of applicable limits.
(2) For mercury, dioxin, and any other parameter that is tested but not subject to
continuous emissions monitoring data, the preceding three years of test data, in a -
format that clearly conveys the number, dates, and magnitudes of any exceedances
of applicable limits.
iii) Continuous Emissions Monitoring Equipment Malfunction Summaries:
(1) Summaries of time periods during which each continuous monitoring system was
malfiinctioning while the facility was operational, as"operational" is defined by
applicable regulations.
i
(2) Quarterly cumulative summaries of such malfunction time.
iv) Should MRI be required by US EPA or DEP to modify the frequency, nature, extent,
or type of sampling and reporting, MRI shall promptly adapt the above database so
that it is consistent with any such modifications.
c) Compliance Records. Commencing at the time this decision is filed in the Town Clerk's
office, at the same time that MRI submits such reports to regulatory agencies, MM shall
deliver to the Town Manager two copies of each periodic(e.g., monthly, quarterly, 9-
1 month, annual) report required by federal, state, or local permits and/or regulations
relating to air quality.
5
i
d) Inspection of Facility Operations and Records. Commencing at the time this decision is
filed in the Town Clerk's office, the Board of Health and its Agents shall have the right to
both unannounced and scheduled inspections of any and all facility operations and
operating records generated after this decision is filed with the Town Clerk as required to
assess ongoing compliance of the facility with permit Limits and conditions imposed by US
. EPA, DEP, and the Town, and compliance with the applicable air quality regulations of
those entities. The right to such inspections is unrestricted in frequency, timing, or
duration, provided that such inspections are conducted in the presence of the Plant
Manager or his designated representative, in a manner that does not unnecessarily disrupt
MRI facility operations and in compliance with MRI health and safety policies and
procedures. Without limiting the foregoing, MRI shall provide fourteen days prior notice
to the Board of Health and its designated representative before conducting tests for
mercury, dioxin, and/or any other pollutant that is not tested on a continuous emissions
monitoring basis. The Board of Health and/or its designated representative shall have the
right to be present at the facility during such tests, and shall have access as may be needed
to ensure that the tests are representative of the facility's operations. The test shall be
representative of actual facility operations.
3) Solid Waste Monitoring
a) Inspection for Ash Dusting. 'The Board of Health and its Agents shall have the right to
periodic unannounced inspections for the purpose of determining whether ash-handling,
storage, and load-out operations comply with the US EPA and DEP requirements
restricting visible emissions, with such compliance to be determined as specified by those
agencies' regulations. Such inspections shall be conducted in the presence of the Plant
Manager or his designated representative, in a manner that does not unnecessarily disrupt
MRI facility operations and in compliance with MRI health and safety policies and
procedures.
4) Shut-Downs of Combustor Units and Other Problems
i
a) Shut-Down of Combustor Units. MRI is required to promptly cease the charging of
municipal solid waste to a combustor unit or units if any of the following criteria is met as
to that combustor unit or units:
i) Potential for Stack Exhaust Fan Failure. The forced draft or induced draft fan ceases
to function. An interlock is required that automatically prevents the further charging
of waste to the affected combustor unit(s), until the fan resumes service.
H) Potential for Excess Emissions from Inadequate Combustion Efficiency. On startup, E
furnace gas temperature, as measured at Elevation 125' - 0" (T1 &T2), less than 1600
F (which is equivalent to 1800 F at the one-second gas residence time plane). An
t interlock is required that automatically prevents the charging of waste to the affected
J combustor unit(s), until the temperature criterion is met.
6
i
During waste combustion, furnace gas temperature measured at Elevation 125' - 0"
drops below 1600 F for more than three hours. Operator must promptly cease the
charging of waste to the affected combustor unit(s), and cannot resume charging until
the temperature criterion is met.
t
iii) Potential for Excess Emissions from Failure of the Fabric Filter. More than three
fabric filter modules are out-of-service (isolated). Operator must promptly cease the
charging of waste to the affected combustor unit(s), and cannot resume charging until
sufficient modules are in service.
iv) Potential for Excess Emissions from Scrubber Failure. Temperature exceeds 450 F at
fabric filter inlet; i.e., following the spray-dry absorber(scrubber). An interlock is
i
required that automatically prevents the fiulher charging of waste to the affected
combustor unit(s), until proper scrubber functioning is restored, as evidenced by the
temperature at the fabric filter inlet.
Lime-slurry feed to the spray-dry aosorber interrupted for more than four hours. E
Operator must promptly cease the charging of waste to the affected combustor unit(s),
until lime-slurry feed is restored.
v) MRI shall maintain a written record on site of the occurrence (date and time) of any of
the above events, and the reason, to the extent known, for the occurrence. .
b) If there is a shut down of a combustor unit(s) for the reasons set forth in Condition 4(a), -
i
MRI shall promptly notify the Town Manager of the shut down. The term"promptly"
means if the shut down occurs during Town business hours, within three hours of the shut j
down, and if the shut down occurs after Town business hours, no later than 10:00 A.M.
on the next normal business day of the town. MRI shall also post any such notices to the
Town Manager on the database referenced in Condition 2(a).
c) Commencing at the time that this decision is filed in the Town Clerk's office, whenever
MRI is required by permit to notify a regulatory agency of an accident or violation, MRI
shall also notify the Town Manager at the same time that it notifies the regulatory agency.
MRI shall also post any such notices to the Town Manager on the database referenced in
Condition 2(a).
