Loading...
2007 PROPOSED PERMITTING PLANPage 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:30 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Transfer Station - Permitting From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 5:02 PM To: james.doucett@state.ma.us Cc: Joanne Scott; Bill Thomson Jr. (billthomson@northsidecarting.com); Robbie George; Paul Taurasi Subject: Salem Transfer Station - Permitting On behalf of Northside Carting and the City of Salem, I would like to discuss our proposed permitting plan for the proposed Salem Transfer Station to be located at the existing Incinerator/Transfer Station site on Swampscott Road. The permitting discussion involves both the current site assignment (minor modification has been suggested) and the proposed increase in tonnage from 100 TPD to 400 TPD (public meeting). I have been discussing the permitting with John Carrigan of DEP-NERD and he suggested that we contact you to further discuss the permitting time line and compliance pathway for the new transfer station. I will try to reach you in the morning and will leave you a message. My contact information is provided below. Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 781/255-1982 Fax: 7811255-1974 Cell: 617/699-1878 7/29/2009 Attachment C Sequence of Events Salem Landfill June 9, 1960 Salem landfill facility is site assigned by the City of Salem Board of Health for a solid waste incinerator. March 1961 Site Plan by J.L. Hayden illustrates the construction of a solid waste incinerator building on the site. 1963 Salem landfill/incinerator opened for City of Salem waste Circa 1968 Incinerator breaks down, is not replaced, and waste is no longer accepted at the landfill. 1969 City of Salem Engineering Department plan details the construction of a road over a portion of the Forest River. 1969-1970 Roadway constructed over a portion of the Forest River, connecting the eastern and southwestern portions of the property. April 1975 CE Maguire Site Plan illustrates conversion of incinerator building to transfer station and construction of access road. September 9, 1975 City of Salem receives approval from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE-now DEP) to cap landfill and convert incinerator building into a solid waste transfer station. Waste is disposed of through various other local landfills. 1979 Notice of Intent filed by City of Salem to DEQE. May 9, 1988 Letter from DEQE to City of Salem discussing an April 26, 1988 inspection of the transfer station. Inspection revealed that the transfer station was operating in compliance with 310 CMR 18. August 18, 1993 DEP issues Notice of Non-compliance (NON) to City of Salem for conducting operations without Existing Facility Permit. June 3, 1994 Permit by Rule granted to City of Salem by DEP for the continued operation of the transfer station to accept up to 100 tons of solid waste per day. Septemberl, 1994 Northside Carting, Inc (NCI) begins to operate the landfill and transfer station, under contract from the City of Salem January 10, 1995 City of Salem issues notice to DEP stating that, as of September 1, 1994, Salem Environmental Company (NCI) is operating the transfer station. January 22, 1996 NCI prepares and submits 1995 Annual Solid Waste Facility Report to DEP. February 1, 1999 NCI prepares and submits 1998 Annual Solid Waste Facility Report to DEP. September 22, 1999 DEP conducts a compliance inspection of the landfill/transfer station facility in response to the receipt of a complaint. December 10, 1999 DEP issues NON to the City of Salem and NCI for various violations observed during the site inspection conducted on September 22, 1999. January 6, 2000 Waste Ban Plan submitted to DEP, indicating that only C&D debris was accepted by the facility. January 2000 BETA is retained by NCI and the City of Salem as consultant for environmental issues related to the landfill/transfer station. January 17, 2000 Request for Determination of Applicability submitted to Salem Conservation Commission and DEP. Salem Conservation Commission determines that Wetlands Notice of Intent filing is required. ------------ February 16, 2000 NCI prepares and submits 1999 Annual Report of waste. July 26, 2000 DEP Enforcement Conference regarding NON issues at landfill/transfer station facility. July 2000 Wetlands Notice of Intent submitted. Order of Conditions Filed- Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. April 19, 2001 Application for Modification of a Large Handling Facility submitted to DEP. April 19, 2001 DEP Issues approval for minor alteration of transfer station facility -the placement of four containers for the storage of recyclable materials. May 14, 2001 DEP issues approval for Modification of Large Handling Facility. May 15, 2001 Leaf and Yard Waste Composting Registration Form submitted by NCI to DEP. July 13, 2001 Administrative Consent Order with Penalty (ACOP) issued by DEP to the City of Salem and NCI. -March-1-5,-20.02------BETA performs_ six soil borings on the site related to the structural expansion of the transfer station. March 21, 2002 BETA is contracted by NCI to conduct ISA and CSA for landfill. Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:30 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Partial Site Chronology Attachments: Chronology.pdf From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 12:40 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Bill Thomson Jr. (billthomson@northsidecarting.com); Robbie George; Chris Pflum Subject: Partial Site Chronology For your information .... This is one item to be included in the information packet for the BOH members to be delivered to you in the morning. More to follow.... Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 781/255-1982 Fax: 7811255-1974 Cell: 6171699-1878 7/29/2009 �pRTHStpp eazt�9 City of Salem INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TRANSFER STATION PROPOSERS APRIL 26, 2007 1. In your proposal, you propose to increase the tonnage from 100 tons per day to 400 tons per day. Note: At the City's option, we will initiate the permitting process to increase the tonnage to 650 tons per day (TPD) immediately. Simultaneously, we will proceed with completion of the Transfer Station design and other critical path items to achieve the schedule presented in our proposal. If we are successful in permitting the 650 TPD Facility, we will agree to increase the Host Community fee to $2.00 per ton. (a) If you are successful, how many trucks will visit the site each day? Currently, there are between 10 and 15 trucks visiting the site per day. We anticipate approximately 20 to 30 more trucks, for a daily total of approximately 30 to 40 trucks coming into the Transfer Station. (b) What are the sizes of the trucks? Most of the larger trucks will be either 30 cubic yard roll -offs or 31 cubic yard rear -load packers. Both vehicles are approximately 32 feet long. Note that we have already re -designed the entrance with a larger turning radius, so that the subject vehicles will be able to readily access the site and avoid impacts to traffic flow along Swampscott Street. Page 1 of 6 G�aateag (c) What is the schedule of drop offs? The arrival times for the majority of the trucks will be scheduled to avoid impacts to peak traffic times in the morning and late afternoon. Since most of the vehicles coming to the site will be NSC trucks, we will have direct control over the scheduling. (d) Will trucks be stored on site? If so, how many? There are currently three vehicles on site that are directly related to operations: a truck to move roll- off containers; a yard spotter for moving trailers; and a tractor for moving the metals trailer. No additional vehicles will be stored on site. Note: This does not include any City vehicles that may be stored on that portion of the site where we propose to construct the Salt Barn and recycling/yard waste drop-off facilities. (e) What is the DEP and Board of Health process for increasing the tonnage? There are two permits required under DEP regulations: ➢ A Major Permit Modification is required under DEP regulations (Form BWP SW 07), since the proposed tonnage rate is over 50 tons per day. As discussed in our proposal, MEPA permitting requirements may also have an impact on the DEP permitting process. ➢ A Minor Permit Modification will be required, also under DEP regulations but administered through the local Board of Health, for the "Site Assignment". Because we propose a 400 -TPD Facility that will not exceed the footprint of the existing facility, we have been advised by DEP that a minor permit modification is appropriate. Note: In the event a 650 -TPD Facility is endorsed by the City, a Major Permit Modification will be required for the Site Assignment Page 2 of 6 Mpg ASIp�, ea2t�, (f) What type of debris will be brought in, C&D or MSW? The wastes are expected to consist of a combination of Construction Demolition Debris (C&D), Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) and Commercial Solid Wastes (CSW). In addition, we are proposing to accept residential yard wastes and recyclable materials year round. (g) Where will the waste be generated from? Proposer's contracts? The majority of the wastes will be generated from Salem residents and businesses, plus wastes from neighboring communities. We currently have contracts with the City of Salem and Nahant for collection of municipal wastes. (h) What is the size of the station itself? Does it exceed the footprint of the existing structure? The overall dimensions of the proposed Transfer Station are approximately 75 feet by 100 feet, or 7,500 square feet. That is equivalent to the square footage of the existing structures, including the stack. Discussions with the DEP have confirmed that the proposed construction will not exceed the footprint of the existing site facilities; therefore, only a minor permit modification to the site assignment will be required. Page 3 of 6 �p1iTHS/pF eazt«9 2. Tell us about your experience managing a transfer station. Size? Capacity? NSC personnel have extensive experience operating similar transfer station facilities in this area as demonstrated in the following table. NSC Transfer Station Experience Facility Location Primary Operator Size of Facility TPD Duration of Direct Involvement Key NSC Personnel Salem NSC 100 13 yrs RG, Thomsons Somerville WM 11600 12 yrs Thomsons Methuen WM 100 2 yrs Thomsons Newbury NSC 49 3 yrs RG, Thomsons Roxbury 1 Laidlaw, 11000 15 yrs RG Peabody Laidlaw 1,000 5 rs RG Key NSC personnel include Robert George (RG) and the Thomsons (Bill Sr, Bill Jr, Brian, Jeffrey, and Kevin), all of whom have a direct ownership interest in the Company. 3. Other than a transfer station, do you have any plan to utilize other portions of the site? If so, for what use? As discussed in our proposal, we plan to construct a new Salt Barn and new recycling/yard waste drop-off facilities on the western portion of the site. Initially, the Salt Barn will be used to temporarily house transfer station operations while the new Transfer Station is constructed. We have proposed to enter into a 99 -year lease for the western portion of the site, with the understanding that NSC will be responsible for operation of the yard waste/recyclable materials drop-off area. Page 4 of 6 �pRTNS/Q�, eaz�.a9 4. What (if any) will be used as an "escalator" for the royalty/tipping fee to the City? While not specifically presented in our original proposal, we will agree to apply a $0.10 per ton escalator per year to the proposed host community fee, in accordance with our previous proposal to the City prior to issuance of the current RFP. 5. Describe what your improvements (buildings/equipment) will be to the parcel. a. Size of building(s) The Building footprint will be 75 feet by 100 feet; it will be two stories high, with an upper story for incoming loads and a lower story with two loading tunnels for receiving direct dumping of material into open top trailers. b. Construction materials used (i.e. cement pad with steel corrugated body and roof, 30' in height, etc.) The tipping and tunnel floors and walls will be cast in place concrete; the superstructure will consist of a pre-engineered metal building with a 35 -foot eave height, with a minimum of 30 -foot clear height within the building. Much of the new building will be pile supported. c. What types of equipment would be housed in each building There will be no processing equipment within the building, only HVAC equipment, electrical panels and other building support systems. A 1,500 square foot office space / lunch room is proposed to be constructed over the tunnels. 6. Will residents be able to take waste there free of charge during normal operating hours? Yes, as stipulated in your RFP. Page 5 of 6 7. What do you envision being your operating hours? Weekdays: 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM — year round, except holidays Saturdays: 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM — year round, except holidays Sundays*: 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM - three Sundays in Spring; three Sundays in Fall * Actual dates to be coordinated with City. ".ARTNS/p� ea�r�9 Page 6 of 6 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:30 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem LF/Transfer Station Project - Q&A From Interview Process Attachments: BETA_MA_1_SCAN_3322_000.pdf From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:36 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Bill Thomson Jr.(billthomson@northsidecarting.com); Robbie George; Jerry Magnan; Paul Taurasi Subject: Salem LF/Transfer Station Project - Q&A From Interview Process Here is a copy of the Q&A document we discussed this morning. It may be helpful to get this to the Board Members for tomorrow night's meeting. Also, we are making copies of the Initial Site Assessment (ISA), Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) and Corrective Action Alternatives Analysis (CAAA) Reports to be sent to you via overnight mail. Please call me with any questions in the meantime. Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 781/255-1982 Fax: 781/255-1974 Cell: 617/699-1878 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:30 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Various DEP Approval Letters - Salem Landfill Attachments: DEP ISA -CSA SOW Conditional Approval.pdf; DEP CSA Conditional Approval.pdf; DEP Approval Letter.pdf From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:50 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Bill Thomson Jr. (billthomson@northsidecarting.com); Robbie George; Jerry Magnan; Paul Taurasi Subject: Various DEP Approval Letters - Salem Landfill Here are copies of three DEP "Conditional Approval' Letters of the following submittals related to the subject project site: • Initial Site Assessment & CSA Scope of Work; • Comprehensive Site Assessment; and • Corrective Action Alternatives Analysis. Please call me with any questions. Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 781/255-1982 Fax: 781/255-1974 Cell: 617/699-1878 From: Jerry Magnan Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:44 PM To: Alan Hanscom Subject: Al, Here are the ISA, CAAA and CSA approval letters from DEP. Jerry 7/29/2009 C� JUN. IV. 20&b 2: 49PM DANA SVM Governor NO. 8B5 P.2/6 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Metropolitan Boston - Northeast Regional Office Mr. Stanley Bornstein City of Salem Department of Public Works 93 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Dear Mr. Bornstein: BOB DURAND soccetaay LAUREN A lzss Commissioner June 19, 2002 RE: SALEM— Solid Waste Salem Transfer Station/Landfill BWP SW 12-ISA/CSA Scope of Work Conditional Approval Transmittal No. W 027657 The Metropolitan Boston/Northeast Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Waste Prevention, Division of Solid Waste Management (the 'Department"), has completed the review of the Town of Salem's application (BWP SW 12, Transmittal No. W 027657) for an Initial Site Assessment (I$A) and Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) Scope of Work for Salem Landfill and Transfer Station, located on Swampscott Road, in the City of Salem, The Salem Landfill and Transfer Station is located near the intersection of Swampscott Road and Highland Avenue in the western portion of Salem. The property where the landfill is located is approximately 8 acres in size and has been owned by the City of Salem since at least 1928. A landfill incinerator was operated by the City of Salem from 1963 through 1968. A portion of the property was used to dispose of ash generated at the on-site incinerator, A transfer station has been operated by the City of Salem from 1963 through 1994. Northeast Carting Inc. (NCI) has operated the transfer station on the property since 1994 to the present, The Department has reviewed the information presented in the ISA/ CSA Scope of Work pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 (Solid Waste Management Regulations) and the established guidelines preseatedinDeparlment's guidance document, T.arid1111 Terlmiral Giiidanve Mannal� (DEP Publication No, SWMID: 001-91-0, Rev. 5/97), 'Phil fnlhrmnffon L maMble In altarnalo fcrmot by calling car ADA Coordlnamr at CRR) 6749&72. 205A Lowell 31, Wilmington, MA 01687 . Phone (876) 661.7600 . F9%(676) 961.7016 . Trop (078) 661.7070 Web $110: hnp:/AWW.Mess.Oov/CEP 0 Printed on Recycled Paper JUN. 19.2002 2�49PM N0.885 P. 3/6 Salem: ISA/C$A Scope of Work Conditional Approval Transmittal No' W 027657 Page 2 of 5 Based on this review, the Department, acting trader the authority of the M,G.L, c. 111, �. 150A and 310 CMR 19.000, hereby approves the Town of Salem application for an ISA/CSA Scope of Work for the Salem Landfill with the following conditions: (1) CSA Compliance Reporting The CSA shall be performed in accordance with the following: a. JIMT,andiill Terhniral GiiidanceMaros], b. 310 CMR 19.150 (5) rare rehensive Cite Asomment; and C. The Conditionally approved CSA Scope of Work. If there is a need to make any significant deviations from the tasks contained in the Conditionally approved CSA Scope, or from any other Department protocols, the Town shall obtain written approval from the Department prior to undertaking such changes, (2) Drilling Program, Groundwater Monitoring Wells. a, Well installations, testing, and sampling shall be performed in accordance with the Departments guidance document #WSC-310-91; Standard References I C Mmitnring Well (Standard References), ` b. The Department requires that one (1) additional Well be constructed next to one of the proposed downgradient monitoring wells and completed as a deep and shallow well couplet for the purpose of determining the vertical extent of potential groundwater contamination and vertical hydraulic gradient. The well screens of the shallow and deep well couplet should be separated by at least 10 feet. If the additional well is installed in bedrock, the bedrock shall be cored to a minimum depth of 10 feet to confirm refusal. The rock core shall be logged as described in SPd ian R 7 Rock Mssifination of,Stan and R .f renres, The core sample should provide information regarding rock type and degree of fracturing and should be assessed as to the potential for fluid migration through the rock. The methodology for evaluating the potential for fluid migration should be presented in the Draft CSA along with sample field data sheets, c. The ISA indicates that piping, possibly associated with an underground storage tank (UST) was present on-site at the time of the site inspection (Salem LSA; page 21), The presence of piping indicates that the UST is also still present. Therefore, the Department requires an investigation of the area around the UST consisting of the following: NO. BBS P.4/6 Salem: ISAJCSA Scope of Work Conditional Approval Transmittal No, W 027657 Page 3 of 5 I. Research ofthe Town and Fire Department records to determine the age, capacity and dimensions of the UST; 2, Evaluation and analysis of the contents of the UST to determine the volume Of any liquids remaining in the UST and the depth to the bottom of the UST; 3, The installation of three soil borings on the north, south and west sides of the UST to extend to a depth below the bottom of the UST; 4, Logging and field screening of 8011 samples with aflame or photo, ionization detector (PIF or FID), and, 5. Soil sample collection and analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPM, EPA mathod 8020, and EPA method 8310. Massachusetts DEp methods volatile petroleum hydrocarbons (VPIq) and Massachusetts DEP extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPIC can be substituted for the above EPA methods, If soil analysis indicates the presence of petroleum or hazardous compounds, monitoring wells shall be installed in the area surrounding the UST for further evaluation of the soil and groundwater conditions, (3) Extent of Refuse: Vertical and horizontal extent of refuse at the site must be determined through the use of test pits or other means. (4) Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity: The hydraulic conductivity Of all major stratigtaphic units shall be determined. An evaluation should be conducted to determine all the major statigraphic units at the site. (5) Groundwater Analytical Parameters In addition to the analytes listed on Page 12 of the CSA Scope of Work, the following compounds must be Included; methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobntyl ketone, and acetone. In addition, unknown peaks having intensities greater than five times the background intensity shall be identified (Method 8260 is detailed in the EPA publication SW -846, entitled Test Methods for Evaluating Solid TFaste); ' JUN.19.2962 2:56PM N0.885 P. 5/6 Salem.: ISA/CSA Scope of Work Conditional Approval Transmittal No. W 027657 Page 4 of5 (6) Surface Water Sampling and Analysis Plan Based on the results of the surface water sampling, the need for additional surface water sampling should be considered. (7) Sediment Sampling and Analysis Plan In addition to the two proposed sediment sampling locations (up and down stream locations), a third location shall be sampled from the area of historical leachate breakouts (described as area of discoloration in ISA). In addition to the analytes listed on page 11 of the CSA Scope of Work, sediment samples shall be analyzed for the following parameters: 1. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 2. Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) 3, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) 4. 2,3,7,8 - TCDD (indicator for Dioxins and Furans) (8) Landfill Gas Characterization Ua. In accordance with the -Landfill Twibnirnl Gaidanep Manual, a landfill gas characterization must be performed for the landfill. The following compounds should be analyzed for the characterization: • Benzene 1,1,1-Trichloroetbane • 1,2-Dibromomethane Trichloroethene • 1,2-Diehloroethane Trichloromethane • Dichloromethane Toluene • Tetrachloroethene Vinyl Chloride • Tetrachloromethane Xylenes EPA TO -14 may be used in place of the compound list above. b, Landfill gas characterization shall also include laboratory analysis for fixed gasses: methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen and nitrogen. c, Non -methane organic compounds by RPA method 25A or equivalent must be analyzed, (9) Field and Lab Quality Assurance /Quality Control Plaits The QA/QC Sampling Plan Analysis must include a trip blank, field blatilc, lab �:' blank and blind samples. JUM.19.2002 2:50PM Salem: ISA/CSA Scope of Work Conditional Approval Transmittal No. W 027657 Page 5 of 5 (10) Continued Monitoring M0.885 P.6i6 Following completion of four (4) quarters of sampling for the CSA, the Town shall continue to conduct euvixonmentaj monitoring at the landfill in accordance with 310 CMR 19.132 and the approved CSA Scope, until otherwise approved in writing by the Department Gas monitoring shall be conducted quarterly, and groundwater monitoring shall be conducted semi-annually. Please be advised that the Department reserves the right to require additional assessment and investigation of the landfill site based on a review of the analytical results, It is the applicant's responsibility to comply with all other applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as a prerequisite to conducting the CSA, Should you have any questions relative to this letter, please contact John Morey at (978) 661-7663. Jo P. Morey Environmental Analyst Heidi O'Brien Deputy Regional Director cc: Salem Boardof$ealth John Keenan, Salem City Solicitor, 222 Essex Street, Salem, MA 01970 Robert George, Northside Carting, Inc., 215 Weathersfield, St. Rowley, MA 01969 C! J COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION METROPOLITAN BOSTON — NORTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE MITT ROMNEY ELLEN ROY HER23ELDER Governor - secretary ItERRY HEALEY ROBERT W. GOLLEDGE, Sr. Lieutenant GDvemor Commissioner MAR 0 2 2004 Mr. Stanley Bornstein RE: SALEM — Solid Waste Salem_..---. ._ -. _.....-- -----------------------------Salem Transfer Station/Landfill--- ---- --- Department of Public Works BWP SW 23 93 Washington Street Transmittal No. W 044286 Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Comprehensive Site Assessment FMF139974 Dear Mr. Bornstein: The Metropolitan Boston/Northeast Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Waste Prevention, Division of Solid Waste Management (the "Department"), has completed the review of the City of Salem's (the "City") application for a Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA) for the Salem Landfill and Transfer Station (the "Site'. Beta Group, Inc. of Norwood, Massachusetts prepared the CSA on behalf of the City. The CSA was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the May 7, 2002, Administrative Consent Order (the "ACO') between the Department and the City. The Site is located near the intersection of Swampscott Road and Highland Avenue in the western portion of Salem. The property is approximately 8 acres in size and has been owned by the City of Salem since at least 1928. The City operated a solid waste incinerator at the Site from 1963 through 1968, A portion of the property was used to dispose of ash generated by the incinerator. The City of Salem operated the transfer station at the Site from 1963 through 1994. Northeast Carting Inc. (NCI) has operated the transfer station on the property since 1994 to the present. This iotormatloo it avetloble is altercate format Call Debra Doherty, ADA Coordinator, at 1-617-292.5565. TDD Service -1.800.29&2207. One Wlnter Sheet, Boston, MA 02108• Phone (617) 654-6500 • fax (817) 568.1049 • TDD * (800) 298.2207 DEP on the World Wide Web: httpJ/w .stata.ma.usldep C Pdhted on Recycled Paper Salem Page 2 of 3 Salem Landfill The Department has reviewed the information presented in the CSA, pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 (Solid Waste Management Regulations) and the guidelines presented in the Department's Landfill Technical Guidance Manual (DEP Publication No. SWMlD: 001-91-G, Rev. 5/97). Based on this review, the Department, in accordance with 310 CMR 19.150(2), approves the CSA with the following conditions: (1) Drilling and Gas well Installation. a. Within. 90 days of the date of this Conditional Approval, the City shall relocate the three (3) destroyed gas probe wells (SG -2, SG -3 and SG -5) at the site to the following locations: 1. a point located midway between MW -2 and SG -7 along the eastern edge of the site, 2. a point immediately adjacent to MW -2, and -------._-------3--a point -immediately south of the transfer-station-building;---- b. ransfer-stationbuilding:---b. Well installations, testing, and sampling shall be performed in accordance with the Department's guidance document #WSC-310-91: Standard References for _.... Monitorine Wells (the "Standard References".) and the Landfill Technical Guidance ,. Manual: C. The landfill gas shall be analyzed for the parameters required by 310 CMR 19.132(4) and in addition for methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen, and nitrogen. (2) Sediment Sampling and Analysis Plan a. Within 90 days of the date of this Conditional Approval, the City shall collect two (2) additional sediment samples from the following locations: 1. the area up -stream of the northern property line in order to access the upstream concentrations of sediment and local conditions, and 2. the small inlet immediately to the south of the landfill. (3) Investigation Results The City shall include the results of the investigations required by conditions (1) and (2) above in the Corrective Action Alternative Analysis (CAAA). This shall include an analysis of any trends in the monitoring data, both temporal and spatial. If results of the additional monitoring indicate that landfill gas or sediment contamination pose a actual or potential significant risk to the public health, welfare, public safety or the environment then remedial measures, in addition to a landfill cap, necessary to abate the risk shall be evaluated in the Corrective Action Alternative Analysis (CAAA). SalemLdfCSAAprv3_04 3/2/2004 Salem Salem Landfill (4) Continued Monitoring Page 3 of 3 The City shall continue to conduct environmental monitoring at the landfill in accordance with 310 CMR 19.132 and the approved CSA Scope, until otherwise approved in writing by the Department. This includes conducting the gas monitoring quarterly and groundwater and surface water monitoring semi-annually. This decision is issued by the Department under the authority of MGL, Chapter 111, Section 150A and 310 CMR 19.000. All activities shall be implemented in compliance with 310 CMR 40.0114, Solid Waste Management Facilities, of the Massachusetts Contingency Plan and in a manner consistent with the Department's April 1991 guidance document -Standard References for Monitoring Wells WSC-310-91 and the Landfill Technical Guidance Manual. ' This decision does not relieve the City of its responsibility to comply with all other r-- ---applicable state; -federal; andiocal statutes; regulations -and-requirem6nts.. The -City shall -obtain---- - -- - I Department approval prior to making any significant modifications to the tasks required by this decision or any Department protocol. T:he Departnent.may require additional:aasessment,and/or remedial activities at the landfill if environmental data indicate that past or:present activities at the site have contributed to conditions that pose a significant risk to the public health, safety or the environment. I jShould you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact John Morey at (617) 654-6698. Sincerely, Sincere , JL P. Morey John A. Carrig Environmental An Section Chi Solid Wast Management JAC/JPWjjpm ' Cc: John Keenan, Salem City Solicitor, 222 Essex Street, Salem, MA 01970 Robert George, Northside Carting, Inc., 215 Weathersfield, St. Rowley, MA 01969 SalemLdfCSAAprv3_04 3/2/2004 Brace Tbubodeau lrin z u I= City of Salem Department of Public Works 120 Washington Street .. Salem, MA 01970 RE: SALEM - Solid Waste Salem landfill Corrective ActionsAlternativesAnalysis ; Conditional Approval File # W062414 Facility # 39974 Dear Mr. Thlbodeau: The Metropolitan Bosion/Northeast Region ofthe Department of Environmental Protection, Division, of - Solid Waste Managementhas received your application for approval of the Corrective Action Alternatives:Analysis (CAAA) for closure of the Salem Landfill, SwampscottRoad,'Salem, Massachusetts (BWP SW 24 Corrective ActionAlternative Analysis, Transmittal Number W062414). The application was prepared onyou r.beb&by BETA Group, Inc., Norwood, Massachusetts. The recommended alternative provides for: 1. Demolition of the exis6g.transfer stafirm (former incinerator) and replacement witha new structure designed for:use as lr transfer station. 