| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
 Posted - 08/31/2009 : 10:44:09 PM
|
This problem just keeps going on and on and on and on, and since April, the neighbors could not even open their windows? TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE and this issue is a huge impact on my decisions this election.
I'd like to know who wants Wood Waste moved and who doesn't, because if he moves, this will be the nightmare we will be stuck with. We should have tried to get rid of him. He just made a 3.6 million dollar PROFIT on the old city yards, and he has to have a fence that's falling down like that? Makes me ill.
You must be logged in to see this link.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Landfill updates
This was in the Aug. 28 update on the landfill, from MassDEP:
In addition to tracking the causes of odor complaints, Shaw continued to inspect the Landfill identifying and marking landfill gas and leachate breakouts first thing each morning and throughout the day. In addition, Shaw personnel observed a problem with the operation of a number of extraction wells at the landfill. They notified New Ventures, of the issue and New Ventures, under the supervision of their engineer, SITEC, is implementing measures to identify and correct the cause of the problem. Shaw personnel are monitoring these activities.
I found this very interesting. The "problem with the operation of a number of extraction wells at the landfill" obviously has been a "problem" for a while.
This is from today's update:
Today New Ventures, under the supervision of their engineer, SITEC, is conducting a repair of the landfill gas extraction system at the landfill. This repair requires in part excavation of a shallow trench in the uncapped area of the landfill. These activities are likely to cause odors. The trench will be backfilled as soon as the repair is complete today.
Obviously, some kind of environmental engineer not related to New Ventures was always needed on site.
Nobody thought that something was wrong, with all the gas that has been escaping? Nobody but the landfill neighbors, that is ...
This is really inexcusable.
On a lighter note, apparently last Thursday, Aug. 27, was a day free of odor. One of the neighbors wrote an email to all concerned thanking them for this.
Thank you for last Thursday. We had all of our windows open for 9 hours straight. It was the first time for us to do that since April. We even had lunch on the deck. It was truly amazing.
Can you imagine living like that? Thanking all and sundry for ONE day without a nauseating stench in your home?
I remember, way back in July it was, Mayor Moak saying that the work causing the stink would all be done "in a couple of weeks."
I'm not necessarily blaming him; obviously he has no control over New Ventures.
|
 |
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2009 : 1:18:42 PM
|
Behind the stink; Documentary outlines Newburyport landfill saga
By Katie Farrell Lovett
Staff writer
September 24, 2009 12:14 am
For some Newburyporters, the story of the Crow Lane landfill is a way of life. They live it every day.
But for others, the vast history of the ongoing saga is unclear.
It's those looking to gain an education who may benefit most from Mary Godfrey's new film, "Dumping Billy: The Story of the Crow Lane Landfill," which she will premiere Saturday at 11:30 a.m. at the Firehouse Center for the Arts as part of the Newburyport Documentary Film Festival.
The film is not an "activist piece," Godfrey says.
"The film covers the story of the Crow Lane landfill up until November 2008, when I stopped filming," she says. "It is not an exposé on (owner-operator) New Ventures. People can expect a very reserved piece."
Although Godfrey, 32, grew up in Newburyport, it was on the other side of the city from the landfill, which New Ventures, owned by William Thibeault, has operated since 2000. But a graduate school assignment brought her up close with the landfill.
A student at New York University's Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, specializing in news and documentary, Godfrey was required to compile a 20-minute "short" documentary as a final project in a broadcast journalism class.
She initially hoped to do a different environmental piece. But when that idea didn't pan out, a neighbor suggested the Crow Lane landfill as a subject matter.
The landfill has been an issue in Newburyport for more than a half decade. New Ventures purchased it in 2000 to cap it, but for years, neighbors surrounding the landfill have dealt with the smells of rotten eggs and burnt matches produced from the decomposing gypsum at the site as it sits uncapped. The city, state and New Ventures have engaged in ongoing legal battles relating to the closing — a fight that has included many fines and shutdowns of the site.
Last spring, Mayor John Moak and Health Director Jack Morris issued an administrative order, prompting the capping to begin again. City officials hope it will be closed this fall.
For the film, which she shot between July and November 2008, Godfrey interviewed neighbors and those in the city affected by the landfill. She attempted to interview representatives of both the state's Department of Environmental Protection and New Ventures, but both declined since the matter was in litigation at the time.