5) Miscellaneous
a) MRI shall not combust sewage sludge in the combustor units.
b) Noise: Noise from the facility as upgraded by the Project shall not increase the broadband
level by more than lOdBA above the ambient levels or produce a"pure tone"condition as
set forth in DAQC Policy 90-001, the guideline for 310 CMR 7.10. In order to ensure
compliance with this condition, MRI shall perform ambient testing prior to operation of
the Project, at Location 5 as referenced in a document entitled"Sound Level Evaluation
E
f
1
7
i
j
E
t
for the Massachusetts Refusetech, Inc. Emissions Control Project, prepared by Michael D.
Theriault Associates Inc., and consistently with the testing that was done in that report.
MRI shall then perform testing at Location 5 not later than one hundred and eighty days
` from completion of on-site construction, and compare the test results to determine
g y s
y
• P zxzune
compliance. MRI shall submit the test results with a report indicating whether the test
results indicate compliance with this condition. If the test results indicate non-compliance,
MRI shall devise and implement measures to ensure compliance.
c) MRI shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws, regulations, and permit
conditions governing the operations of the facility.
d) MRI shall pay to the Town the lump sum of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) on
or before January 2, 1999, in addition to any payments made under the Host Community
Agreement between MRI and the Town, for the purpose of funding air quality monitoring
activities relating to the facility. MRI shall pay the lump sum of$25,000 on or before
January 2 of each year thereafter, and this obligation shall cease one year after the
termination of the operation of the entire facility.
e) MRI shall provide financial security in a form acceptable to the Board, such as a proper
bond analogous to that required under the Subdivision Control Law, G.L. cA1, §$IU, in
the amount of fifly thousand dollars ($50,000) to be used by the Town for expenses
incurred by the Town should the facility be abandoned or extraordinary expenses incurred
by the Town to provide emergency services at the facility while it is in operation. The
4 financial security shall be renewable and reinstatable and shall be maintained on a yearly
` basis, and MRI shall notify the Town Manager when the financial security is established,
and each time it is renewed.
f) Unless otherwise specified, the conditions herein shall be effective upon operation of the
emissions control project. Operation shall be defined as the date upon which MRI
submits its initial performance test to DEP in accordance with the new Clean Air Act
regulations.
g) All conditions to this Special Permit/Site Plan Approval are binding upon any and all
successors, assignees, and transferees of MRI.
h) Without limiting the remedies available to the Town, violations of these conditions are
subject to fines and/or injunctive relief to the fullest extent authorized by law.
i) The air quality consultant retained by the Town shall specifically investigate and address
the extent to which MRI's continuous emissions monitoring equipment is not functioning
and report to the Planning Board based on actual data as to whether a standard stricter
than that imposed by DEP and USEPA should be imposed to address this issue. Such
stricter standards may include but are not limited to, imposing a requirement that a
combustor be shut down if a continuos emissions monitoring system fails for an excessive
amount of time, or requiring redundant continuos emissions monitoring equipment. The
3
8
1
............ _
t
Planning Board reserves the right to revisit this issue after receiving reports from the air
quality monitor.
i
j) Prior to the date of Operation, MRI shall submit to the Board an as-built plan, certified
by a professional engineer, indicating that the Project has been constructed substantially in
compliance with the plans contained in the Application for Site Plan Review.
k) The Application for Site Plan Review, dated May 15, 1998, and revised July 7, 1998 and
the attachments thereto, shall be deemed part of this decision, and the Project shall be
constructed in accordance with those documents and plans including the following:
i) Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by R. D. Vanasse &Assoc., Inc., 10 New
England Business Center Drive, Suite 314, Andover, MA 0 18 10, prepared for
EMCON, 3 Riverside Drive, Andover, MA 01810, dated January 28, 1998,rev.
August 3, 1998.
ii) Air Quality Monitoring Report prepared by Earth Tech, 196 Baker Avenue, Concord,
MA 01742,prepared for Massachusetts REFUSETECH Inc., 285 Holt Road, North E
Andover, MA, dated January 1998.
iii) Sound Level Evaluation prepared by Michael D. Theriault Associates, Inc., prepared
for EMCON, Inc., Andover, MA, dated January 1998, rev. July 1998.
iv) Visual Impact Analysis prepared by Young Associates, 121 Juliand Hill Road, Greene,
NY 13778, prepared for Massachusetts REFUSETECH Inc., 285 Holt Road, North
Andover, MA, dated January 6, 1998.
v) . Independent Air Quality Review of Proposed MRI Emissions-Control Upgrade,
prepared by ARI, 9 Pond Lane, Concord, MA, for Town of North Andover Planning
Board and Board of Health, dated July 1998.
vi) Noise Study Peer Review prepared by Stephen E. Ambrose,Noise Control Engineer,
4 Old Great Falls Road, Windham, ME 04062, prepared for the North Andover i
Planning Board, dated July 30, 1998.
vii)Traffic Review prepared by Hajec Associates, 375 Common Street, Lawrence, MA
01840, prepared for the North Andover Planning Board, dated July 2, 1998.
viii)' Plan titled: Massachusetts Refusetech Inc., 285 Holt Road, North Andover, MA
Air Emissions Control System Retrofit General Arrg't Elevation, prepared by
EMCON, Inc., Andover, MA, dated 4/15/98, last rev. 5/21/98 j
k
ix) Plan titled: Massachusetts Reflisetech Inc., 285 Holt Road,North Andover, MA Plan
to Accompany Application for Site Plan Review, prepared by EMCON, Inc., Andover,
MA, dated 4/15/98, rev. 5/13/98, and 7/7/98, 3
9
x) Plan titled: Massachusetts Reffisetech Inc., 285 Holt Road,North Andover, MA Lime
Preparation retrofit General Arrangement Elevation, prepared by EMCON, Inc..