2. Excavation of construction & demolition waste from the culverted crossing of Forest River with reconstruction of the culvert and crossing. C&D materialsare to be disposed of within the existing landfill. . 3. Excavation of waste (ash and MSW),&om along Forest River with. relocation of the waste to within the existing.land511, The. finished slope along ForestRiver will be graded:at a:slcp.e of . 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3:1,a 33% grade)... 4. Construction of a;new-retaining wall'in the vicinity of the existing transfer station (incinerator) building to facilitate relocationof. the waste materials (ash, MSW and C&D) while retaining the. necessary separation;of grades between the front.and rear of the new transfer station building. 5. Capping of the waste materials with a flexible membrane'aer (FML) cap. 6. The finished grade of the capped landfill will have a minimum gradient of 5%. 7. Construction of a new salt shed west of Forest River. Thb inform25on Is available In alternate format Can Donald M. Games, ADA Coordinator, at 1-617556-1057.7DD service. 1-800-298-2z(17. So Floor, One Winter Street, Boston, MA 02108 Phone (e17) 8548500 • Fax (617) 558-1048 • TDD #(800)298-2207 DEP on the Wodd Wlde Web: hap:#A .state.ma.us/dep 1Q� Printed on Recycled Paper Salem Salem Landfill Corrective Action Alternative Analysis Conditional Approval Page 2 As described in the application, the C&D materials from the demolition of the existing transfer station (incinerator) building will be used as backfill for the building foundation. The Department conchs that the C&D materials - both from demolition of the existing building and from relocation of materials from the culvert area - may be used to backfill the building foundation hole and re -grade the area around the existing foundation. The application proposes to effect the use of the C&D debris as backfill pursuant to a Beneficial Use Determination (a BUD, 310 CMR 19.060). The Department has determined that a BUD is not the appropriate mechanism for the effecting the use of the C&D as proposed by this project. In consideration of the origin and character of the C&D debris, the debris must be placed as part of the waste materials in the landfill, and the landfill cap extended to include the transfer station foundation. The Department will entertain disposal of the C&D materials in this manner as an integral component of the site remediation and landfill closure design. Based on the site use history and the soil conditions identified by the Comprehensive Site Assessment (CSA), the Department has determined that the construction of the salt shed does not require Department approval. The Department approves the CAAA and concurs with the selection of Option 4 for the design of closure of the landfill subject to the following conditions: 1. The closure design shall: a. Extend the limits of the cap to cover the C&D waste materials. In accomplishing this extension of the cap, either the FML may be extended under the new building with the FML and related layers designed to accommodate the loads, or the building foundation shall be integrated into the impervious layer of the' cap. b. Design the new building foundation to protect the building and its occupants from explosive gases. 2. The Corrective Action Design (CAD, i.e. the closure plans) application shall be signed by the appropriate official of the City of Salem Reports, plans, etc., shall be signed and sealed by the engineer of record Each shall include certification pursuant to 310 CMR 19.011, as required. 3. The Department reserves the right to amend, modify, suspend or revoke this approval as necessary to protect the public health, safety or the environment, or as otherwise necessary to insure compliance with applicable law and/or regulation. 4. The City shall obtain and comply with the requirements of all applicable state, federal and local laws, regulations, and permits. Concurrently with submitting the CAD application the City shall submit documentation that the applications for such other permits and approvals as may be required have been applied for. 5. In consideration of the commercial operating nature of the transfer station by Northside Carting Inc. and the interdependence of the reconstruction of the transfer station on the corrective action design, the Department's review of the CAD shall not be subject to the exemption from application fees granted to municipalities. The application shall be subject to payment of the applicable fees for privately owned/operated facilities as established at 310 CMR 4.00. 6. The Department reserves the option to require Northside Carting, Inc. to obtain a permit, issued to Northside Carting, Inc., for future operation of the facility, and/or otherwise pay an annual compliance fee as applicable to privately operated facilities. s150412apv.doc 04/12/05 Salem Page 3 Salem Landfill . Corrective Action Alternative Analysis Conditional Approval NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The City of Salem (the'"City") is hereby notified that it may within twenty-one (21) days file,a request that this decision be deemed a provisional decision under 310 CMR 19.037(4)(b), by submitting a written statement of the basis on which the City believes it is aggrieved, together with any supporting materials. Upon timely filing of such a request,, the decision shall be deemed a provisional decision with an effective date twenty-one (21) days after the Departments rem receipt of the request Such a request shall reopen the administrative record, and the Department ay rescind, - supplement, modify, or reaf rim its decision. Failure by the City to exercise the right provided in this section shall 'constitute a waiver of the Citys right to appeal Areal. Any person aggrieved by the issuance of this decision, except as provided for under 310 CMR 19.037(4)(b), may file an appeal for judicial review of said decision in accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. c.111, s.15QA and M.G.L. c. 30A, not later than thirty (30) days following the receipt of the fatal decision -The standing of a persontc file an appeal and the procedures for filing such appeal shall be governed by the provisions ofM.01. c..30A. Unless the person requesting an appeal requests and is granted a stay of the term and conditions of the decision by a court of competent jurisdiction, the decision shall remain effective. Notice of Action . Any aggrieved person intending to appeal this decision to the Superior Court shall.first provide notice to the Department of their intention to commence such action. Said notice of intention shall include the Department file number and shall identify with particularity the issues and reasons why it is believed the decision was not proper. Such notice shall be provided to the Office of General Counsel of the Department and the Regional Director forthe regional office which processed the application. The appropriate addresses to which to send such notices are: General Counsel Department of Environmental Protection One Winter Street -3rd Floor Boston, MA 02108 Regional Director Department ofEnviroomental Protection NERO One Winter Street - 5te Floor Boston, MA 02108 No allegation shall be made in any judicial appeal of this decision unless the matter complained of was raised at the appropriate point in the administrative review procedures established in those regulations, provided that a matter may be raised upona showing that it is material and that it was not reasonablypossible with due diligence to have been raised during such procedures or that matter sought to be raised is of critical importance to the environmental impact of the permitted activity. The Department reminds you that pursuant to the Administrative Consent Order (ACOP -NE -0111005), the City was required to complete closure of the landfill by November 1, 2004. On October 28, 2004 the Department forwarded to the City; via your consultant, BETA Group; an agreement for extension of the ACOP to November 1, 2005 for completion of the closure of the landfill. The City has not executed that extension. The Department will entertain discussion to reasonable extension of the ACOP deadlines. However, it is necessary that the City. submit, within twenty-one (21) days of this notice, to the Department a schedule for completion of the project design (the Corrective Action Design [CAD]) and construction of the landfill closure: s1504122ay.doe 04/12/05 Salem SalemLandtlll Corrective Action Alternative Analysis Conditional Approval Page 4 Should youhave any questions concerning this matter, please contact David Adams at 617-654-6677. Sincerely, B=' =l David C. Adams John A. Carrigan Environmental Engineer Section Chief Solid Waste Management Solid Waste Management JAC/DCA/dca enclosure: Fact Sheet cc: Salem Board of Health Salem, MA jscott@salem.com Alan D. Hanscom, PB BETA Group, Jac. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, MA 02062 Robert George Northside Carting, Inc. 12 Swampscott Road Salem, MA 01970 s1f50412epv.dcc 04/12/05 FACT SHEET File Number: W062414 - Salem Landfill & Transfer Station Page 2 of 4 Corrective Actions Alternatives Analysis Size: total site: 9.2 acres landfill: not provided Other Department Approvals Effecting this Application: Administrative Consent Order ACOP -NE -01-4005 effective date: April 4, 2002 amended: negotiation pending Comprehensive Site Assessment File Number: W044286 approved: March 2, 2004 Submissions with this Application: report City of Salem, Massachusetts Corrective Action Alternative Analysis . Salem Landfill 12 Swampscott Road Salem, Massachusetts March 2005 Discussion: Pursuant to 310 CMR 19.011 and 19.030(10 & 11) a "responsible! official" of the applicant (the City of Salem) is required to sign the application. The City has not signed the Corrective Action Alternative Analysis (CAAA) application. In consideration of the need to proceed to design of this project and the degree of conformity of the selected option to a standard design, the Department has elected to waive the signatory requirement for this application. It will be necessary that the appropriate "responsible official" of the City of Salem sign the application for review of the Corrective Action Design. The CAAA reviews 5 options. The first 2 options ([Option 1] the need for "more stringent closure actions than defined in 310 CMR 19.112 and [Option 2] the ability to allow a "less stringent closure actions" than defined in 310 CMR 19.112) and the "no s150409fs.doe 04/14/05 FACT SHEET File Number: W062414 Salem Landfill & Transfer Station Page 3 of 4 Corrective Actions Alternatives Analysis build" option [Option 5] are only summarily described and examined. The focus of the report is a "standard" option [Option 31 and a "modified" option [Option 4]. Options 2 and 5 are rejected as not meeting the goals of the regulatory standards for landfill closures. • . Option 1 is rejected as the results of the Comprehensive Site:Assessment (CSA) did not indicate aneed. . The City's engineers recommend the selection of Option 4 for the closure of the landfill: Under Option 3: * The existing landfill would be capped with a low permeability soil or FML cap. * All waste would be retained within the existing waste limits. * The.River,Front of the Forest River would be remediated by:. i. excavating the waste from the edge of the river, ii. constructing a concrete bin type retaining wall along the edge: of the river, iii. backfilling the retaining wall with the excavated waste. This option would not make any changes to the existing transfer station or other improvements to the site outside of the existing limits waste. Option 3 describes using an FNM to constrict the cap along the slopes facing the river. As described the FML would be placed at a gradient of 3:1, and excavated waste would be "stored" behind.a retaining wall constructed next to :the river.. The Department assumes it is meant that the excavated waste will be used as permanent backfill behind the retaining.wah. The described River Front remediation would result in waste materials being placed above the cap. This element of the design does not coruply with minimal requirements for the capping of the waste material. However, the design is amenable to alteration to - - correct this deficiency. Under Option 4 the landfill would be capped with a low permeability soil or FML cap as included;at Option 3. In addition: * The old incinerator building (of which part is used as the existing transfer '. station) would be razed. s150409a.dw 04/14/05 FACT S19EET Salem Landfill & Transfer Station Corrective Actions Alternatives Analysis File Number: W062414 Page 4 of 4 * The River Front of the Forest River would be remediated by excavating waste from along the river and regarding the landfill slope' (currently varying from 1:1 to 2:1) to a gradient of 3:1. * Forest River will be Ruther remediated by removal of the C&D waste materials from the area of the culvert and reconstructing the river crossing with clean fill. * The C&D debris from razing the incinerator, along with the waste excavated from the River Front would be used to backfill the area of the incinerator building. * A new transfer station, with access driveways and aprons, would be constructed. * A new salt shed would be constructed on the portion of the property on the opposite side of the Forest River (the area currently used for the Town's leaf & yard waste composting