"To me, it was a new way in which to tell a story that everyone's been reading about for the past several years," Godfrey says.
Those who have been following the story won't learn any new information, but will see the subject presented in a new medium, she adds.
"It really covers the main points," she said.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/30/2009 : 2:00:50 PM
|
I'd like to hear what happens at this meeting. I have been asking the question......Where is it that Wood Waste will ship their trash too once the landfill is closed, an no one knows.
I think it's very important for the City of Everett to know..... and see a copy of a contract (or whatever they use) with the new landfill. You can not put your guard down when it comes to this type of business and the owner.
Mayor to hold meeting to update council on landfill
By Katie Farrell Lovett
Staff writer
October 30, 2009 03:54 am
—
NEWBURYPORT — Mayor John Moak has called a special City Council meeting for Thursday, Nov. 5, at 6 p.m. to update councilors on the closing of the Crow Lane landfill.
Moak said yesterday he called the meeting after the council's ad-hoc committee on the landfill asked for an update on the closure and the state of the berm.
Representatives from the Department of Environmental Protection will be present at the meeting as well.
The meeting, to be held in the City Hall Council Chambers, is slated to last an hour, the mayor said.
At-large City Councilor Kathleen O'Connor Ives said she and Ward 4 Councilor Ed Cameron had approached the mayor and asked for the meeting.
The meeting is important for the neighbors of the landfill to hear directly about the closure and how DEP will respond to odor problems, as well as what will happen after the process is complete, Ives said.
Ives said she hopes health director Jack Morris will also be at the meeting. Morris has taken a regional health director position with Amesbury and Salisbury but will continue to work part time in Newburyport until a replacement is found.
"The project is still ongoing," Ives said.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 07:00:27 AM
|
The landfill - it ain't over yet
OK, so a couple of weeks ago the final membrane layer (FML) was about to be placed on the last bit of the landfill by the end of that week ... and yet, here it was a special meeting of the City Council on Nov. 5 and the MassDEP was telling us how the contractor laying the membrane had to leave to go to another job and won't be back until Nov. 18, or so.
But never fear, landfill neighbors - it should all be over in time to ruin your Thanksgiving. (As in, the new schedule for finishing this part of the job is the day after Thanksgiving.)
I can't even go into the rest of it because it's too late at night/early in the morning, but suffice it to say that the news was not good.
What also was not good was the absence of anyone representing Ward 1.
Everyone else was there, for at least part of the meeting (and even though Tom Jones came in very late, his wife Terry Berns was there). Bob Cronin was there. Ari Herzog was there.
I do believe I heard some tense of the word "concern" voiced by a councillor ...
There are, I think, 3 meetings left in this session of the Council.
I wonder if we have seen the last of Larry?
Posted by Gillian Swart at 12:38 AM
You must be logged in to see this link.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/08/2009 : 07:08:31 AM
|
Published: November 06, 2009 03:59 am ShareThis PrintThis
1
DEP: Work on landfill ends in May State says liner to be finished this month, odors will stop
By Katie Farrell Lovett
Staff writer
NEWBURYPORT — The Crow Lane landfill will be fully capped by the end of May, and a post-closure plan will be filed with the state by mid-June, state Department of Environmental Protection representatives told the City Council last night.
DEP northeast regional director Richard Chalpin and John Carrigan, a section chief at the Northeast Regional DEP office, updated the councilors and landfill neighbors about the closure process while also looking ahead to the future.
The liner should be fully in place, including the small area still missing, by the end of November, Carrigan said. Once that is in place, it should abate the odors coming from the landfill.
The completion of the capping is slated for May 30, with a post-closure plan being submitted by June 15, he added.
New Ventures, the owner and operator of the landfill, is required to submit a post-closure report, which will also be given to the city for public review and response. The document will include a post-closure maintenance plan and estimated cost. Additional elements will be included as well, Carrigan said, such as a time length for the maintenance and monitoring of the berm.
Bruce Vogel, of Myrtle Avenue, asked what happens once the landfill is capped.
"Do we get handed the keys to this thing after it's all done?" he asked. "Who owns it?"
New Ventures is the owner, Carrigan responded. If the company does walk away from its obligation, the state will take it over and access accounts and funds, becoming responsible for making sure it is properly maintained.
As planting and vegetation can't be finished until the spring, the liner will be exposed for about eight months, he said, assuring councilors that the material can last if exposed to sun without degrading.