Andover, MA, dated 4/15/98, rev. 5/13/98.
Cc. Director of Public Works
Building Inspector
Health Administrator
Assessors
Conservation Administrator
Drainage Consultant
Planning Board
Police Chief
Fire Chief
Applicant
Engineer
File
NM - Site Plan Review
10
1
�°North
7t+
11 own OF No th Andove rtORTN
OFFICE OF =Ohl, iD ,.1MOt
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES
'� h
30 School Street o
North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 p * I
WIf.LIAM J.SCOTr SSAcxUstii d
Director
NOTICE OF DECISION
Any appeal shall be filled
within (20) days after the
date of filling this Notice -�-
in the Office of the Town
Clerk._,
to �, -%•,}• �
Date August 19', 1998
Date of Hearing June 16,1998, Jaa-y 7 1-998
August 4, 1998, August 18, 1998
Petition of REF'USETECH , INC.
1
G
Premises affected 285 Molt Road �
Referring to the above petition for a special permit from the r
North Andover Zoning Bylaw Section 8.3 site plan review
requirements of the � y ( � ) �
so as to allow construction of 21,493 of new gross floor area.
After a public hearing given on the above date, the Planning Board ,
voted t0 APPROVE the SPECIAL PERMIT- SITE PLAN REVIEW
c
1.
based upon the following conditions: E
F.
H
�
SignedP� k
CC: Director of Public Works Richard S.Rowen Chairman k
Building Inspector I`
Natural Resource/Land Use Planner Alison Lescarbeau V. Chairman
Health Sanitarian s
Assessors John Simons, Clerk
Police Chief
4
Fire Chief Richard Nardella I.
Applicant
Engineer Joseph V. Mahoney
Towns Outside Consultant
File Planning Board
Interested Parties
CONSERVATION-(978)688 9530 HEALTH-(978)688 9540 • PLANNING-(978)688-9535
7
*BUILDING OFF,ICE-(978)688-9545 • *ZoNING BOARD OF APPEALS-(978)688-9541 *146 MAIN STREET
1
Town of North Andover
r
ONCE OF 3�O*EiY� c ee.1 SQL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES �
384 Osgood Street
North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 Are.
J.SCOTr SAC Us s
Director
s
s
August 25, 1998
Ms, Joyce Bradshaw
a
Town Clerk
120 Main Street
No. Andover, MA 01845
i
E
Re: Special Permit/Site Plan Review 285 Holt Road
i
Dear Ms. Bradshaw:
The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday evening, June 16, 1998 at
7:30 p.m. in the Department of Public Work 384 Osgood Street on the application
REFUSETECH, Inc. 285 Holt Road,North Andover, MA 01845 for a special permit under
Section 8.3 (Site Plan Review) of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw . The legal notice was
properly advertised in the North Andover Citizen on May 27 and June 3, 1998 and all parties of
interest were duly notified. The following members were present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman,
Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Joseph Mahoney,Richard Nardella and
Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also absent.
The petitioner was requesting a special permit to allow the construction of a 21,493 SF of new
gross floor area and is in the(1-2)Industrial-2 Zoning District.
l
Dom Scalise was present to represent 285 Holt Road. Mr.Rowen stated the Planning Boards
role is to ascertain whether or not this project meets with the Town's Zoning Bylaw. The Board
is not reviewing the merits of the retrofit itself. Mr. Rowen stated that the Board has hired an air
quality consultant at the applicant's expense to review the technology. All health concerns should k
be brought up at Board of Health meetings. The Board of Health will make a presentation to the r
Board on August 4, 1998.
t
Attorney Marty Healy stated that they must meet the Clean Air Act or the site will be shut down.
There is no change in the use, there is no increase in the design capacity and there is no work
outside the developed area of the site. They are filing for site plan review because the new gross
floor area is greater than 2,000 SR They would like to start construction in November and start Y
the engineering at the beginning of July. 3
z
Dave Raymond stated that the structure would stay the same. Mr. Raymond stated that this
project would have a significant positive impact. Mr. Raymond went over the process on the
plans with the Board. The site consists of 14.6 acres, All proposed construction will be within:the r
1
BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535
• t
4
perimeter of the road. They have shown the wetland lines on the plan. Mr. Raymond stated that
the lot coverage will go from 21%to 23% and the floor area ratio will go from 19%to 20%.
Jim Connolly of Emcon, stated that they have 52 parking spaces and they presently have only 3 5
employees. Mr. Connolly stated that the Building Inspector asked if they could show future
parking spaces if needed. A NOT is not required. They have included an attachment on the lighting
with the application. Mr. Connolly stated that an ENF was submitted to NEPA and that they y
received a certificate. There will be no changes to the utilities.and there is no increase in public
service. Architectural consistency will be maintained. Mr. Connoly stated that they are in the I-2
zoning district and the use is allowed. The project is consistent with the Town's Master Plan and
there is no loss of open space. A noise study was conducted and they will comply with the D.E.P.
sound level criteria. Mr. Connolly stated that there are no visual impacts. Mr. Raymond showed
the Board some pictures of what the site will look like from different sides of the property. Mr.
Connolly stated that we believe that our application will conform with the zoning bylaw and that it
is not detrimental on abutting properties and will have minimal impacts on traffic. C
Mr. Rowen asked how would the plant operate during construction. Mr. Connally went over the
plan for operation during construction. Ed Meaghger, People for the Environment, stated that
there will be a meeting regarding this site at the North Parish Church on July 9, 1998. Ms.
