Water treatment upgrade can wait

Dear Editor:

Last week you printed a letter from me that talked about the need for leaders (and residents) to focus on the big ticket expenditures to be voted on at town meeting. To that end, I want to draw people’s attention to what is the second largest item on the capital spending plan, a request for residents to pay almost $2.5 million to upgrade one of the town’s water treatment plants. (See item 12-10 on page 41 in the town meeting booklet mailed to residents.)

The measure is supported by both the Capital Planning and Finance committees (each committee had just one dissenting voter), which overwhelmingly approved the expenditure of $2.5M to add carbon filtering to the town’s Moran water treatment plant with the justification that doing so will solve the PFAS contamination issue in water from that plant.

However, if you read the justification paragraphs, which represent the committees’ majority opinions, you’ll see that the testing results for PFAS showed that the water from the plant is well within the limits of federal and state guidelines. In other words, the water is safe.

The lone voice of opposition on the Capital Planning committee said:

“…this project is not necessary in FY21 given that the detected levels of PFAS at the Moran facility are well below the EPA level and below the Mass DEP level. The project would also increase operating costs and put upward pressure on town water rates.” And further, the dissenting vote suggested that it would be “fiscally prudent to continue monitoring PFAS levels at the Moran facility to ascertain whether they are trending towards or above the state’s 20 ppt guidance, whereupon the town could assess its eligibility for additional funding options.”

In other words, if the problem someday becomes real, we may be able to utilize state monies to help pay for it.

Why did 10 other people on the two committees approve the expenditure? Surely they’re aware an additional $1,000 to $2,000 in water costs per household over the next few years would be burdensome to many residents.

Their approval is made even more puzzling by the fact that the town’s professional water consultant, Peter Newton, M.S. hydrology, Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute, who conducted the PFAS tests, reported to the selectmen at the October 15, 2019 selectmen’s meeting that the water is safe, that the measurement used for PFAS is parts per trillion, the equivalent of pennies per billions of dollars, and that it’s safer to drink the water than it is to eat chocolate cake.

Another thing I don’t think the committees considered is that the Moran treatment facility is a workhorse. It consistently meets production goals year after year. Meanwhile, the town’s more advanced plant, the Neponset treatment plant, has been a disappointment. It spends a lot of time out of service and its operating costs for carbon filtration have been well in excess of what was expected. In fact, that plant’s poor performance has resulted in the town spending twice as much for water due to the need to outsource water from the state.

I think the dissenting voters and Peter Newton have it right. The water is safe. Let’s not put an undue burden on residents or the Moran plant.

However, if there is relevant information or data that hasn’t been disclosed, like other PFAS tests or the possibility of unknown pesticides in the Moran water, which are concerns I’ve raised with selectmen in the past, then committee members and residents should be asking officials to share that information.

Thank you,

Glenn Shane

Share This Post

Short URL: https://www.thecantoncitizen.com/?p=68128