City councilors raised questions on the boring tests that were done several months ago without a plan for the berm construction being finalized.
Ward 5 Councilor Brian Derrivan said negotiations on a berm design should stop and a plan should be issued.
"There's no question in my mind, it's always been about the money," he said. "I don't think I'm the only person who thinks that. Why do we have to negotiate with him?"
Without the report being released, there is a perception that there's a problem with the berm, he said.
Chalpin said the process is not a negotiation but a review process to make sure the design is the right one.
Construction on the berm won't start until the warmer weather arrives, Carrigan said, as it can't be done during the winter months.
Health director Jack Morris said he anticipates that blasting could occur at the site soon, which is needed to remove some of the bedrock. DEP said they plan to give neighbors at least a few days notice when it will be happening, and Mayor John Moak said the city can issue a automated phone message for that area, if given enough notice.
A firefighter is required to be on site when blasting occurs, and the Fire Department must issue a permit, Morris said. The blasting will be in a limited area, Chalpin said.
Councilors also asked for the results of air and water tests that were performed at the site. Carrigan said the results will be posted on the DEP Web site by next week.
Contaminants that were found at the landfill are not unusual and are often found at landfills, he said. No immediate red flags have been raised, he said, adding that the data is still being reviewed. Once the data is put on the state's Web site, there can be further discussion, he said.
"There are things that you normally expect to find at a site like this," Carrigan said. "I'm not trying to dodge the question. I'm trying to answer in a fair manner."
With concerns raised about a new "burnt" odor in the city, Carrigan said testing was done and complaints of a similar smell were reported in Everett, where New Ventures transported capping materials from its waste facility in that city. Most likely, that may have been the source, he said.
Ron Klodenski, a landfill abutter, was one of numerous neighbors who attended the meeting.
"I do have some hope that we're getting closer," he said. "I guess I am somewhat optimistic."
Landfill odors have been absent over the last several days, he said.
"Let's hope it continues," he added.
You must be logged in to see this link.
"Deb" |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2009 : 2:03:54 PM
|
You must be logged in to see this link.
Neighbors sue landfill owner
By Gillian Swart
Fri Nov 13, 2009, 01:28 PM EST
Newburyport -
After more than five years of vile, rotten-egg odors that have caused numerous health complaints, and after pleading for help from local and state officials to no avail, neighbors of the Crow Lane landfill are suing the site’s owner, New Ventures.
The complaint, filed in Essex Superior Court on Oct. 20 by William Simmons, a Salisbury lawyer who specializes in environmental law, claims that the landfill has been a continuous nuisance and that New Ventures has been negligent and has shown a “reckless indifference to the health and welfare of the community.”
In order to cap the landfill, New Ventures signed an agreement with the city that allowed the company to truck in about 450,000 cubic yards of construction and demolition waste. But a major component of that waste was gypsum drywall, which releases hydrogen sulfide as it decomposes. It has been the emissions of that gas that have caused the continual odors and problems for residents in nearby homes.
In addition to annoyance, discomfort and inconvenience, the complaint argues that neighbors have suffered substantial and unreasonable interference with the use of their property because of New Ventures’ negligence. And now, those neighbors want to be compensated.
On behalf of about 85 residents of Newburyport #8209; more have signed on since the complaint was filed #8209; Simmons has demanded a jury trial in order to determine how much money New Ventures should pay each resident and each home owner in the Crow Lane neighborhood.
“The landfill owner has 20 days from the date of the filing to respond,” Simmons said. “After New Ventures answers, there will be discovery, during which both sides try to garner information relevant to the case, or “triable facts,”’ Simmons added.
According to the complaint, New Ventures is liable not only because it created a continuous five-year nuisance, the company also failed to comply with laws, regulations, rules and permit conditions of every governmental agency that had jurisdiction over the site.
Not only did the company fail to prevent hydrogen sulfide emissions, the complaint alleges that New Ventures refused to try to control odors by providing necessary equipment and by applying a daily cover to active work areas. Such a cover also would have controlled blowing litter and kept water from seeping into the landfill.
According to the suit, New Ventures also violated a federal law that requires solid waste be stored so that it doesn’t pose any fire, health and safety hazards. It also charges that the landfill is a noisome trade, a business that threatens residents, their property or public health and causes injurious odors. And, according to state law, anyone who is injured in the comfort and enjoyment of his or her property because of a noisome trade can sue and recover damages. .