Lescarbeau asked that if at the next meeting they were going to speak about on the noise. Mr.
Connolly stated that they submitted a noise impact study with the application. The Planning
l
Board will send the noise study out for review by a consultant. Mr. Nardella asked what
f
variances were needed for the site. Ms. Colwell stated that they only need one for the height.
The Board scheduled a site walk for 6:00 p.m. on June 24, 1998.
1
r
Continued until July 7, 1998. 5
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on July 7, 1998. The following
E
members were present: Richard S. Rowen, Chairman, John Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, 1
Associate Member and John Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present.
1
Dom Scalise was present to represent 285 Holt Road. Mr. Scalise stated that on behalf of the
applicant they would not like to hold a hearing tonight because there is only 4 members present
and at the last meeting there was 6 and they are afraid that it might be a problem when it comes
i
time to vote. Ms. Colwell stated that we did receive a copy of our traffic consultants comments
but, we did not ask him to attend this meeting because we thought your consultant would not
have time to respond. W. Rowen stated that he has put together a list of things that he would
Eke to see during the permit process. Mr. Rowen stated that he is not keen on surprises and
would like to pass them out to you. Mr. Rowen went over his punch list with the Board and the n.
applicants. Ms. Colwell stated that the noise proposal went out today to the 3 companies. Ms.
N
Colwell also stated that the People for the Environment are holding a meeting Thursday night July 4
9, 1998 @ 7:00 p.m. @ the North Parish Church.
Continued until August 4, 1998.
x
3
}
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 4, 1998. The following }
members were present: Richard S, Rowan, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John
Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Joseph Mahoney and Richard Nardella.
Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. 3
Mr. Rowan stated that we have had a consultant review the entire project as a health issue. The
consultant responded and the Board of Health wrote a letter stating that although much evidence
was presented to the Board of Health regarding the dangers inherent in some of the emissions
products from the MRI incinerator, it is the opinion of the Board that in the quantities expected to
be released after the retrofit that these emissions will not pose a health threat to the citizens of
North Andover. David Minott of ARI stated that after the upgrade this would meet EPA limits, it
meets the zoning bylaw and emissions will go down. Mr. Minott stated that after the upgrade the
stack emissions would meet State and Federal standards. Mr. Minott stated that the total
exposure from 1985 -2030 would not be significant. Mr. Minott stated that with the upgrade the
ash dust will be collected in a totally enclosed system and MM has proposed a scrubber that a
would control the ash dust. MRT has also incorporated a procedure to clean the ash off the tires.
Mr. Minott stated that this ash has been tested in labs and based on the testing at other
Wheelabrators it will come back O.K. Mr.Minott stated that they have made recommendations
for permit conditions. The Planning Board will ensure that the public has access to latest t
emissions data by requiring MRI to install a computer at the library to display emissions data.
The town will hire a monitor to inspect records on air quality and ash issues. Mr. Rowan stated 1
Mr.Minott's position is that the design if approved will meet State and Federal government
regulations if run properly. Mr.Nardella asked what ARI's recommendation is on unannounced
visits. Mr. Rowan stated that the Board required a monitoring plan and asked if ARI has come up s
with one yet. Mr. Minott stated that frequent inspections would be required initially,but this
could be reduced in future years to perhaps going to the plant four times a year and looking at
records once a month. Mr. Minott stated that if you saw something that raises your eyebrows a
you could come back more frequently. Mr. Nardella stated that he would like to see a monitoring
plan. Mr.Nardella questioned DEP's standards for mercury and how it sways away from EPA
standards. Mr.Minott went over DEP's standards, indicating that Mass.DEP had the strictest in
the nation limit on mercury. Mr. Nardella asked if the upgrade will meet Massachusetts
standards. Mr. Minott stated that it would. Mr. Rowan stated that in the decision it will need to
state that we will have unannounced visits. Mr. Simons asked what scientific methodology Mr.
Minott used to review the proposed design. Mr. Minott stated that he reviewed the data given to
him by both MRI and the regulatory agencies. He also stated that he did extensive interviewing.
Mr. Minott stated that he did not do independent health risks but, he did check the conclusions of
the consultants, Mr. Simons questioned the epidemiological studies that were done. Mr. Minott
stated that the studies done dealt with the issues of cancer and asthma. Mr. Minott stated that
those studies as described found no link between this waste energy plant and the observed rates of
the studied health problems. Mr. Minott stated that he is not a doctor and he did not challenge
those studies. Mr. Minott stated that one last point is that DEP is conducting a commutative
impact study and they are looking at the future and existing site conditions. DEP indicates that
total impact does not show significant risk. Mr. Simons asked if he was aware of any larger
studies. Mr. Minott stated no. Mr. Simons asked if it was possible to show disparities with
s
a
i
r
1
tracking results, Mr. Minott stated that for example they track the twenty four hour running
average and then compare that to the permit limits. Mr. Minott stated that sampling is conducted
several times per hour and the display will be updated. Mr. Rowen stated that we don't want to j
see a twenty four hour delay in reporting data. Mr. Nardella stated that they are proposing twelve
hours. Mr. Nardella asked if he were sitting on this Board what would you consider reasonable to
ask for. Mr. Minott stated that what he would want would be instant data and valid computer
data as soon as he could get it. Ms. Lescarbeau questioned the complete history of MRI and if E
they have any violations. Mr. Minott stated that the issues are more procedural problems. Mr.
Angles asked if there are any new technologies that may be better fit for the MRI plant. Mr.
