Tim Andrews recommends cap-and-cover plan, citing up to 26,000 ppm lead and an estimated $202 million price tag

Tim Andrews, an engineer with Novus Group, told the Lincoln public hearing that the town’s draft remedial action plan for the former paper-mill/transfer-station property supports a cap-and-encapsulate approach to enable redevelopment as a riverfront park. Andrews said the draft compares three alternatives and recommends Alternative 2 — removal of a sludge discharge area and placement of geotextile demarcation with two feet of clean fill over roughly 7.4 acres of impacted material — paired with deed-based activity-use restrictions and long-term groundwater monitoring.

Andrews summarized the site’s history and investigations. He said the property abuts the Lincoln Transfer Station and the town’s riverfront and was historically used by the JD Henry/Franconia paper mill through about 1980. Investigations cited in the draft include test pits, soil borings and four new monitoring wells; the report lists contaminants of concern including total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), polyaromatic hydrocarbons, lead and other metals such as barium and mercury. "Lead is at very high concentrations, some resulting in more than 20,000 parts per million," Andrews said, noting that some confirmation samples were taken 10–12 feet below surface.

Andrews described three evaluated options. Alternative 1 — a minimal containment option using fencing and activity-use restrictions — was presented with an estimated cost of about $135,000 and would limit future reuse. Alternative 3 contemplates deep excavation and off-site hazardous-waste disposal in locations where lead concentrations are extreme; Andrews estimated disposal costs for that option in excess of $6,000,000 and said excavation of 10–12 feet of contaminated material would be required in places. Andrews argued that, because there is no clear groundwater source driving contamination off-site, full excavation yields limited additional public-health benefit relative to cost in some areas.

As the recommended solution, Alternative 2 would remove the sludge-disposal area (described in the draft as about 1 acre and roughly 6 inches thick) and isolate broader impacted areas beneath a geotextile demarcation layer and two feet of clean material. Andrews said that approach would allow park features to be built on top of the encapsulated material while managing exposure risk through monitoring and routine maintenance. He said the draft report shows a price estimate of about $202,076,000 for the recommended work; the draft document on the town’s website uses that figure and town staff should confirm the number and the budgetary breakdown prior to any formal endorsement.

On groundwater, Andrews said two monitoring rounds to date detected low-level PFAS that exceed current New Hampshire groundwater criteria but do not show a high-concentration source at the site. An initial cadmium detection (20 parts per billion) did not reproduce on follow-up sampling and was treated as likely analytical interference. He recommended continued monitoring of four on-site wells if a remedy leaves higher-than-standard materials in place.

Board members asked about monitoring obligations and funding options. Andrews said New Hampshire DES does not require a federal match but sometimes offers smaller state Brownfields or revolving loan funds; he suggested the town consult DES project staff and regional planning entities about other grant sources. The application deadline discussed at the hearing was "next Wednesday the 28th," and staff were told to upload minutes, a sign-in sheet and a summary of comments and responses as attachments to the grant application.

After questions, the hearing moderator closed the public hearing and immediately called an emergency meeting of the board of selectmen, citing an emergency provision in the open-meeting rules, to consider whether the board will formally endorse the recommended alternative. No board vote on endorsement is recorded in the hearing transcript.