In addition to asking the court to award each individual plaintiff money for their past discomfort, inconvenience and the loss of the use of their property, the complaint asks for additional money for each day plaintiffs have their lives disrupted by odors and health problems after December 2009, the date New Ventures has been ordered by Suffolk Superior Court to end all releases of hydrogen sulfide from the landfill.
Neighbors named as plaintiffs in the complaint include At-large City Councilor Tom Jones and his wife Terry Berns; Gloria Braunhardt; Michael and Alida Frey; Victoria Hendrickson; Robert Kelleher; Ronald Klodenski; Joseph Teixteira, chairman of the conservation commission, and his wife Kimberly Kudym; and several minor children (along with their parents).
Too little, too late?
On the heels of a special meeting in which the state Department of Environmental Protection announced that the landfill will not be covered until the day after Thanksgiving, the City Council Monday approved a resolution asking the state attorney general to crack down on landfill owner New Ventures.
“Now, Therefore, be it resolved that the Newburyport City Council asks the Office of the Attorney General to more aggressively pursue contempt actions and urges further legal action in order to protect the health and safety of Newburyport’s residents,” the final paragraph of the resolution reads.
At-large councilor Kathleen O’Connor Ives, who drafted the document, said that after the state DEP visit last week, she thought it was “only fitting” that the council relay its concerns to the attorney general’s office.
At a special meeting of the City Council on Nov. 5, DEP section chief John Carrigan told the council and the audience of mostly landfill neighbors that the landfill will not be covered with the final membrane layer until the day after Thanksgiving. The landfill will not be officially capped until May.
Councilor-at-large Tom Jones echoed the frustrations of his fellow landfill neighbors, who have endured six years of “fugitive” gas emissions, broken promises and deferred deadlines, when he noted the 2005 deadline for capping and closing the landfill is long gone.
Carrigan said fugitive emissions should be mitigated after closing, if the landfill is closed properly.
“If closed properly,” said Ward 2 councilor Greg Earls. “I would be more comfortable if you said ‘when it is closed properly.’”
Carrigan replied, “I admit I’m a little nervous.”
Richard Chalpin, DEP Northeast regional director, added that there have been “constant battles” with the landfill owner.
Although Carrigan and Chalpin tried to allay the fears of city officials and neighbors that the berm is not safe, the abutting wetlands are in danger, and William Thibeault, owner of New Ventures, will walk away leaving the city holding the bag, concern lingers.
Both men were questioned closely by city councilors and members of the audience about those issues and about the gas emission system, which is supposed to burn off landfill gases.
Chalpin said the problems with the system are caused by the owner/operator. New Ventures will be responsible for maintaining the system after the landfill is closed.
If the owner walks away, the state would take over and can gain access to the $3 million cash in bonds, the financial assurance mechanism New Ventures put up at the start of the project.
Looking ahead
The landfill was scheduled to be covered two weeks ago. Carrigan said a small portion of the top of the hill was not graded before the contractor had to leave for another job. Work is scheduled to resume Nov. 18.
Once the landfill is capped, sand and loam will be placed over the liner and grass will be seeded. There are also some storm water issues that Carrigan said would be completed by June. New Ventures is required to submit a post-closure plan that will be open for public review and comment.
Health Director Jack Morris said blasting through rock to enable laying of pipes will be done under the direction of the city fire department. Mayor John Moak said that, with enough notice, the city could use the reverse 911 system to notify residents within 250 ft. of the blasting site.
Rosemary Powers, who attended the meeting representing DEP commissioner Laurie Burt, said the commissioner is “concerned and interested in this issue” and she is aware of what neighbors have endured for years.
Neighbor William Woodbury, who with his wife Deborah is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit filed by the landfill neighbors, said he had a lot of concerns about what will happen after the landfill is closed.
“For my family, the last six years have been nothing short of a nightmare,” he told the DEP people.
“Sure, I guess I’m optimistic,” said Wildwood Drive resident Ron Klodenski this week. “What else can I be but optimistic? At this point, what other choice do I have?”
Neighbors sue landfill owner
Residents are asking the court to compensate them for five years of problems that have kept them from enjoying their property
"Deb" |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2009 : 12:44:17 PM
|
Landfill's lawyer responds to lawsuit
By Katie Farrell Lovett
Staff writer
November 18, 2009 03:39 am
NEWBURYPORT — Neighbors of the Crow Lane landfill who filed a lawsuit last month against the owner of the landfill heard a response yesterday from New Ventures.