Minott stated no,this upgrade would use the best equipment. W. Minott stated that with new
strict limits there isn't a margin for further gain for the pollutants.
Julie Kneedham questioned whether ash is a toxin or is it safe. Mr. Minott stated that in a F
regulatory sense the ash is to be tested regularly. If the ash is tested O.K. it is transported as h
non-hazardous. If tested bad it will be treated as hazardous. Mr. Rowen stated all the ash are
tested. Julie Kneedham stated that she has concerns with where they will be traveling with the
hazardous waste. Mr. Rowen stated that it will be discussed later in the meeting. Eric Weltman
stated that the testing is to ascertain whether the toxins will leach out of the ash. Higher dioxin
levels have been shown because of incinerators. Leah Kettlesen stated that this report is highly �E
misleading to the Board and the Board needs to be looking at health issues. Ms. Kettlesen stated
that if ARI's telling the Board that MRI is meeting health standards I don't think they're telling
what they are not meeting. Mr. Simon stated that he has not seen anything scientific and he wants s
to deal with fact. Mr. Rowen stated that health issues were discussed at the Board of Health
meetings this meeting was to discuss issues pertinent to the Planning Board decision.
Andrew Reiner stated that there are people in this room that would like to speak. At the Board of
Health meetings they let Mr. Minott speak and then they voted and then they got up and left. Mr.
Nardella stated that the Board of Health stated that there is not a health threat. Clayton Osgood,
Chairman of the Board of Health stated that we made it very clear we would only listen to the
concerns and was it. The Board of Health meeting wasn't there to criticize the ARI report and 1
i
the issue was studied for three months. Mr. Reiner stated that they had no opportunity to express p
their concerns with Mr. Minott's report. Mr.Rowen stated that the Planning Board asked the
Board of Health to review the report. Mr. Reiner stated that this Board has responsibilities to l
listen to the public's concerns. Mr. Simon stated that he would like to hear the criticism. Mr. t
Rowen stated that we deliberately had several meetings and determined that the best forum would {
be that the health issues be conducted by the Board of Health. They have written to us and stated
that the retrofit is not going to be a health hazard to the Town. What you're telling me is that the
Board of Health did not conduct a good recommendation in your opinion. Atty. Marty Healy
stated that there has been several Board of Health meetings and this Board has no jurisdiction.
Ms. Lescarbeau stated that,she's a member of the Planning Board and not a scientist. She would I,
be happy to sit here until midnight to listen to the people but, she is basing her decision on the
�i
information provided by the experts hired to review the project. Mr. Mahoney stated that he is
fully aware of the Friends for the Environment and he sat at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting a
for three hours. Mr. Mahoney stated that he accepts the comments of Town Council and he is not
willing to stay here all night. His position is that we're beyond where we should be.
i
u
f
E
p�
,E
5
. i
Joan Kulash stated that there was not a series of public hearings held by the Board of Health.
There were two meetings hosted by MRI and there were no opportunities to speak. Ms. Kulash
stated that she asked to have Betsy Conte of Haverhill state that she wrote a letter to the Board of
Health and never got a response. Ms. Conte stated that they are downstream getting the smoke.
Ms. Conte questioned if they have hired an environmental lawyer. Mr. Simon stated that he is
willing to listen to the science. Fred Glorin asked other than MRI where did you get your
information. Mr. Minott stated that he got it from Massachusetts DEP and fifteen years of
experience working with these facilities. Fred Glorin stated that their statistical information was !
from DEP that was submitted from MRI, was there independent study? Thea Fornier stated that
she is an environmentalist speaking in terms of scientific data. If you had a family member being
affected by having two hundred seizures a month and couldn't breath. Ms. Fornier stated that she
had to track these plants down and if she had waited until the data was submitted her son would
have died. Ms. Fornier stated that the children are our jewels and if you just rely on scientific data
you will be a loser. Mr. Simons stated with all due respect that's why I asked for studies and I
haven't seen them. Joan Kulash stated that Mr. Minott is not an epidemiologist and he does not
have the background to say that this is not a health issue. Ms. Kulash read from Mr. Minotts
report. Ms. Kulash skated that he did not mention the permits for dioxin and that this incinerator 1
has the highest mercury. He seems to be poo pooping the violations for MRI. Ms. Kulash read
over her comments on ash. Ms. Kulash stated that she asked the Board to use their common f
sense, that if MRI is saying this ash is O.K. Ms.-Kulash stated that the EPA says that Dioxin is a
known human toxinigen. Ms. Kulash stated that we can't afford to make a mistake once because
there is a lot at risk here. Ms. Kulash read from her notes. R.itch Rothstein a resident, asked if
Mr.Minott could give him more insight of meeting the new D,E.P. mercury limit. Mr. Minott
stated that lie looked at the data from one or two of the other plants. '
i
Mr. Nardella asked if the testing for mercury would be done every nine months. Mr. Minott
stated yes, every nine months. Mr. Rowen stated that he understood about the problems that the
residents are concerned about but, Mr. Minotts task was to find out if this plant would meet the
Federal and State requirements for permits. Mr. Rowen stated that he wants a monitoring plan E
and would welcome public comments because we're trying to ensure compliance. Attorney Healy
stated that MRI is fighting people who care about the environment. Mr.Healy stated that he
would like Frank Ferraro to speak. Mr.Ferraro stated that.they have been very quiet through the
proceedings. The EPA officer stated that they have filed a Notice of Violation(NOV)for NM-
Mr. Ferraro stated that there have been many inaccuracies. The issue was an old permit. The
permit was modified in 1992. The NOV was based on the wrong data. Mr. Ferraro stated that in
regards to the ash the citizens did the wrong drinking water test which has been confirmed by the
EPA. All NM's tests have been done by the agencies. Mr. Ferraro stated that with regards to
the mercury we are meeting twenty eight. This is a modern plant and he is sorry that Ms. Kulash
is using old data. David Urry 209 Vest Way, asked if Mr. Minott was familiar to the EPA dioxin
limit. Mr. Minott stated that he does not know the limit but, he does know that one exists.