area.). As proposed the new building would retain the same setback from the street side property line as the current building (circa 40 feet). Option, 4 proposes to use the C&D debris and excavated waste as fill under the new. transfer station pursuant to a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD). This type of approval will hof likely be appropriate. However, the design will likely be amenable to extension of the waste area and cap to beneath the new transfer station building. Option 4 includes construction of a new salt shed on the property. As identified in the plans available at this time, the area where the salt shed is proposed has not been used for solid waste (ash, MSV) disposal. The area is currently being used for leaf & yard waste composting -an activity exempt pursuant to 310 CMR 16.05(4)(b). As described in the CSA and noted on the plan included with the CAAA, waste disposal at the site was: limited principally to the portion of the site east of Forest River. Some construction & demolition waste (C&D debris) disposal also occurred within the immediate vicinity of the Forest River as part of establishing access across the Forest River to the portion of the west of the river - an approximately 160 foot reach of the river was placed into a culvert and the river channel at the culvert was filled with C&D debris materials. The Department, therefore, deems the portion of the site west of the Forest River (not including the area of C&D disposal) to be a separate and distinct area from the waste disposal area ofthe site. Therefore, the area where the salt shed is to be located is not subject to review and approval as a post closure use for the purpose of constructing a salt shed as proposed. Run (horizontal) to rise (vertical). &5040M.dw 04/14/05 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:29 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Landfill / Transfer Station Attachments: UpdatedChronology.pdf From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 4:45 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Bill Thomson Jr. (billthomson@northsidecarting.com); Robbie George; Paul Taurasi; Jerry Magnan Subject: Salem Landfill / Transfer Station We have updated the attached Project Chronology to bring it current...... through today's site walk. Copies of the ISA, CSA and CAAA Reports have been sent to you via overnight mail. Please call me with any questions ...... Also, Please let us know the time we are scheduled to meet with the Board tomorrow night. Thanks, Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 7811255-1982 Fax: 781/255-1974 Cell: 6171699-1878 7/29/2009 8/13/07 Chronology of Events Salem Landfill June 9, 1960 Salem landfill facility is site assigned by the City of Salem Board of Health for a solid waste incinerator. March 1961 Site Plan by J.L. Hayden illustrates the construction of a solid waste incinerator building on the site. 1963 Salem landfill/incinerator opened for City of Salem waste disposal. Circa 1968 Incinerator breaks down, is not replaced, and waste is no longer accepted at the landfill. 1969 City of Salem Engineering Department plan details the construction of a road over a portion of the Forest River. 1969-1970 Roadway constructed over a portion of the Forest River, connecting the eastern and southwestern portions of the property. April 1975 CE Maguire Site Plan illustrates conversion of incinerator building to transfer station and construction of access road. September 9, 1975 City of Salem receives approval from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE- now DEP) to cap landfill and convert incinerator building into a solid waste transfer station. Waste is disposed of through various other local landfills. May 29, 1979 Notice of Intent filed by City of Salem to DEQE. May 9,1988 Letter from DEQE to City of Salem discussing an April 26, 1988 inspection of the transfer station. Inspection revealed that the transfer station was operating in compliance with 310 CMR 18. August 18, 1993 DEP issues Notice of Non-compliance (NON) to City of Salem for conducting operations without Existing Facility Permit. June 3, 1994 Permit by Rule granted to City of Salem by DEP for the continued operation of the transfer station to accept up to 100 tons of solid waste per day. 8/13/07 Septemberl, 1994 Northside Carting, Inc (NCI) begins to operate the landfill and transfer station, under contract from the City of Salem. January 10, 1995 City of Salem issues notice to DEP stating that, as of September 1, 1994, Salem Environmental Company (NCI) is operating the transfer station. January 22, 1996 NCI prepares and submits 1995 Annual Solid Waste Facility Report to DEP. February 1, 1999 NCI prepares and submits 1998 Annual Solid Waste Facility Report to DEP. September 22, 1999 DEP conducts a compliance inspection of the landfill/transfer station facility in response to the receipt of a complaint. December 10, 1999 DEP issues NON to the City of Salem and NCI for various violations observed during the site inspection conducted on September 22, 1999. January 6, 2000 Waste Ban Plan submitted to DEP, indicating that only C&D debris was accepted by the facility. January 2000 BETA is retained by NCI and the City of Salem as consultant for environmental issues related to the landfill/transfer station. January 17, 2000 Request for Determination of Applicability submitted to Salem Conservation Commission and DEP. Salem Conservation Commission determines that Wetlands Notice of Intent filing is required. February 16, 2000 NCI prepares and submits 1999 Annual Report of waste. July 26, 2000 DEP Enforcement Conference regarding NON issues at landfill/transfer station facility. July, 2000 Wetlands Notice of Intent submitted. Order of Conditions Filed- Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. January 9, 2001 Draft Consent Order sent to City and NCI. January 25, 2001 DEP compliance inspection conducted. February 22, 2001 Follow-up Enforcement Conference at DEP with City and NCI. 8/13/07 April 19, 2001 Application for Modification of a Large Handling Facility submitted to DEP. April 19, 2001 DEP Issues approval for minor alteration of transfer station facility -the placement of four containers for the storage of recyclable materials. May 14, 2001 DEP issues approval for Modification of Large Handling Facility. May 15, 2001 Leaf and Yard Waste Composting Registration Form submitted by NCI to DEP. July 13, 2001 Administrative Consent Order with Penalty (ACOP) issued by DEP to the City of Salem and NCI. March 7, 2002 Administrative Consent Order issued to the City of Salem and NCI. March 15, 2002 BETA performs six soil borings on the site related to the structural expansion of the transfer station. March 21, 2002 BETA is contracted by NCI to conduct ISA and CSA for landfill. April 30, 2002 NCI executes agreement with BETA for design of the landfill closure and transfer station design. April, 2002 ISA Report and CSA Scope of Work submitted to DEP for review and approval. May 7, 2002 CSA submitted to DEP for review and comment. June, 2002 ISA Report and CSA Scope of Work approved by DEP. September, 2003 CSA completed and submitted to DEP. March 2, 2004 CSA conditionally approved by DEP. January 25, 2005 DEP meeting with City, NCI and BETA to discuss CAAA, project progress and future modifications to transfer station. April, 2005 NCI amendment for BETA to complete the design of the transfer station. March 29, 2005 CAAA submitted to DEP for review and comment. 8/13/07 April 20, 2005 CAAA conditionally approved by DEP. June, 2005 NCI authorizes BETA to resume transfer station design. August 22, 2005 Meeting at DEP, including City staff, NCI, BETA and Mr. Keegan of the 7h Essex District to review status of project. September 1, 2005 NCI suspends design effort. February, 2007 Request for Proposals issued by City of Salem for landfill closure and transfer station design. April 26, 2007 Short list interview. July 13, 2007 NCI notified as the intended awardee for the landfill closure and transfer station design and construction. Contract negotiations begin. August 13, 2007 Landfill/transfer station site visit with Salem BOH. 4 Group, Inc. Engineers ♦ Scientists ♦ Planners July 24, 2008 Mr. Richard Bourre, Acting Director Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs MEPA Office 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Attu.: Mr. Richard Bourre Acting Director Re: Supplemental Information to Environmental Notification Form Salem Transfer Station & Landfill Closure Project Swampscott Road, Salem, MA Dear Mr. Bourre: 315 Normod Park South Norwood, MA 02062 (781) 255.1982, fox (781) 255.1974 www.BETA4nr.com The following questions and comments were posed by members of the MassDEP Northeast Regional Office, Salem Planning Board, and City Council in response to the Environmental Notification Form for the referenced project, submitted to MEPA on June 2, 2008. On behalf of Northside Carting, Inc. and the City of Salem, we have provided the following responses in bold text. Questions are answered in the order received by MEPA. I — July 90' Letter received from the Salem Board of Health I-1: Will the proiect require an EIR pursuant to Section 11.03 (9) (a) of the MEPA regulations tions because the capaciiy will increase to greater than 150 TPD for processing and disposal of solid waste? Since the project is a transfer station, it is exempt from a categorical EH2 under the regulations at Section 11.03 (9) (a). I-2: Are industrial revenue bonds being used so the Board of Health and DEP will not be able to retract the permit? At this time, no industrial bonds and/or state assisted funding have been arranged. If such public funding is arranged and MEPA regulations require the filing of a Notice of Project Change, the Project Proponents are committed to filing such public notice. Mr. Richard Bourre, Acting Director July 23, 2008 Page 2 of 8 I-3: The stated tipping floor area of the proposed building is 5,328 square feet Based on the proposed capacity, the Best Practice equation calculates that an area of 12,000 square feet would be needed. How will the proposed area be able to handle the increase in capacity Based upon recent discussions with MA DEP representatives, we plan to expand the building size by approximately 2,200 square feet to obtain additional space within the building for operations. The actual square footage of the building is expected to be approximately 9,700 square feet. The square footage of the tipping room floor is estimated to be approximately 7,500 SF. Based upon years of operating experience by Northside personnel, that space is more than adequate to handle the volume of waste projected for the facility. I-4: Whv do the Progress Set of Drawings (Attachment J) show building dimensions of 7,350 SF (97'8" x 74'6"), when the imposed area is stated as 7,500 SF? The Progress Set of Drawings was provided for review of the building layout and operational concepts. As indicated above, the final square footage of the building is expected to be on the order of 9,700 SF. I-5: Is Northside Carting intending to do a land exchange with the adjacent property owner that will extend the sensitive receptors margin to include eight more residential dwellings? The City has arranged for a temporary construction agreement with the adjacent property owner to allow capping of the landfill to be performed. Land swaps will not be required under that access temporary site access arrangement. I-6: The two garage doors will be open during operational hours Will this affect the surrounding area by allowing odor, litter, dust noise and vectors to escape? The building will have misting capabilities and ventilation equipment that will significantly control nuisance conditions. A fine water spray will be used, as required, to knock down any fugitive dust emissions. The ventilation equipment, including exhaust fans and filtration equipment will be operated to help prevent any dust and odors to be emitted from the building by maintaining a negative pressure. Minimal noise impact to surrounding properties is anticipated, based upon results of the Noise Study conducted by Epsilon. I-7: How do you plan to locate the transfer station so that it minimizes the effects on the surrounding community The transfer station will be located in the least conspicuous area within the boundaries established in 310 CMR 16. The closest residential area is located approximately 650 feet away, and a day care center is located approximately 675 feet away on Greenledge Street, both outside the required 500 -foot buffer zone. Furthermore, the transfer station has been oriented to minimize visual and noise impacts to the surrounding area. Reference is made to the Site Plan included in the ENF that shows the location of the transfer, station with relationship to the neighboring properties. Mr. Richard Bourre, Acting Director July 23, 2008 Page 3 of 8 I-8: The noise im a�eport states that a "pure tone" condition will be created by the truck's back-up alarms Will the freouent backing up cause a noise nuisance for the closest residence? A noise impact study was conducted to determine what effects the expansion would have on the surrounding area. Results of the study showed a 3dB increase at the closest residence, which is well below the DEP maximum allowable increase of lOdB; however, during station operating hours, nearby residents may detect the pure tone sound from the trucks. We are committed to address this issue during final design, where we will consider reasonable alternatives for sound attenuation. I-9: Will the composting area include windrows so that excessive odor will be avoided? No composting will be performed at the site. As yard wastes accumulate in the collection area, they will be loaded onto dump trailers and transported off-site to a composting or other processing facility. During periods of high usage, the yard wastes will be shipped daily. During low usage, the yard wastes will not be allowed to accumulate more than one month. I-10: Will trucks pull into the building and directly dump into waiting transfer trucks or will there be sorting and recycling? I-11: In most cases the waste will be dumped on the floor. Any land -banned materials will be segregated for separate off-site management. The waste will then be pushed by a front end loader into the trailers waiting below. Segregation of land banned materials will be a requirement in our operating permit. "Sorting" is a processing term, and no sorting will be performed at this location. Only segregation of land banned materials will be performed for separate off-site management. As indicated in the response to I-3, the tipping room floor will be expanded by approximately 2,200 SF beyond the dimensions shown on the concept plans to facilitate tipping floor operations, consistent with recent discussions with DEP representatives. I-12: What are the average Weekday Daily total trips? Currently, the Average Weekday Daily amount of vehicle trips is 140. The proposed expansion will result in an additional 54 vehicle trips, for an Average Weekday Daily total of 194 vehicle trips. W. Richard