Salisbury environmental attorney William Simmons is representing the 74 adults and 14 minors who have sued landfill owner and operator New Ventures. The plaintiffs are asking for a jury trial and seeking damages stemming from spending the last half decade living with the impact of the Crow Lane landfill, such as health repercussions from the sicking odors and the impact on their property values, they say.
According to the complaint filed Oct. 20 in Essex Superior Court, the plaintiffs are saying New Ventures has "negligently" and "willfully" broken the law with their actions.
The plaintiffs total 39 households.
Simmons' firm received the response yesterday and had no comment on the document, as they were still reading through it.
The neighbors are seeking an award for the "annoyance, inconvenience and discomfort damages" to each individual named in the suit and an award of "loss of the exclusive possession and loss of use of their property damages" as well as an award for future damages for each day after December that the plaintiffs are damaged by hydrogen sulfide emissions from the landfill.
The complaint claims New Ventures has "failed to abate the continuing nuisance" from the landfill, noting that the landfill "created a private continuous nuisance in that the continuous release of air contaminants and pollution, including ... objectionable odors and H2S onto and around plaintiffs' properties," which caused substantial interference with the neighbors' right to use and enjoy their properties.
Simmons said he first heard from a neighbor last year, and the case began to move forward after a meeting with abutters at the end of September.
Now that New Ventures has filed its response, the case will move into the "discovery" stage, Simmons said. Simmons said the case could be resolved in about a year and a half, as it's on an expedited track.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2009 : 4:10:08 PM
|
Good for those families in Newburyport. I hope they tie Thibeault up in court and are compensated for all they have had to endure.
"Such a clown" |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2009 : 7:27:06 PM
|
There should be some heavy compensation. I don’t know you can return 5 years of a child’s life to him.
That’s great that they are taking a stand like that. More people from Everett should have taken this type of stand a lot sooner. What do we get? We get back room deals being made - and Everett being a big money maker for Wood Waste - a VERY WEAK consent agreement, that only protects Wood Waste. We never collected on any of his violations. So much for the enclosure being built by November 09……..two years from now we will be hearing the same lies.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2009 : 08:12:24 AM
|
Monday, November 30, 2009
Moak says holidays not ruined
I found this little snippet in the paper amusing:
Moak said last week he disagrees with recent claims that holidays have been ruined in recent years for neighbors of Crow Lane, due to the presence of odors and smells from the landfill.
Moak said that there has been one holiday — Christmas of 2006 — that neighbors suffered from the smells. In 2007 and 2008, there were no problems at Thanksgiving or Christmas, the mayor added.
"I beg to differ that anything happened in '07 or '08," Moak said.
Moak also worked to ensure that this year's Thanksgiving was odor-free.
"We kill ourselves to make sure that happens," the mayor said..
I went back and looked at complaints registered on the email chain by neighbors. Apparently the 4th of July doesn't rank as a "holiday" in the mayor's mind. There were numerous complaints both on July 4 and July 5 ... and the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th ... in fact, right through into August.
Didn't I hear somewhere (a recent public meeting w/DEP) that the final membrane layer (FML) would be in place by the day after Thanksgiving?
Then why did I see an email from a landfill neighbor dated 11/29, complaining of odors?
I did not have time to note it before, but it was New Ventures, the landfill owner, who delayed the placement of the FML by not doing what it was supposed to do!
When will this ever end? Someone should look into this ....
Posted by Gillian Swart at 8:46 AM
You must be logged in to see this link.
" Send in the Clowns " |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2009 : 7:01:02 PM
|
There was a comment that was left on the recent story about Moak. I'm sure Newburyport is glad to be getting rid of him!
Anonymous said...
Are you kidding me? Is this not the same Mayor Moak that sat in meetings and heard constituents complaints?
Is this not the same Mayor Moak that admitted on MANY occasions that he's been to the landfill and discovered an odor/gas problem?
He is disputing what is clearly documented?? WHY????? |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2009 : 12:21:27 PM
|
You must be logged in to see this link.
Newburyport -
Lawsuit claims New Ventures knew grinding waste caused more gas emissions and more odors but did it anyway
By Gillian Swart
newburyport@cnc.com
The miserable odors from the Crow Lane landfill continued last weekend, despite the fact that the five-year battle between the site’s owner, New Ventures, and the residents in the surrounding neighborhood may now be heading to court.
