Applicant proposes package wastewater plant or subsurface septic for conference center; engineers cite 20,000 gpd design and DEC review

Kelly Leibold, representing the project applicant, presented a revised wastewater plan to the planning board and introduced Walt Littman of MJ Engineering, who outlined three technical options for handling wastewater from a proposed conference-center development.

Littman told the board the team compared an on-site septic approach with a centralized system that would collect sanitary flows to a single treatment location. "The 1 that was previously submitted is a wastewater treatment plant, which is a package plant," Littman said, and the design flow used for preliminary review is "about 20,000 gallons per day." He described three alternatives: a package wastewater treatment plant that would discharge to Crum Elbow Creek; an enhanced underground (subsurface) septic system; and a package plant whose effluent would pass through a vegetative bioswale before entering the creek.

The applicant said the team provided technical reports to the board and expects DEC review. Littman said DEC provided preliminary effluent parameters and that the project would require a SPDES permit. "They did provide, preliminary speedies per effluent limits that you see on this next slide," he said, and added that final effluent standards will be established after DEC completes its review and the design is finalized.

Why this matters: Crum Elbow Creek has a high stream classification and seasonal aquatic life needs that affect allowable pollutant concentrations. Littman noted DEC gave separate seasonal ammonia limits "for June through October and a higher limit for November to May" to reflect lifecycle or temperature-related concerns for trout and other aquatic life. A board member pressed whether DEC guidance treats discharge into a Class A trout stream as a last resort; the board member said such discharges "are not the preferred first option." The applicant responded that similar SPDES permits have been issued downstream and that DEC’s calculations reflect stream classification and local conditions.

On operations and oversight, Littman described state requirements for plant operation. The operator of a permitted treatment plant must be certified in accordance with DEC criteria; the agency scores plant components to determine the operator grade required. Littman said there are four grades, continuing-education requirements for operators, and that plants typically include SCADA sensors and daily monitoring requirements. He added that package plants would include emergency standby generators so the plant can continue to operate during power outages. "You still have to physically grab a sample and test it," Littman said when asked whether the human factor can be removed, acknowledging manual sampling and local reporting remain part of compliance. He also said that daily monitoring reports are submitted to DEC, which would flag violations and issue letters requiring corrective action.

Board members and the applicant discussed a newly proposed third option — the vegetative-bioswale variation — which the applicant said was developed to address board concerns about direct discharge. The applicant asked for more time to present its full package of documents; the chair limited tonight’s presentation to wastewater and offered a three-hour follow-up meeting on January 21 for deeper review.

The board did not take a formal vote on wastewater design tonight. Next steps recorded during the meeting included continued technical review, DEC permit application and comment responses from the applicant, and a planned extended meeting on January 21 to continue detailed discussion of site engineering and permitting.