Bourre, Acting Director July 23, 2008 Page 4 of 8 I-13: What are the differences between the vehicles currently using the transfer station compared with the vehicles that will use the transfer station after the expansion? Currently, the vehicles that use the transfer station include cars, pickup trucks and various size dump trucks. For the proposed facility, vehicles are expected to include cars, pickup trucks, rear -loading garbage compactor collection trucks (-16 tons/truck), and 18 -wheel hauling trucks (-20 tons/truck). I-14: Based on calculations for a 400 TPD facility, the number of 12-21 ton vehicles was determined to be 104 round trips between collection and hauling trucks. This translates to one truck entering/exiting entering/exitingevery 4.6 minutes. What effect will this have on surrounding roads? As indicated in the Traffic Study, the impact to traffic over the course of the day is not expected to be significant. The additional rear -loading collection and hauling trucks anticipated due to the expansion would enter/exit the site every 9 minutes. I-15: How will internal traffic be directed so that individuals disposing of yard waste and using the tipping floor are safely out of the way? Is there any way to keep the public unloading areas and traffic separate from commercial vehicles? The roads on the site will be paved, of sufficient width, and clearly marked to safely accommodate the projected truck and residential traffic. Signage and pavement markings will clearly demarcate lanes for public and commercial vehicles. Further consideration will be given to establishing safe on-site traffic conditions during final design. I-16: Is the salt barn shown in the Fact Sheet in Attachment D currently in the transfer station design? Based upon discussions between City Officials and Northside Carting, no Salt Barn will be constructed on the rear portion of the site, as originally proposed. I-17: Have the materials for the building that is to be demolished been sampled for hazardous residuals, including asbestos? Yes, a comprehensive pre -demolition inspection has been performed by Smith & Wessel and BETA stall. All hazardous and regulated building material (asbestos, mercury switches, PCB ballasts, lead paint, and other hazardous materials) will be segregated and properly managed off-site prior to demolition of building. Most of the remaining building components will be segregated, sorted, and either configured under the landfill cap, or managed off-site at appropriate reuse/recycle/disposal facilities. Mr. Richard Bourre, Acting Director ... . . July 23, 2008 Page 5 of 8 I-18: What are the sources and projected amounts for waste water other than from storm water run off? All wastewater will be discharged to the City's sanitary sewer, which runs along Swampscott Road. Runoff is anticipated to be on the order of approximately 500 gallons per day. Sources of waste water include wastewater from restroom facilities for use by on-site workers, general housekeeping (washing of the tipping floor and trucks) and a small amount from the misting system used to reduce the amount of fugitive dusts. Questions I-19 through I-21 reference Epsilon's Air Quality Monitoring Report I-19: Was the modeling performed in this report based on the use of cars and small trucks that are currently using the facility, or mainly 10-21 ton trucks proposed to use the facility? The baseline modeling used in the Epsilon report modeled fine and course particulate emissions for existing traffic, including the types of vehicles that currently use the station. For projected use of the new transfer station, the modeling includes the types of vehicles projected to use the station, including the existing and projected vehicles, packer trucks and larger waste hauling trailers. I-20: Figure 1 in the Air Quality Monitoring Report shows an out of date aerial view, and does not show the 12 pump gas station located on the comer of Highland Avenue and Swampscott Road. How does the gas station affect the air quality in the area immediateIX surrounding the gas station? Emission controls for volatile organic compounds are present at the existing gas station at the intersection of Route 107 and Swampscott Road. Vapor controls are required at all gasoline dispensers, so that there is limited impact associated with fueling vehicles. I-21: The report states that the most recent data was obtained from EPA AIRS database for the years 2004 — 2006. Does this data include information collected after the neighboring gas station opened in 2007? The most currently available data was used, which does not include the neighboring gas station. I-22: How will the combination of VOC emissions from the gas station, heavy routine traffic, methane emissions from the landfill cap, the commuter rail train, nearby junk/auto salvage aggregate Industries, and Salem Hospital effect the air quality? The assessment is outside the scope of our current assessment. We reviewed the current level of fine and course particulates and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) associated with the current and projected operating scenarios and determined that the impact on human health corresponding to the increased traffic related to the expanded transfer station is negligible. Phase in of new emission controls and Mr. Richard Bourre, Acting Director. ...... July 23, 2008 Page 6 of 8 changes in the formulation of diesel fuel will actually result in reduced air quality impacts. U. — July 15, 2008 letter received from the MassDEP Northeast Regional Office II -1: Final design plans have not vet been received. Is data available to demomtrati As discussed recently with DEP representatives, the proposed transfer station building will be expanded, consistent with current siting regulations, to approximately 9,700 SF. That represents an increase of approximately 2,200 SF to the preliminary design. Based upon years of operating experience by Northside Carting staff, that will afford ample space for the proposed operations. DEP will be reviewing the final construction documents under their permitting regulations. II -2: Will there be enough room for vehicles to be within the building during tipping? See response to prior question. II -3: The Toe of Landfill Cap Detail attached as Figure 5 indicates waste materials e2Wosed along the bank of the Forest River. How will erosion of this material be prevented? Will this design provide adequate stability to the bank? The slope stabilization detail was provided in the ENF and fully discussed with the Conservation Commission during the NOI public hearings. The slope will be stabilized with geotextile fabric to accommodate settlement; dumped rip -rap will be provided to achieve the required stability and protection from erosion. II -4: The storm water management system described in the Storm water Management Report would not be in compliance with the regulations that went into effect January 2008. Are data and calculations available that support the conclusion that the storm water management system would meet the applicable standards? Recently enacted storm water regulations were taken into account in providing our design for storm water treatment during the NOI public hearings. Reference is made to the filing with the Salem Conservation Commission, which details the drainage system layout and water quality control structure. Reference made to storm water report included in the ENE Detailed storm water calculations are available at the Salem Conservation Office located at 93 Washington Street, Salem, MA. II -5: What BMPs will be used to capture and treat the appropriate water quality volume for removal of 80% of Total Suspended Solids (TSS)? Are calculations available that demonstrate TSS removal by these methods is appropriate? As indicated in the NOI and subsequent submissions to the Conservation Commission, proposed BMPs for the project include street sweeping, deep sump catch basins, and a water quality structure (Stormceptor). Calculations that demonstrate TSS removal are included in the NOI submittal to the Conservation W. Richard Bourre, Acting Director. _ July 23, 2008 Page 7 of 8 Commission and are available at the Salem Conservation Office located at 93 Washington Street, Salem, MA. _ u v14, 20081etter received -from Charles M.-Puleo _ . III -1: Comment: Results from the traffic impact report, air quality report, and noise impact study show that the proposed transfer station expansion would have negligible to no effect on the surrounding areas. The reported findings from these impact studies are based on the most accurate and recent data available. We believe that all of the reports accurately assess the current situation and future traffic projections associated with the proposed expansion of the transfer station. 11I-2: Comment: Results from the Human Health Risk Characterization Study were not included in the ENR The proposed transfer station expansion does not significantly increase the potential risk to human health. Even though an assessment of human health is not required under pertinent regulations, we did perform a focused human health risk characterization that evaluated the increased risk to human health associated with expansion of the transfer station. That characterization concluded that the risks to human health are projected to be minimal and that human health risks in the area are actually projected to decrease, due to phase-in of EPA regulations related to mandated changes in diesel fuel formulation and new vehicle emission controls. Furthermore, the total travel associated with collection and off-site hauling of wastes is expected to decrease, now that a more centrally located transfer station will be available. The net effect to the region will be lower overall diesel fuel emissions. IV. — July 15, 2008 letter received from City of Salem Councilors IV -1: With 450 SF of vegetated wetlands, 3600 SF of land under water, 157,000 SF of riverfront area located on the site, and a 500 unit condominium complex located within 300 feet of the landfilL why should an Environmental Impact Report not (be) required? There is no significant impact to either human health or the environment that hasn't already been taken into account. Conversely, there is significant environmental benefit to the environment by closing the landfill, stabilizing the embankment along the river and addressing a long-standing aesthetic issue for area residents. Furthermore, it addresses a long-standing issue with DEP that requires the City to properly close the landfill. IV -II: Concerns regarding negative effects the expansion may have on the surrounding areas The impacts to traffic, air quality and noise have been adequately assessed and appropriate mitigation measures have either been taken into account or will be addressed during final design and facility operations. W Richard Bourre, Acting Director .. July 23, 2008 Page 8 of 8 We trust that these responses adequately address the questions and comments received to date. Please call me with any further questions or concerns, or if we can provide any further information. Very truly yours, BETAGroup, Inc. Alan D. Hanscom, LSP Senior Associate cc: Beth Renard, Esq., City Solicitor David Knowlton, City Engineer Robert George, NSC Bill Thomson, Jr., NSC David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:28 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Landfill & Transfer Station Attachments: MEPAComments.pdf From: Alan Hanscom [mailto:AHanscom@BETA-Inc.com] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:46 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Beth Rennard; Robbie George Subject: FW: Salem Landfill & Transfer Station For your information .... please call me with any questions. From: Alan Hanscom Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:40 PM To: 'Eglington, Aisling (EEA)' Cc: Rick Bourne (richard.bourre@state.ma.us); 'Beth 'Bill Thomson'; Jerry Magnan; 'Paul Taurasi' Subject: Salem Landfill &Transfer Station Page 1 of 1 Rennard'; 'David Knowlton'; 'Robbie George'; Here is our letter response to the the various comments we have received...... Please call me with any questions. Alan D. Hanscom, P.E., LSP Senior Associate BETA Group, Inc. 315 Norwood Park South Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Tel: 781/255-1982 Fax: 7811255-1974 Cell: 6171699-1878 Confidentiality Notice: This email message (and any attachments) contains information from BETA Group, Inc. that is confidential. If you are not the intended redpient(s), you may not disclose, copy, distribute, rely upon, or use its contents. Please reply to the sender immediately and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. 7/29/2009 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:27 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Legal Council From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:55 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Legal Council What is the hourly rate for the law firm and what are we limiting the $ to for the entire project? Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:21 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Legal Council Dear Beth: You had mentioned that you have a template to send to the law firm helping the BOH with the Transfer Station application. The law firm that responded to the RFQ is Adorno & Yoss, 155 Federal Street, Suite 1202, Boston, MA 02110-1727; the attorneys are Kenneth Whittaker and William Parker. Could you send me the contarctor template for the engineering company? It will be Tighe & Bond, 446 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01608; the Senior Project Manager will be David A. Murphy, P.E. We would anticipate an early August filing so that the public hearing could take place in early September, after Labor Day, but would need the technical people onboard officially first so that we could be sure to follow the timeline required by the code. Thank you, Joanne Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:27 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 10:58 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: As we discussed with the Mayor, please make sure the contract with the engineering firm includes a review of the cost for closure. Thank you Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) 7/29/2009 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:27 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Legal Council From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:19 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Legal Council That's a fair rate. I'll draft a letter retaining their services. Thanks Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327(fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:18 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: RE: Legal Council The hourly rate is $250 not to exceed $14,000. From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:55 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Legal Council What is the hourly rate for the law firm and what are we limiting the $ to for the entire project? Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327(fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:21 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Legal Council Dear Beth: You had mentioned that you have a template to send to the law firm helping the BOH with the Transfer Station application. The law firm that responded to the RFQ is Adorno & Yoss, 155 Federal Street, Suite 1202, Boston, MA 02110-1727; the attorneys are Kenneth Whittaker and William Parker. Could you send me the contarctor template for the engineering company? It will be Tighe & Bond, 446 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01608; the Senior Project Manager will be David A. Murphy, P.E. We would anticipate an early August filing so that the public hearing could take place in early September, after Labor Day, but would need the technical people onboard officially first so that we could be sure to follow the timeline required by the code. Thank you, Joanne David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:26 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Legal Council From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:21 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Legal Council Do you have a scope of work that was included in RFQ for legal? Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 11:18 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: RE: Legal Council The hourly rate is $250 not to exceed $14,000. From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:55 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Legal Council What is the hourly rate for the law firm and what are we limiting the $ to for the entire project? Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 9:21 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Legal Council Dear Beth: You had mentioned that you have a template to send to the law firm helping the BOH with the Transfer Station application. The law firm that responded to the RFQ is Adorno & Yoss, 155 Federal Street, Suite 1202, Boston, MA 02110-1727; the attorneys are Kenneth Whittaker and William Parker. Could you send me the contarctor template for the engineering company? It will be Tighe & Bond, 446 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01608; the Senior Project Manager will be David A. Murphy, P.E. We would anticipate an early August filing so that the public hearing could take place in early September, after Labor Day, but would need the technical people onboard officially first so that we could be sure to follow the timeline required by the code. Thank you, Joanne The Commonwealth of Massachusetts lug EXecutive Office of Energy and EnvironmentaCAffairs 1 oo Cambridge street, Suite goo Boston, WA 02114 DEVAL L. PATRICK Tel: (617) 626-1000 GOVERNOR Fax: (617) 626-1181 TIMOTHY P. MURRAY htlp://www, m ass, gov/envir LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR IAN A. BOWLES July 25, 20011 SECRETARY _ CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENT TAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME Closure of lite Salem Landfill and Redevelopment of the Salem Transfer Station PROJECT MUNICIPALITY PROJECT WATERSHED EOE;A NUMBER PROJECT PROPONENTS DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR Salem North Coastal 14261 City of Salem and Northside Carting, Inc. June 11,'1,008 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (G. L. c. 30, ss. 61-62H) and Section 11.06 of the MEPA regulations (301 CMR 11.00), I hereby determine that this project docs not require the preparation of an Envirorunental Impact Report (EIR). The project consists of closure of the Salem landfill and redevelopment of the transfer statign,.including an increase in ton rage at the transfer station from 100 tons per day to 400 tons per day. The project includes demolition of the existing incinerator building, regrading and capping of the, landfill, and construction of a neer transfer station building. The proposed transfet station will receive construction and demolition (C&D) debris, municipal solid waste, and commercial solid waste. The project also ineludcD relocation of the leaf and yard waste recycling area and a new paved access road to cowutect this area with the transfer station and Swampscott Road. Site improvements proposed in the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) include partiai removal of the Forest River culvert and removal of debris from the Forest River. Environmental impacts associated with the project include alteration of 1,200 linear feet of Bank, 450 square feet (sf) of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BV)&% 3,600 sf of Land Under water, and 157,000 sf of Riverfront Area. Traffic impacts are estimated in the ENF at 54 new vehicle trips per day (for a total of 194 trips per day). The project does not meet or exceed thresholds for a mandatory EIR. The project is undergoing environmental review pursuant to Section 11.03(9)(b)(1) because it involves an increase in capacity for storage, treatment or processing of 50 or more tons per day of solid waste. The proposed project will require a Solid Waste Permit from the Massachusetts 0 PnniWMPacycW510 EEA #14261 ENF Certificate July 25, 2008 Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). The project requires a Minor Modification to Site Assignment from the City of Salem Board of Health and an Order of Conditions from the City of Salem Conservation Commission (and, on appeal only, a Superseding Order from MassDEP). The proponents are not seeking financial assistance from the Commonwealth. Therefore, MEPA jurisdiction applies to those aspects of the project within the subject matter of required state agency permits with the potential to cause Damage to the Environment as defined in the MEPA regulations. In this case, MEPA jurisdiction extends to solid waste, wetlands, land and stormwater. The ENF includes a description of the proposed project, an alternatives analysis, and a discussion of the project's consistency with the performance standards for Riverfront Area in the Wetlands Protection Act regulations (310 CMR 10.58(4)). The ENF also includes a Traffic Impact and Access Study, an Air Quality Modeling Report, and a Noise Impact Study. The proponents have committed in the ENF to the following measures to avoid and minimize, or mitigate environmental impacts: • Wetlands restoration at a 1:1 ratio; • Erosion and sedimentation controls; • Measures to reduce noise impacts; • Vehicle emission controls; • Transportation improvements: including site access modifications and, within one year of commencing transfer station operation, an evaluation of vehicle crash history and a review of signal timing, phasing and coordination along Highland Avenue (with recommendations to MassHighway for implementation as part of its proposed work in the area). MassDEP in its comment letter has expressed concern about waste materials exposed along the bank of Forest River below the water surface. The proponents should ensure that the riverbank area is designed to provide adequate stability to the bank and prevent erosion of waste materials (ash) to the environment. The proponents should consult with MassDEP to discuss any alterations in design that may be required. As noted by MassDEP in its comment letter, information on the exposed material was not available to MassDEP when it reviewed the Corrective Actions Alternative Analysis (CAAA) for the Salem landfill closure. MassDEP issued a conditional approval of the CAAA in April 2005. The proponents should redesign the stormwater management system as necessary to ensure compliance with the Stormwater Management regulations that went into effect January 2008. The system as proposed in the ENF does not comply with these regulations. The proponents should submit additional calculations and data to MassDEP to support the conclusion that the stormwater management system will meet applicable performance standards. I refer the proponents to the MassDEP comment letter for guidance on additional information to submit, which should include details of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and a long-term pollution prevention and pollution control plan. EEA #14261 ENF Certificate July 25, 2008 The City of Salem Board of Health, in its comment letter, questioned whether the proposed building size will be adequate. The proponents should submit final designs for the transfer station to MassDEP and data to demonstrate that the building will be of adequate size to handle the proposed quantity of waste. MassDEP may require, as part of its approval of transfer station design, alteration to the location and/or size of the building to meet operational requirements, including but not limited to, providing adequate room for vehicles to be within the building during tipping. The proponents should provide additional detail in its submittal to MassDEP and to the Board of Health to demonstrate how odors, litter, dust, noise and other nuisance conditions will be avoided and minimized to protect sensitive receptors in the project area. The Traffic Impact and Access Study was prepared in consultation with the Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) and the City of Salem. The study includes recommendations for intersection improvements along Highland Avenue to be incorporated as part of MassHighway's ongoing project in the area. The study concludes that the proposed transfer station will have minor impacts upon completion of the proposed improvements. The proponents should continue consultation with MassHighway to finalize plans for transportation improvements and to ensure that traffic impacts will be avoided and minimized or mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. The ENF includes a Noise Study with an analysis of potential noise impacts to the surrounding community. According to the ENF, the proposed project will be designed to operate in accordance with the MassDEP noise policy and air pollution control regulations (3 10 CMR 7.10). Noise levels are expected to increase by 3-4 decibels (dBA) at nearest residences and pure tone sounds associated with truck back-up alarms are expected to increase in duration by a total of approximately 15 minutes per day. The ENF indicates that the tipping floor building entrance will be situated towards Highland Avenue to reduce noise impacts to residences in the vicinity of the project. I expect that any additional noise mitigation requirements will be incorporated as appropriate into the state and local permits and approvals. The Air Quality Modeling Report included in the ENF was prepared in response to the Salem Board of Health request to analyze the impact of diesel truck emissions on residential areas in the vicinity of the project. The report indicates that the emissions associated with the project are below the National Ambient air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM 10). I encourage the proponents to continue consultation with the Salem Board of Health and to respond to the Board's additional comments and requests for information as further detailed in its comment letter on the ENF. Several comment letters received expressed concern about the projects potential traffic, air quality and noise impacts. The proponents should re-evaluate the trip generation projections in light of the comments received and consult with the Board of Health to discuss any revisions in the traffic estimates as well as plans for internal traffic routing on-site to ensure safety among commercial vehicles and residents using the drop-off facilities. I note that the ENF includes a letter from the City of Salem Legal Department to the Salem Board of Health (dated September 13, 2007), which recommends air quality mitigation to EEA #14261 ENF Certificate July 25, 2008 be implemented by the proponents. The proponents have committed to the following measures to avoid and minimize air quality impacts associated with diesel emissions. • Retrofitting all vehicles used the site with new emissions control equipment; • Limiting hours of operation during commuting hours to reduce emissions during peak non -transfer station traffic; • Posting and enforcing anti -idling provisions in accordance with environmental regulations; • Use of misting facilities to help manage fugitive dust emissions during transfer station operations; and • Use of ventilation and air filtration equipment to significantly reduce dust emissions during operations. I expect that MassDEP and the Board of Health will incorporate any additional mitigation requirements as appropriate in any conditional approvals or permits issued. I also note that there will be additional opportunity for public comment during the Board of Health's site assignment review process. I have determined that the ENF has sufficiently defined the nature and general elements of the project and its potential impacts, and proposed measures to avoid and minimize or mitigate impacts. Based on review of the ENF and comments received, and consultation with state agencies, I am satisfied that the project as described in the ENF does not warrant the preparation of an EIR. The proposed project may proceed to state permitting_ July 25, 2008 DATE Ian A. Comments Received: 7/14/08 Salem Board of Health 7/15/08 Department of Environmental Protection, Northeast Regional Office 7/15/08 Charles M. Puleo 7/15/08 Steven A. Pinto, Councillor at Large and Paul C. Prevey, Councillor Ward 6 7/15/08 Joan B. Lovely, Councillor at Large 7/24/08 BETA Group, Inc. (response to comments on behalf of the proponents) Form Letters: 54 IAB/AE/ae Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:25 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station Attachments: 14261 EN F. pdf From: Beth Rennard Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:02 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Kim Driscoll Subject: FW: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station Joanne, here is the MEPA certificate on the transfer station project. Are you ready to have the applicant make application to the board of health? thanks Contlidentialiry Notice: This email message (and any attachments) contains information from BETA Group, Inc. that is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you may not disclose, copy, distribute, rely upon, or use its contents. Please reply to the sender immediately and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:25 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station From: Beth Rennard Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:33 PM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station I will call. thanks Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327(fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:10 PM To: Beth Rennard Subject: RE: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station Beth: Are we all set with the attorney? If so, I ask him when you should apply so that the public hearing will take place in the beginning of September. I think there is a 30 day window, but I want him to say so. Thank you, Joanne From: Beth Rennard Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:02 PM To: Joanne Scott Cc: Kim Driscoll Subject: FW: Salem Landfill Closure and Transfer Station Joanne, here is the MEPA certificate on the transfer station project. Are you ready to have the applicant make application to the board of health? thanks Confidentiality Notice: This email message (and any attachments) contains information from BETA Group, Inc. that is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you may not disclose, copy, distribute, rely upon, or use its contents. Please reply to the sender immediately and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 2 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 9:36 AM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: RFP From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 3:13 PM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: RFP Follow AI's lead and please add in language to have engineer review proposed closure cost. thanks Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327(fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 3:02 PM To: Beth Rennard Subject: RE: RFP Dear Beth: I changed the timeline dates to June or early July for review mtg (engineers) or filing (legal). Both RFP's say, "Review of documents associated with closure of the landfill is not included under this solicitation." Do you want me to say that one of the tasks in the Engineering RFP is to review the developer's cost estimate of the closure." and remove the current sentence? For the blanks under "Prposposal requirements" can I put my information there? I would rather go with the air quality person I have since I had already worked it out with her and signed a contract that I thought was OK, unless of course she is no longer available. I thought Al said I could just get three estimates by phone? Thanks, Joanne From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 2:14 PM To: Joanne Scott Subject: FW: RFP Joanne, please add in that the consultant shall review the developer's cost estimate of the closure. The mayor wanted to have that for council. Also, since you will need more than one price for air quality, why not add that as an alternate to this RFP? Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor 7/29/2009 Page 2 of 2 City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) From: AI Hill Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 8:29 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: FW: RFP From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 4:04 PM To: Al Hill Cc: 'Paulette Puleo' Subject: RFP Dear Albert: Please review these draft RFPs, both for technical assistance to the Board of Health for its review of a request for a "Minor Modification" of the Transfer Station Permit to Operate. Please add in any procurement language required and send them back to me. Thank you, Joanne Scott 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:47 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Request for Quotes for Engineering Technical Assistance Attachments: Trasnsfer st RFP for BOH.doc From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 2:17 PM To: 'Plourde, Kim'; 'Scipione, Michael'; 'David A. Murphy'; 'me.info@m-e.aecom.com' Cc: 'Paulette Puleo'; Beth Rennard Subject: Request for Quotes for Engineering Technical Assistance Dear Sirs or Madams: Attached please find a Request for Quotes for Technical Assistance for the Salem Board of Health in reviewing a Minor Modification application in accordance with 310 CMR 16.00. Sincerely, Joanne Scott Salem Health Agent iscott(aDsalem.com 978-741-1800 7/29/2009 RE: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:50 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem From: Joanne Scott Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 2:45 PM To: 'David A. Murphy' Subject: RE: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem Page 1 of 3 Dear Chris: So sorry for the delay. We are putting together an RFP and I will let you know as son as it is available. Thank you, Joanne Scott From: David A. Murphy [mailto:DAMurphy@tigheBond.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:10 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem Hi Joanne, Just checking in. I was curious if the City has made any decisions regarding the peer review selection. As a side note I have had the opportunity to review some of your files and am about as up to speed as one can get before actually coming on board. If it's of any value in your selection, I have been in all three positions over my 23 professional years.... 1. The regulator reviewing and permitting these types of facilities 2. The engineer representing the developer trying to permit the same kind of facility in a similar city, and 3. The peer review engineer representing the municipality that has to review the developers proposal. Good luck with your selection. Please don't forget that we represent SESD and the City of Peabody and that we work right beside your fair city every week. David Murphy David A. Murphy P.E. 7/29/2009 RE: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem Tighe & Bond 446 MainStreet Worcester, MA 01608 Direct Line: (508)471-9620 Main: (508) 754-2201 x106 Cell: (617) 319-0447 Fax: (508) 795-1087 From: David A. Murphy Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 12:22 PM To: 'iscott@salem.com' Cc: Dana Huff Subject: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem Hi Joanne, Page 2 of 3 Thanks for taking my call and for your consideration of Tighe and Bond to serve your peer review needs at the Old Salem ash landfill site. I thought you might be able to use the attached GIS orthophoto we plotted of the transfer station and ash landfill site. It is in PDF format and can be easily printed on a color plotter. We would be glad, at our cost, to provide you with a larger 24" x 36" plot if that would be helpful. If you don't select Mike at W&S you have my permission to tell him I'll treat him to lunch next time! O Have a great weekend David Murphy << File: aerial_SwampscottRd_Landfill.pdf>> David A. Murphy P.E. Tighe & Bond 446 Main Street Worcester, MA 01608 Direct Line: (508) 471-9620 Main: (508) 754-2201 x106 7/29/2009 RE: Peer Review, 12 Swampscott Road, Salem Cell: (617) 319-0447 Foix: (508) 795-1087 7/29/2009 Page 3 of 3 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:49 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: RFP for Engineering Company From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 9:52 AM To: 'Paulette Puleo' Subject: RFP for Engineering Company Dear Paulette: Attached is the RFP that I am proposing for an engineering company to review the technical information of the anticipated minor modification application. Feel free to let me know if you want any changes. I will send it to Al Hil, the Purchasing Agent, on Monday for his required language and then back to Beth. Have a great weekend! Joanne 7/29/2009 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS The City of Salem requests qualifications and proposals from engineering firms with project development experience in Massachusetts, including all phases of environmental permitting. The use of specialty sub -consultants with pertinent experience is acceptable in meeting the qualification and experience requirements outlined herein. Such services are anticipated to include technical review of recent environmental documents related to evaluation of environmental impacts of expanding the existing 100 ton -per -day Transfer Station at 12 Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton -per -day facility at the same location. Review of documents associated with closure of the landfill is not included under this solicitation. Overview After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for redevelopment of the subject site, the City of Salem selected Northside Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts, as the preferred developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and design, including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission and preparation of the following study reports to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submittal to MEPA: • Traffic Impact Study prepared by Vanasse & Associates, Inc.; and • Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses prepared by Epsilon, Inc. The technical review of the `Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses" will be conducted by a different vendor. Additional environmental assessments and documents to support an expanded ENF will also be made available for review. Proposed Scope of Services As part of the review, the selected Consultant will be required to perform the following tasks: • Attend a meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer and other City representatives to discuss the objective of the review process, including compliance with 310 CMR 16.00 and specifically 310 CMR 16.30 (2) (c) 3; • Review and provide written comments to the Board of Health and City Engineer related to the technical information presented in the respective reports and supporting documents; and • Attend a review meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer, NSC and their representatives, to discuss any questions or concerns related to review of the available documents. • Attend the Board of Health Public Hearing and address residents' technical concerns at the Public Hearing or in writing within one week of the end of the Public Hearing. Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis. Qualifications Respondents to this RFP must demonstrate compliance with the following minimum selection criteria: • Three representative development projects within the past five years that have at a minimum involved the evaluation of traffic, air quality and noise impacts. The use of specialty subconsultants on such projects is permissible. • One or more registered Professional Engineer(s) and/or Licensed Site Professional(s) who will be responsible for signing all review submittals to the City. Proposal Requirements Please provide your letter response, along with any supplemental understandings and/or clarifications of the stipulated scope of work and resumes of key staff and sub -consultants, if any, by 5:00 PM on . Any questions related to this RFQ/P shall be addressed to at P8/ Schedule The review meeting is anticipated to be held in late May or early June 2008. The timeline will follow that required in 310 CMR 16.00 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:49 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: RFP for Engineering Company Attachments: Trasnsfer st RFP for BOH.doc q Trasnsfer st RFP for BOH.doc ... -----Original Message ----- From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 10:37 AM To: 'Paulette Puleo' Subject: RE: RFP for Engineering Company Sorry Paulette. Here it is. I am finishing the legal FRP and will send it along shortly. Joanne -----Original Message ----- From: Paulette Puleo [mailto:prp600@msn.com] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 10:34 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: RFP for Engineering Company Hi Joanne, I don't believe there was an attachment with your email... Paulette >From: "Joanne Scott" <JScott@Salem.com> >To: "Paulette Puleo" <prp600@msn.com> >Subject: RFP for Engineering Company >Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 09:52:10 -0400 >Dear Paulette: >Attached is the RFP that I am proposing for an engineering company to >review the technical information of the anticipated minor modification >application. >Feel free to let me know if you want any changes. I will send it to Al >Hil, the Purchasing Agent, on Monday for his required language and then >back to Beth. >Have a great weekend! >Joanne 1 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:48 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Tech Assistance From: Joanne Scott Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 3:23 PM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Tech Assistance Dear Beth: I think that NSC has to submit the payment to us when it submits its/the City's application for the modification. So I will follow Al Hill's requirements. It also gives me peace of mind to know that I can pay the bills in a timely fashion. Joanne 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:51 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Engineering Company From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:15 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Engineering Company Dear Beth: I have two engineering companies that are interested in reviewing the Transfer Station plans for the Board of Health. Are you writing an RFP for that? Also, I think that you were including Air Quality review in that document so that we can move forward with that part of the review with the BU professor, once we receive the information. Thank you, Joanne 7/29/2009 Page 1 of 3 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:51 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Engineering Company Attachments: Trasnsfer st. RFP for BOH.doc From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:43 PM To: Beth Rennard Cc: 'Paulette Puleo' Subject: FW: Engineering Company Dear Beth: The following are comments regarding the attached RFP. How does this RFP allow for the contract with the Air Quality review expert from BU? I don't think what the Board of Health is requesting a "peer" review' but a "technical review." What does the paragraph "to understand the objectives of the peer review process" mean? If the engineering company has done this before, they will understand that the objective is to comply with the DEP code, 310 CMR 16.00. Written comments should be submitted to the Board of Health, not the City Engineer, because the company is working for the Board in this review. Under qualifications, we should ask for Registered Professional Engineers, and not LSP's since LSP's are mainly concerned with remediating contaminated soils and water under different DEP requirements and laws. The wording in the RFP needs to reflect what is said in the Code regarding Technical Review. You could site that part of the code, 310 CMR 16.30 (2) (c) 3 or include its wording. It says that the Technical Review is to assist the Board of Health in: Reviewing the application (which could mean the MEPA application); reviewing the request for the minor modification; reviewing public comments and any subsequent amendments or additions to the application. Tasks could include: Determining completeness and accuracy of the data in the application; determining whether the correct analytical techniques were used, whether valid data was obtained; whether the data support the proposed conclusions; determining what other data should be obtained, the means to obtain it and its potential significance; examining municipal and other relevant documents and consulting with DEP staff; visiting the site to make a visual inspection; preparing and submitting comments to the Board of Health on technical issues relating to the site; reviewing data submitted prior to and during the public hearing; preparing a written report of comments and determinations. 