Both sides have fired opening salvos in the case. In late October, a group of neighbors represented by Salisbury environmental attorney William Simmons, filed a complaint alleging New Venture’s willful negligence in operating a construction and demolition waste landfill that created a continuing private nuisance and that operation demonstrated a “reckless indifference to the health and welfare of the community.”
In addition to annoyance, discomfort and inconvenience, the complaint argues that neighbors were deprived of the use and enjoyment of their homes because of New Ventures’ negligence. The neighbors are asking for compensation, and they have requested a jury trial in order to determine the monetary value of their five years of frustration, health complaint and discomfort.
For its part, New Ventures has filed a response to the complaint that essentially denies any wrongdoing.
The next step in the case is the discovery phase, which could be complicated the potential battery of attorneys representing different neighbors who surround the landfill site.
Todd Hageman, an environmental attorney from St. Louis, Missouri, and Van Kirk McCombs of Jacksonville, Florida, both appear to be representing landfill neighbors. McCombs said this week his firm has filed a petition for admission to the case.
Hagerman has fought several landfill cases in the past and began following the Crow Lane situation, in part, because of a similar case he is handling in Bourne.
In an interview with The Current last July, Hagerman said the stomach-turning odor that neighbors put up with for years was a nuisance. He said then that a nuisance is not a minor problem and it could be grounds for a lawsuit.
“A nuisance can be something that’s serious enough to rise to a course of legal action when it infringes on your property rights,” Hagerman told The Current in July. “People who live in these situations can’t hang out outside of their homes; they can’t enjoy their property,”
The ugly truth?
This case isn’t just about the discomfort endured by neighbors. It zeroes in on claims that New Ventures’ operation of the landfill was negligent, reckless and wanton.
At the heart of the complaint is the release of hydrogen sulfide from the landfill. The colorless gas smells like rotten eggs and is known to be a landfill emission. New Ventures over the years dumped construction and demolition materials containing gypsum drywall into the landfill. As the drywall comes in contact with organic matter already in the landfill, the hydrogen sulfide gas forms.
The complaint alleges that the reduced particle size of the material placed in the landfill allowed for more than usual hydrogen sulfide to be generated. The construction and demolition material was ground up into “fines” at the owner’s facility in Everett before being transported to Newburyport.
“Therefore, Defendant’s Crow Lane Landfill which accepts C&D fines functioned as a [hydrogen sulfide] factory, a fact which the Defendant knew or should have known,” the complaint says.
The plaintiffs claim that New Ventures should have been “even more vigilant and prudent to assure that proper measures were taken to prevent the release of [hydrogen sulfide] gas from the landfill into Plaintiff’s surrounding residential communities.”
It has been years since New Ventures took over what was a private dump and began to haul C&D materials to the Crow Lane landfill to cover to materials already there. During that time, numerous complaints have been filed by both the city and the state over improper installation and maintenance of the gas extraction system at the landfill.
Berm remains a concern
Ward 5 City Councilor Brian Derrivan said this week that the final membrane layer, or FML, has been placed on the huge pile of construction waste at Crow Lane, except for the areas being used as a haul road. Derrivan said the haul road will be used to transport sand and loam to the top of the landfill. Those materials will cover the FML in the spring, grass seed will be planted and the landfill will be closed.
But the state Department of Environmental Protection, which is overseeing the landfill closure, has yet to release a report on the berm that supports the landfill. Engineers for New Ventures generated a report on the berm design, following concerns that the material already in the berm was not stable enough to support the ultimate weight of the landfill.
“No one has seen the new berm design, and there has been no review,” Derrivan said.
“But [New Ventures is] doing what they’re supposed to be doing,” he said, referring to the guidelines the company is following as it finishes the site capping.
Work yet to be completed includes running pipes from a catch basin to a vernal pool across Crow Lane. Derrivan said recent odor complaints are most likely from that basin, which currently is full of runoff from the landfill.
I still would like to know how much we have collected on this violation, which Thibeault is still in violation of:
City Of Everett
Building Department
2-24-09
Wood Waste
85-87 Boston St.
