Ban or not, Gilmanton officials stand behind biosolids

GILMANTON — Town officials, tired of discussing the spreading of biosolids, will only refer people with questions to the town website where the posted minutes of the selectmen’s June 18 meeting record the back-and-forth discussion between residents and selectmen.

“There was a clarification at the board of selectmen meeting,” said Assistant Town Administrator Heather Carpenter. “The board chair read a statement, and we have multiple legal opinions on this.”

She would not say more about the dispute regarding the town’s adoption of a ban on the spreading of biosolids, and the continued practice of spreading the treated sludge on farmers’ fields.

Residents who passed the ban at this year’s town meeting thought the article would prevent farmers from spreading biosolids on their fields, but Town Attorney Walter Mitchell and an attorney with the New Hampshire Municipal Association have concurred with the selectmen’s interpretation that those already using biosolids were “grandfathered” and would not be affected by the ban.

Among those applying biosolids is Bob McWhinnie, the brother of Selectman Steve McWhinnie. Residents who want the town to uphold the ban claim it is that relationship that has prompted the town to ignore the clear will of the people.

Steve McWhinnie read into the record on June 18, a statement he said was based on legal advice: “Town Counsel and NHMA both advise that any existing operations using biosolids as a fertilizer prior to the adoption of warrant article 4 would be protected by Article VII, Non-Conforming Uses, Lots & Structures, A, of the Gilmanton Zoning Ordinance.”

The ordinance provides that “Any lawful use of a lot, or a structure, or of a part of a structure, which was in existence when the Ordinance or any revisions were approved may be continued.”

McWhinnie’s statement continued, “Therefore, a farming operation already using biosolids in conformance with the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services regulations … and best management practices would be allowed to continue.”

Resident Barbara Swanson disagrees with that interpretation. In a letter to the editor, she wrote, “The key word here is ‘use’. The use of the lot is farming. The stockpiling or spreading of biosolids is not a use of the lot.”

Health and welfare

Residents who overwhelmingly supported the ban in March cited concern about the long-term environmental impact of allowing treated human waste to be spread on agricultural fields. They warned that pathogens and heavy metals could contaminate neighboring properties.

“We voted to ‘protect the health and welfare of our residents and prevent pollution of surface and ground water resources,’ Swanson wrote.

Speaking at the selectmen’s meeting, Swanson said, “The March vote left no room for grandfathering.”

Resident Don Guarino said the Department of Environmental Services, which regulates biosolids, will not interfere with what the residents voted upon.

Ray Gordon, in a telephone interview on Monday, agreed with that statement, saying it is a local decision. As an Environmental Services employee who oversees both biosolids and wastewater treatment, however, Gordon said the state agency has determined that biosolids can be beneficially reused as a soil conditioner and fertilizer – both on agricultural land and as a way of reclaiming such substandard land as gravel pits.

He explained that the Department of Environmental Services closely regulates the solid, semisolid, and liquid material at wastewater treatment plants and that only a small portion of the treated sludge meets the tough criteria for approval in land spreading. The DES constantly reviews the scientific data in setting its standards, and he said New Hampshire is far ahead of other states in pre-approval testing.

“We test for some 172 substances,” Gordon said, “including volatile organic material, heavy metals, nitrates, phosphates, and enteric viruses, as well as checking the pH level and every possible combination. We test it before it’s spread, and monitor it afterwards.”

Gordon said there has never been a case of contamination from biosolids, and he attributed that to the rigorous follow-up testing the state does.

As to concerns about heavy metals in the biosolids, Gordon pointed out that healthy soils contain heavy metals, and he said it is a matter of making sure they do not build up. Each year, before approving an application to spread biosolids, the state tests the soil to determine its makeup and nutrient needs.

“We measure for metals in the soil and see if they’re building up over time,” he said. “We monitor 14 metals, more than in other states.”

While he would not comment on Gilmanton’s biosolids ban, he noted that communities that do not allow land spreading of biosolids literally pay a price, in the form of a $25 increase in the fee for septic haulers.

“Communities have to be careful when they put in bans,” he said. “The landfills are filling up, and the best option environmentally is for land spreading, rather than stockpiling the sludge or sending it to a landfill.”

He acknowledged that “in our modern, industrialized society, factories are producing harmful chemicals, but we regulate industries to prevent contamination.”

People who believe biosolids are harmful are relying on 10-year-old data, Gordon said. “We try to stay ahead of the curve on the science.”

Did it count?

Swanson said that, before the vote to ban biosolids, the issue was the health and welfare of the community, but now the big thing is whether residents’ votes count for anything.

“Steve said he’s not protecting his brother, but it looks suspicious,” she said of McWhinnie’s statement about grandfathering.

“I have yet to hear more than just the selectmen saying it’s grandfathered in,” she said. “I’m going to ask for a paper trail concerning my complaints about the deliveries to Bob McWhinnie’s Hayshaker Farm.”

She still believes biosolids are harmful.

“One of our neighbors developed a rash and infection within two days of biosolids being spread,” she said. “She was treated for Erysipelas, which is caused by Group A streptococcus bacteria. If left untreated, it could have been life-threatening. The question is whether or not this was just a coincidence. I don't believe so, nor does she. We believe it was caused by airborne bacteria from the biosolids. The problem is trying to prove that.”