David Urry 209 Vest Way asked if Mr. Minott was aware that they are one hundred times stricter
for this permit. Mr. Minott stated that he does not believe that is a fact and questioned where he
got that information. David Urry 209 Vest way stated that he got it out of the 1994 EPA study.
F
b
f
i
David Urry 209 Vest way asked what Mr. Minott suggests we do if MRI fails to comply. Mr.
Minott stated that State and Federal permits have the authority to shut down the facility.
Attorney Healy stated that there will be no work outside of the limit of work. The traffic impacts
will be an increase of two additional workers per day. There will be no change in level of service.
Paul Hajec, Town's traffic consultant made three recommendations. One was to have striping
and signage on Rt. 125. The second would be center and shoulder painting per the approval of
DPW. The third thing would be the installation of a yield sign per the approval of Mass. Highway
or DPW. Mr.Heally stated that they are submitting a letter agreeing to a truck turn warning sign
subject to the approval of Mass. Highway. Mr. Rowen asked if there was going to be any }
additional trash. Mr. Heally stated that there would not be. A resident asked what the total
number of trash trucks per day. Jim Connolly stated that there are sixteen and it will go up to
eighteen trucks per day. Paul Hajec stated that he has gone back and fourth with Dermit Kelly k
r
and he has received a copy of their final results. Mr. Simons stated that in Mr. Hajecs letter it $,
stated that he had concerns with left hand turns. Mr. Hajec stated that the signs are to alert cars
that trucks are turning. Mr. Hajec stated that he would like to see them trying to get the trucks to [
use the road on off peak hours. Ken Kimmell stated that he has been working with the Board of
Health developing regulations so that there will be fines for the trucks. Mr. Rowen stated that all
s
the trucks will be heading North on Rt. 125. A resident asked who will be enforcing these trucks.
Mr, Rowen stated that these haulers have contracts with MM and it will be part of their contract
that they must follow these regulations. Mr. Rowen stated that the intent is to keep them on Rt.
495.
Steve Ambrose was present to speak on the noise study he prepared. Mr. Ambrose stated that he
has been involved with noise for twenty years. Mr. Ambrose stated that the State regulations
permit a 10 dB increase. Mr. Ambrose went over examples of dB. A quiet whisper is 10 dB. For
you to speak to someone id 55-60 dB. Mr. Ambrose stated that a 10 dB noise difference is the
minimal needed to notice something change. Mr. Ambrose stated that typically in a neighborhood
where people live during the day is 50 dB and at nighttime it would be 10dB. Commercial
property would be 60-65 dB. Mr. Ambrose stated that this site has an advantage because of the
distance to the community. Mr, Ambrose stated that for a forced draft, or induced draft fan you
would typically put in a silencer to tone out the frequencies. Mr. Ambrose stated that the two
residential areas near this site on a quiet night may hear change in sound but, not in level. Mr.
Ambrose stated that he found that the report that was prepared by MRI was adequate and thinks
it is very achievable. Mr.Rowen asked if he would recommend putting in a silencer on the fan.
Mr. Ambrose stated that usually duct work is installed.
s
Mr. Rowen stated that we have hired a consultant to review the plant design to see if it would
achieve permit levels established this. We have asked him to make a recommendation to the
Board of Health and the Board of Heath wrote us a letter stating that it would not be an adverse
T
health problem. Andrew Reiner stated that the environmental considerations is part of your
concerns and is specifically sited in the zoning bylaw. Mr. Reiner started asking questions, not
pertinent to their scope of the meeting. Ken Kimmell stated that he has never been to a Planning ;.
Board meeting that a lawyer in the audience tried to interrogate a member. Ken Kimmell asked if if
Mr. Rowen wanted to respond. Mr. Rowen stated that he did not.
i
g
3
rt
Mr. Rowen stated that he would Iike to add in the decision that the trucks are to take Rt. 495 per
trucks routes established by the Board of Health. Jim McIver the plant manager, stated that the
ash contracts will go out to bid. Mr. Rowen asked-if there is a way that he can ensure other
NESWIC communities where we stand. Steve Rothstein stated that if were ever informed of a
violation we will inform the Town Manager and we will work with Mr. Kimmell. Mr. McIver
stated that all revenue goes to NESWIC so he would have to talk to them before they break a
contract with a driver. Mr. Nardella stated that what ever he could do to help would be a plus.
Mr.Rowen asked how MRI will be aware of a violation. Mr.McIver stated that he is sure they
all get phone calls. Mr.Rowen asked if there will be a mechanism to report calls. Mr. McIver
stated that there would be. Mr. Nardella asked if there was a way to number the trucks so that if
z
they do, do something wrong a resident can report it. Mr. McIver stated that he could look into
that. k
Joseph Mahoney left at 11:00 p.m. but he heard all pertinent information regarding the special
permit and the information that he missed was the discussion of the decision.