Everett, Ma. 02149
Attn: William Thibeault
Regular & Certified Mail 7002 0510 0004 3670 4588
Hand Delivered
Re: Outdoor Storage of Good at 85-87 Boston St
Map K-4, Lots 6-29 & 33-40
Dear Mr. Thibeault;
This office conducted an inspection of your property and you are in violation of the City of Everett Zoning Ordinance Section 21 Industrial Limited District (a) Uses. Section 5. “Storage of goods in containers where all storage is contained within the building, not including storage of any raw or natural materials”.
You are hereby ordered to remove all outdoor storage within 30 days.
Failure to do so will result in daily fines for all violations per City of Everett Zoning Ordinance Section 13 Violations and Penalties. “Whoever shall violate any provision of this ordinance shall, for each offense, and for each and every day that such offense continues, shall be subject to a fine of not more than twenty dollars ($20.00)
James Sheehan
Inspector of Buildings
Cc: Mayor’s Office, B.O.H., City Solicitor, Code Enforcement, Police Department, and Fire Prevention
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2009 : 12:32:46 PM
|
I was down at Stop & Shop yesterday. There is still an outside pile of debris on the Everett side of Wood Waste. So, does that mean we are still collecting fines down there? It is well past the 30 days Thibeault was allowed to "remove all outdoor storage".
" Send in the Clowns " |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2009 : 1:07:00 PM
|
The Environmental Lawyers at The Simon Law Firm Represent Massachusetts Residents in Suit Against Landfill Owner
Business Wire News Releases
Published: 12/10/09 04:21 PM EST
Newburyport residents call the Crow Lane landfill a “hydrogen sulfide gas factory”
Residents of Newburyport, Mass., living near the Crow Lane landfill who claim to have been exposed to air pollution and hydrogen sulfide odors emanating from the facility have filed suit against the landfill’s owner, New Ventures Associates LLC.
The suit, Woodbury, et al. v. New Ventures Associates LLC, cause no. 09-2058C, was filed in Essex County Superior Court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on Oct. 23.
Filed on behalf of 89 plaintiffs, the suit claims that the Crow Lane landfill accepted construction and demolition debris that acted as a “hydrogen sulfide gas factory,” requiring vigilant and prudent management to prevent release of the foul-smelling gas into the surrounding community.
A preliminary injunction entered on Oct. 20, 2006, required the landfill owner to implement measures to prevent or mitigate the release of hydrogen sulfide, but, the suit alleges, the owner failed to comply. Although the human threshold for tolerance of hydrogen sulfide odor is as low as 0.5 parts per billion, since 2006 some residential neighborhoods have recorded air concentrations as high as 134 ppb, and landfill perimeter readings have climbed as high as 470 ppb.
As a result, residents allege, they have been unable to use and enjoy their property and have suffered such health effects as eye irritation, sinus problems, sore throats, headaches, dizziness, shortness of breath, a burning sensation in the chest, nausea and vomiting.
The suit asserts claims for private nuisance, negligence and negligence per se and seeks damages for the loss of use of the plaintiffs’ property and reimbursement for the costs of the suit and for other such damages a jury would deem appropriate.
The residents are represented by The Simon Law Firm, a St. Louis-based firm that represents people who have lost the use and enjoyment of their property or been hurt as a result of environmental and landfill hazards; the Jacksonville, Fla.-based Law Offices of Van Kirk McCombs II; the Law Office of William A. Simmons, based in Salisbury, Mass.; and Anthony Z. Roisman with the Lebanon, N.H.-based National Legal Scholars Law Firm
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/28/2009 : 1:51:22 PM
|
State seeking authority to intervene in landfill problems
Newburyport City Notebook
Katie Farrell Lovett
December 28, 2009 12:15 am
—
The state announced recently that the Patrick administration is seeking greater authority for the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection to intervene in problem landfills.
In a press release issued by the state, the example of the Crow Lane landfill in Newburyport is specifically listed as an example of a "problem landfill." The initiative was listed as part of a larger announcement that Gov. Deval Patrick will maintain the existing moratorium on new facilities for incineration of municipal solid waste.
DEP spokesman Ed Colletta said last week the initiative is part of the state's mission to protect citizens. Difficulty arises when the state can't take over capping and closing a landfill problem site, Colletta said.
"We will now seek statutory authority to intervene more directly to try to protect others from problems like Crow Lane," Colletta said.
The state will work with the Legislature on the initiative in the new year, he added, noting there are "a handful" of other landfills with odor problems around the state.