7/29/2009 Page 2 of 3 Under:" Schedule" I would ask the engineering company for a review of all documents submitted to MEPA so that any deficiencies or concerns could be addresses prior to filing with the Board of Health. Once the MEPA determination is made, I would anticipate a filing with the Board of Health. If I understand the Code correctly, the Board is required to advertise a public hearing within 7 days, hold a public hearing within 30 days, and make a determination within 45 days of the public hearing. Of course, the public hearing could last more than one day. The Board will need this time to make an informed, articulate determination. On a different note, I was told that NSC has Attorney Thomas Mackie of Mackie, Shea & O'Brien, 137 Newbury Street, working for them. Since you will be representing the City in this application before the Board of Health, and NSC has a firm who advertises a completed project as, "Solid Waste- Negotiation of a multi -faceted host community agreement for the new owner of a regional solid waste landfill", the Board must have independent council. It has discussed writing a formal request for legal council to assist it in this process. This is extremely common in all communities that we know have gone through this process. Separate, independent legal counsel is needed to ensure the best possible outcome of this process, in accordance with the Site Assignment Regulation, for the City and its residents. The attorney, air quality expert, and the technical assistance do add a cost for NSC, however, without such review and assistance, the Board will not be able to adequately evaluate this application. Thank you, Joanne From: Beth Rennard Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:24 AM To: Joanne Scott Subject: RE: Engineering Company Yes, here is RFP language which you/AI Hill can incorporate into AI's boilerplate RFP format. Elizabeth Rennard, Esq. City Solicitor City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 978-619-5631 978-744-9327 (fax) From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:15 AM To: Beth Rennard Subject: Engineering Company Dear Beth: I have two engineering companies that are interested in reviewing the Transfer Station plans for the Board of Health. Are you writing an RFP for that? Also, I think that you were including Air Quality review in that document so that we can move forward with that part of the review with the BU professor, once we receive the information. 7/29/2009 Page 3 of 3 Thank you, Joanne 7/29/2009 REQUEST FOR QUOTES The City of Salem requests qualifications and quotes from legal firms or attorneys with project development experience in Massachusetts including all phases of environmental permitting. Experience with the DEP code, 310 CMR 16.00: Site Assignment Regulations for Solid Waste Facilities is preferred. Such services are anticipated to include working with the Board of Health to assure that the necessary procedures are followed, in accordance with 310 CMR 16.00, as the Board reviews and decide upon a site assignment modification request. This request involves the expansion of an existing 100 ton -per -day Transfer Station at 12 Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton -per -day facility at the same location. Review of documents associated with closure of the landfill is not included under this solicitation. Overview After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for redevelopment of the subject site, the City of Salem selected Northside Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts, as the preferred developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and design, including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission and preparation of study reports to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submittal to MEPA. Proposed Scope of Services As part of the Board's review of the application, the selected Consultant will be required to perform the following tasks: • Work in conjunction with other consultants and the Board to prepare questions the Board might ask of the applicant during the Public Hearing in order to elicit the testimony/information necessary for the Board to reach a final decision; • Represent the Board at the hearing and to examine witnesses at the hearing; • Assure that necessary procedures are followed throughout the Hearing process; and • Assure that the application and the Board's written decision satisfy the applicable regulatory criteria. Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis, upon approval by the Board of Health. Expenses may not exceed $14,000. Qualifications Respondents to this RFQ must demonstrate compliance with the following minimum selection criterion: • One or more Attorneys licensed to practice in Massachusetts who have had experience with environmental regulatory requirements in the community setting. Proposal Requirements Please provide your letter response by e-mail, your hourly rate, along with any supplemental understandings and/or clarifications of the stipulated scope of work and resumes of key staff and sub -consultants, if any, by 6:00 PM on Thursday, June 19, 2008. Any questions related to this RFQ and your response shall be addressed to Joanne Scott, for the Salem Board of Health, at 978-741-1800 or jscott@salem.com. Schedule The application for a modified permit is anticipated to be filed with the Board of Health in June or early July 2008. The timeline will follow that required in 310 CMR 16.00 REQUEST FOR QUOTES The City of Salem requests qualifications and quotes from engineering firms with project development experience in Massachusetts, including all phases of environmental permitting. The use of specialty sub - consultants with pertinent experience is acceptable in meeting the qualification and experience requirements outlined herein. Such services are anticipated to include technical review of recent environmental documents related to evaluation of environmental impacts of expanding the existing 100 ton -per -day Transfer Station at 12 Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton -per -day facility at the same location. Overview After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for redevelopment of the subject site, the City of Salem selected Northside Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts, as the preferred developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and design, including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission and preparation of the following study reports to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submittal to MEPA: • Traffic Impact Study prepared by Vanasse & Associates, Inc.; and • Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses prepared by Epsilon, Inc. The technical review of the Air Quality Report may be conducted by a different vendor. If this does not occur, an additional $1200 will be added to the funds for this project for review of the Air Quality Report. Additional environmental assessments and documents to support an expanded ENF will also be made available for review. Proposed Scope of Services As part of the review, the selected Consultant will be required to perform the following tasks: Attend a meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer and other City representatives to discuss the objective of the review process, including compliance with 310 CMR 16.00 and specifically 310 CMR 16.30 (2) (c) 3; Review and provide written comment on proposed closure costs as presented by applicant. Review and provide written comments to the Board of Health and City Engineer related to the technical information presented in the respective reports and supporting documents; Attend a review meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer, NSC and their representatives, to discuss any questions or concerns related to review of the available documents; and Attend the Board of Health Public Hearing and address residents' technical concerns at the Public Hearing or in writing within one week of the end of the Public Hearing. Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis. Expenses may not exceed $10,000. Qualifications Respondents to this RFQ must demonstrate compliance with the following minimum selection criteria: Three representative development projects within the past five years that have at a minimum involved the evaluation of traffic, air quality and noise impacts. The use of specialty subconsultants on such projects is permissible. One or more registered Professional Engineer(s) and/or Licensed Site Professional(s) who will be responsible for signing all review submittals to the City. Proposal Requirements Please provide your letter response, your hourly rate, along with any supplemental understandings and/or clarifications of the stipulated scope of work and resumes of key staff and sub -consultants, if any, by 6:00 PM on Thursday, June 19, 2008. Any questions related to this RFQ, or your proposal, shall be addressed to Joanne Scott, for the Salem Board of Health, at 978-741-1800 orjscott@salem.com. Schedule The review meeting is anticipated to be held in late June or early July 2008. The timeline will follow that required in 310 CMR 16.00 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS The City of Salem requests qualifications and proposals from engineering firms with project development experience in Massachusetts, including all phases of environmental permitting. The use of specialty sub -consultants with pertinent experience is acceptable in meeting the qualification and experience requirements outlined herein. Such services are anticipated to include technical peer review of recent environmental documents related to evaluation of environmental impacts of expanding the existing 100 ton -per -day Transfer Station at 12 Swampscott Road to a new 400 ton -per -day facility at the same location. Review of documents associated with closure of the landfill is not included under this solicitation. Overview After an extensive solicitation process and review of proposals for redevelopment of the subject site, the City of Salem selected Northside Carting, Inc. (NSC) of North Andover, Massachusetts, as the preferred developer. NSC has proceeded with the initial phases of permitting and design, including the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission and preparation of the following study reports to support an expanded Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submittal to MEPA: • Traffic Impact Study prepared by Vanasse & Associates, Inc.; and • Air Quality and Noise Impact Analyses prepared by Epsilon, Inc. Additional environmental assessments and documents to support an expanded ENF will also be made available for review. Proposed Scope of Services As part of the peer review, the selected Consultant will be required to perform the following tasks: Attend a kick-off meeting with the Board of Health, the City Engineer and other City representatives to better understand the objective of the peer review process; Review and provide written comments to the City Engineer related to the technical information presented in the respective reports and supporting documents; and Attend a review meeting with the BOH, the City Engineer, NSC and their representatives to discuss any questions or concerns related to review of the available documents. Any additional tasks will be performed on a time and expenses basis. Qualifications Respondents to this RFP must demonstrate compliance with the following minimum selection criteria: • Three representative development projects within the past five years that have at a minimum involved the evaluation of traffic, air quality and noise impacts. The use of specialty subconsultants on such projects is permissible. • One or more registered Professional Engineer(s) and/or Licensed Site Professional(s) who will be responsible for signing all review submittals to the City. Proposal Requirements Please provide your letter response, along with any supplemental understandings and/or clarifications of the stipulated scope of work and resumes of key staff and sub -consultants, if any, by 5:00 PM on . Any questions related to this RFQ/P shall be addressed to at 978/ Schedule The schedule is extremely critical due to the time lines established in the Administrative Consent Order with the DEP. It is expected that the selected Consultant will need to review all documents and provide written comments within two weeks after receipt. The review meeting will anticipated to be held during the last week of May 2008. Page 1 of 1 David Greenbaum From: Joanne Scott Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 12:51 PM To: Janet Dionne Subject: FW: Salem Transfer Station From: Joanne Scott Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 2:45 PM To: 'cdavis@goodwinprocter.com' Cc: 'Paulette Puleo'; 'dktrcar@msn.com' Subject: Salem Transfer Station Dear Mr. Davis: I am the Health Agent for the Salem Board of Health, following up on Carol Rainville's e-mail to you The applicant for the Minor Modification request (regulated by DEP's Code 310 CMR 16.00, "Site Assignment Regulations for Solid Waste Facilities") to the Salem Board of Health is the City of Salem, who currently owns the property. An RFP for the sale of the property has been awarded to the current operator of the Transfer Station, NSC, pending City Council approval. North Side Carting, Inc. (NSC) is owned by Robert George and several Thompson Brothers. The modification is to increase the daily tonnage average from 100 tons to 400 tons and to accept "municipal solid waste" (msw) in addition to "construction & demolition" (c&d) that is brought there now The plan includes building a new transfer facility. The Board of Health must review the request, hold a public hearing, and review technical information regarding air quality impacts, facility and building design, traffic impacts, etc. The Board has the option to accept the request, deny the request, or accept the request with conditions. As the Health Agent, my major concern is the political pressure that will be exerted because the actual applicant is the City. In addition, the City is under the threat of significant DEP penalties because of an outstanding (for several years) order to cap the ash landfill that exists on the property. The Board of Health will be asking the City to allocate money (probably received from NSC) to pay the expenses of an attorney, engineering company, and air quality expert. Since the City Solicitor represents the City in this application to the Board, it does not seem possible for her to also represent the Board in this matter. The Board of Health attorney would guide the Board to ensure compliance with the DEP Code including specific time requirements for the filing and holding of a public hearing, and for the time allowed for a written decision to be rendered. Legal assistance would also be needed to write the decision and the specific conditions if the request was approved with conditions. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Joanne Scott 978-741-1800 jscottta7salem.com 7/29/2009