Mr. Rowen went over the list of permit actions dated July 31, 1998. Mr. Rowen stated that if a
resident does not have a computer they can go to the library to look up the data. David Urry 209 t
Vest way asked if there is a way they could get a website. Frank Ferraro stated that this goes well
beyond what we've done in any other community and it takes human intervention to put data into
the website. Mr. Simons stated that the cost of a website is trivial and it is easier to go to a
website. Mr. Ferraro stated that he would like to keep that open for discussion. Mr. Nardella
F
stated that the computer will be part of the decision. Mr. Ferraro stated that mercury and dioxin
are not continually monitored but, we have indicators showing we are controlling it. Ken
Kimmell stated that we will have a air consultant to read the data in a worse case scenario. Mr. s
Ferraro stated that if they have a malfunctioning system it will be reported to D.E.P. Mr. Rowen
stated that the monitor will operate unannounced visits and interpret data. Joan Kulash stated
that we need a physician not hired by the applicant. Mr, Rowen stated that the point of the
monitor is for monitoring the-operation as we get data. A resident asked if the reported data will n
be n the permits. Mr. Rowen stated absolutely, we have asked them to put the data publicly. A
resident stated that he hopes that this Planning Board does not regret this in twenty to thirty
years. David Urry 209 Vest Way asked what is to prevent if the computer does not work. Mr.
Nardella stated that it will work and it will be a condition in the decision. Mr. Rowen stated that
5
We're not going to shut them down. Marty Healy stated that they added that the plant manager 3
be present when they do inspections for safety reasons. Mr. Nardella asked what the
requirements for notification if you were to shut down the plant per D.E.P. Mr. Heally stated that
if we find a problem and we shut down we're not in violation. Ms.Lescarbeu wanted to know
why they could notify us as soon as they notify the regulatory agency. Mr. Rowen stated that
when they notify the regulatory agency then notify us at the same time and when you are just
shutting down one side you have 24 hours to notify us.
1
Mr. Nardella asked if a truck tips over and clean up is needed who is responsible for the cost. Mr. 1
McIver stated that it is the haulers responsibility. The driver would call a tow truck and the state
police and they would clean and they would then leave. Mr. Nardella asked if he conceived the
1
2
i
r
_ I
Town would have to pay the cost. Mr. McIver stated no. Attny Healy stated that the Board of E
Health can request us to report new D.E.P standards. Mr. Nardella asked Mr. Kimmell to look at
the 3rd bullet on the last page of the letter dated July 31, 1998. Mr. Kimmell Stated that he
would. Ms. Lescarbeau asked if we have incorporated all the comments form ARI and
specifically the shut down issues on page 10713 of the report. Mr. Rowen stated that he still i
wants ARI to get a monitoring plan. Mr. Minott stated that the permit condition will require to
be tested every nine months and the Town needs to make sure there consultant is on site during
the tests. Mr.Rowen stated that when the mercury and dioxin tests will be conducted the Town's
consultant will witness the tests. Ken Kimmell asked if the monitoring plan is not complete by j
August 18, 1998 when would the Board like the deadline to be. Mr. Minott stated that it would
be rushed if it was to be in by the August 18, 1998. Mr. Rowen stated that if MftI is stepping up l
they should provide the information in a timely manner. Mr, Simons asked what would happen if
an epidemelogy study was found. Ken Kimmell stated that if there is a report that is credible that
this plant is causing cancer I would not want to put-that in the decision. Mr. Nardella asked Mr.
U
Minott if he has worked with any consultants that look at epidemeology, Mr. Minott stated yes.
David Urry 209 Vest Way stated that he is not a lawyer but, the Town has been notified of the
risks of dioxin. Mr. Urry stated that if dioxin is proved to be carcinogenic the Town could have a
class action law suit.
d
Mr. Rowen stated that he appreciates everyone for coming tonight.
On a motion by Mr. Simons, seconded by Ms. Lescarbeau, the Board voted unanimously to close
the Public Hearing.
2
The North Andover Planning Board held a regular meeting on August 18, 1998. The following l
members were present; Richard S. Rowen, Chairman, Alison Lescarbeau, Vice Chairman, John j
Simons, Clerk, Alberto Angles, Associate Member, Joseph Mahoney, Richard Nardella and John
I
Simons. Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner was also present. {
F
The Board started to go over the decision. Joan Kulash asked for the Public Hearing to be re-
opened. The Board did not re-open the Public Hearing. Mark DiSalvo stated that he would like
I
to speak. Mr.Nardella asked if there is a guideline that Wheelabrator suggests for shutting down
the plant in case of CEM equipment failure. Marty Healy stated that the decision should follow
permit requirements set by the EPA and DEP. Mr. Rowen asked if a thermocouple fails is there a
time you would feel uncomfortable running without monitoring and is there something in DEP
that states that you would have to shut down. It was pointed out that there is redundant
equipment monitoring through temperatures in the.combusters and at the filter fabric inlets. (`
Timothy Porter stated there was no specific time in the permit after which the plant would shut
r
down after loss of CEM. However, the permit calls for continuous monitoring and meets the
qualifications. Ms. Kulash tried to speak but Mr. Rowen stated to the public that the Public
Hearing was closed two weeks ago at the last meeting. Joan Kulash asked what would make you
not want to hear us speak. Marty Healy stated that if this becomes a debate he will be very
concerned. If this becomes a Public Hearing he will withdraw his comments. Ken Kimmell 1
stated that we had an air quality consultant to answer issues to require automatic shut down. Mr_ ?
Kimmell stated that we should leave it for another day and have the consultant respond to the
a
P;
H
{
p
Planning Board with data. Mr. Kimmell thinks that the air quality consultant should get back to
the Board with a shut down time. Mr. DiSalvo stated that he would like to have the public speak.