Home >
Contact:
Robert Keough (Robert.Keough@State.MA.US): 617-626-1109
Lisa Capone (Lisa.Capone@State.MA.US): 617-626-1119
Catherine Williams: (Catherine.Williams@State.MA.US): 617-626-1809
DEVAL L. PATRICK
Governor
TIMOTHY P. MURRAY
Lieutenant Governor
Ian A. Bowles
Secretary
December 11, 2009 - For immediate release:
Patrick-Murray Administration Maintains Incinerator Moratorium, Expands Recycling Efforts
EEA outlines priorities for comprehensive recycling push; calls for review of construction and demolition material used for fuel
BOSTON - The Patrick-Murray Administration today announced that it would maintain the existing moratorium on new facilities for incineration of municipal solid waste. In addition, Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Ian Bowles outlined Governor Patrick's priorities for expanding the recycling of key products like water bottles and consumer electronics, as part of a push to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills and incinerators.
"We are serious about managing the waste we generate in a way that saves money for cities and towns, curbs pollution and protects the environment for our children and grandchildren," said Governor Deval Patrick. "There are better ways than traditional incineration."
"Focusing on incineration and landfills is the wrong end of the waste equation," said Secretary Bowles. "While Massachusetts is ahead of the national average in recycling and some communities like Nantucket are leading the way, there is a lot more we can do to increase recycling and reduce disposal of useful materials."
The Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has had in place a moratorium on new municipal solid waste combustion facilities since 1990. As MassDEP prepares a new Solid Waste Master Plan, which it is expected to issue as a draft in early 2010, today's announcement specifies that the new plan will maintain the moratorium, but also strengthen it in two ways - by reducing dramatically the amount of recyclable material going into the waste stream, and by developing stringent new performance standards for existing waste-to-energy facilities that require higher recycling rates in waste collection areas, lower emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants, and higher efficiency in energy recapture. MassDEP will work toward developing these performance standards for the next 10-year Master Plan.
Secretary Bowles noted that anaerobic digestion, advanced biofuels, and other proven types of waste-to-energy technology applied to organic wastes, will continue to be encouraged in the new Master Plan, but that incineration of mixed municipal solid waste will continue to be restricted to existing facilities.
To complement the incinerator moratorium, the Patrick-Murray Administration is committed to an aggressive agenda of recycling and waste reduction that gives cities and towns assistance to expand and improve their recycling efforts and requires greater responsibility from manufacturers for products - ranging from water bottles to televisions - that end up in our waste stream.
•The Patrick-Murray Administration's priorities to expand recycling and waste reduction include:
Consumer Electronics: The Administration calls for passage of comprehensive producer responsibility legislation for discarded electronics, the so-called "E-Waste" bill, relieving municipalities of this burden.
•Expanded Bottle Bill: The Administration urges approval of an expanded bottle bill to cover water and sports drink bottles, which will reduce litter, increase recycling rates for containers from the fastest-growing segment of beverages, and provide additional resources to support local recycling efforts.
•New Protections for Communities: The Administration will seek greater authority for MassDEP to intervene in problem landfills, such as the one on Crow Lane in Newburyport, and new authority to require waste haulers to provide full recycling services to their customers.
•Helping Municipalities Increase Recycling Rates: The Administration will work with the Legislature, municipalities, and stakeholders to devise new standards and programs to help cities and towns reach higher rates of recycling by offering assistance for municipalities to adopt more effective methods, such as single-stream recycling, which eliminates the need for households to sort their recyclables.
"This initiative will return Massachusetts to national leadership in recycling," said MassDEP Commissioner Laurie Burt. "Built on this foundation, the Solid Waste Master Plan issued next year will guide consumers, businesses, and municipalities toward a future of more recycling, and less landfills and incineration."
At the same time, Secretary Bowles announced that he has directed MassDEP to suspend review of permit applications for facilities proposing to use construction and demolition materials (C&D) as fuel for energy generation, including the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy facility, until a comprehensive assessment of the environmental impacts of using such materials is completed.. This assessment will include a review of potential for emissions of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants related to C&D, an analysis of level of contaminants commonly found in C&D feedstocks, and a review of the most effective means for minimizing, sampling and monitoring of toxics and other contaminants of concern in these feedstocks. Further, the Secretary has directed MassDEP, in coordination with the state Department of Public Health (DPH), to conduct a review of the potential public health impacts associated with the combustion C&D.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
New Ventures/Crow lane landfill