Mr. Rowen stated that we had the Public Hearing two weeks ago. Mr. DiSalvo stated that this
topic was not on the table at that time. Mr.Rowen stated that any point was on the table at that
time. A resident asked why the Board let the public in tonight, Mr. Rowen stated that if they
have one speaker he will listen to the speaker. A resident stated that there is no reason to rush
this through. Joan Kulash stated that we're not your enemies, were due your ears. A resident
asked if the Board would like the public to leave the room so they could have a candle lit room to
talk. Mr. DiSalvo stated that the Board should make their decision only when the Board has
received all the information if it is only a week. Mr. Healy stated that Mr, DiSalvo's comments
are misleading. Mr. Healy stated that if MRI is meeting EPA standards we don't have to shut
down the plant. Mr. Healy stated that we have also set up a program to share our information
with the community. Joan Kulash started to speak out. Mr. Rowen asked her to sit down . Ms.
Kulash asked why the Board is shutting us out. Ken Kimmell went over his draft amendments for i
the decision. Mr. Nardella asked if MM was to have a wish list of back-up parts what would you
pick. Timothy Porter stated that they have an independent parts manager who is on call and he
gets there within twenty four hours for unexpected failures. Mr. Nardella stated that what you're
saying is that within twenty four hours most monitoring issues will be resolved, Ken Kimmell
read his revised comments. Mr. Kimmell stated that he would like to add in"The air quality
consultant retained by the Town shall specifically investigate and address the extent to which
MM's continuous emissions monitoring equipment is not functioning and report to the Planning
Board based on actual data as to whether a standard stricter that imposed by DEP and USEPA
should be imposed to address this issue. Such stricter standards may include but are not limited
to, imposing a requirement that a combuster be shut down if a continuous emissions monitoring
system fails for an excessive amount of time, or requiring redundant continuos emissions
monitoring equipment. The Planning Board reserves the right to revisit this issue after receiving
reports from the air quality monitor. A resident handed the Board an editorial from the Citizen.
Mr.Nardella went over his changes for the draft decision. Mr. Simons stated that he would like
to see dioxin tests be done on a quarterly basis. Mr. Healy stated that he feels that it would be x
objectionable to go above what DEP and EPA require. Mr. Rowen stated that the one thing he
would like to include in the decision would be that the town's monitor should be informed two
weeks prior to testing, and that all mercury and dioxin testing be done at a time which accurately
represented the operation of the facility. Cynthia Hibbard of Camp, Dresser and McKee stated K
that they test quarterly for mercury and every nine months for dioxin. Even though NM is not
constantly tracking mercury they are tracking surrogates whose performance is an indicator of
iz
mercury emission performance. Mr. Porter stated that it is the solid waste law to test every nine
months. Mr. Simons asked what the dioxin test involved, how much it cost and how long it takes. '
Mr. Porter stated that it takes two days to do one combuster for five hours and each combuster
$15,000 and there are two combusters. Mr. Simons stated that he would like to have them test
quarterly for dioxin. Mr. Simons stated that mercury and dioxin are the public health hazards and
this is where the risk is. Mr. Rowen stated that he would like to certainly have them do it for the
first year of operation and if the tests are consistent we could back off. Sean Brewster
representing NESWC stated that we look at DEP and EPA rules that are really protective and he
thinks the town will be adding costs that are not necessary. Mr. Simons stated that MRI can do
extra tests for a year and then if the tests come back U.K. they can do away with the extra. Mr.
i
' - f
5
DiSalvo stated that our tax dollars are paying for the tests anyway. Ms. Lescarbeau went over
her amendments for the draft decision. Mr. Mahoney went over his amendments for the draft
decision. Ms. Colwell stated that she would like to specifically reference the plans and the reports
that were submitted. Mr. Rowen stated that there will be five voting members. Mr. Angles, Ms.
Lescarbeau, Mr. Rowen, Mr. Simons and Mr. Nardella. Mr. Mahoney will be abstaining. A
resident asked if the Board incorporated the ash in the decision and who's responsible for the.ash F
once it leaves the incinerator. Mr. McIver stated that it will be owner by NESWC until it gets to
the landfill. A resident asked for the clarification on who's responsible for the ash. Mr. Rowen
stated that the responsibility for the ash is outside the scope of this Board.
On a motion by Ms. Lescarbeau, seconded by Mr. Simons the Board voted`4-1-0 to approve the
draft site plan review decision for Mass. REFUSETECH at 285 Holt Road.
Mr. Angles yes k
Ms. Lescarbeau yes
Mr. Simons yes
Mr. Nardella no
Mr. Rowen yes
Mr. Mahoney abstained
Mr. Mahoney stated that he abstained because he left early at the last meeting. Mr. Mahoney
stated that he spent ten hours listening to the people for the environment, reading the citizen and 5
three hours at a ZBA meeting listening to your issues. Mr. Mahoney stated that he is totally
aware of their concerns. Mr. Mahoney stated that he heard all the testimony relative to the site k
plan approval application but, he did not vote because he left early one meeting and he thought he
could be challenged. Mr. Nardella stated that our zoning bylaw requires us to look into the
environment. Mr, Nardella stated that he for one would like to note although he did work hard f
on this, we got the best decision we could get but, he couldn't vote for it.
Attached are the conditions.
incereiy,
s
Richard S. Rowen, Chairman q
North Andover Planning Board
7
l
Ii
Ipr,;
Frl
Y
5
2
J
L
f•
k
t