Author: Erik Johnson

By ELIOT WESSLER

Concord Monitor  Published: 4/29/2022 6:01:34 AM

Eliot Wessler lives in Whitefield and works with a number of grassroots organizations in NH’s North Country.

John Casella is the CEO of Casella Waste Systems, the Vermont corporation that a) owns and operates the soon-to-be-closed NCES landfill in Bethlehem and b) is having a hard time getting permits from NH’s DES to replace NCES with a new, even larger landfill, about five miles away in Dalton.

His recent My Turn in the Concord Monitor suggests that a two-year-old study (the DSM study) authorized and paid for by Casella provides the “…true cost of eliminating disposal capacity in New Hampshire.” Experience suggests when a corporation with an enormous financial self-interest says they know the true cost of not getting their way, it’s time to be very, very wary.

The only “true cost” that stands out is the $1 billion cost in lost revenues that Casella’s shareholders will bear if Casella does not get permits to build a new landfill in Dalton. Given that Casella funded the study and is now using it to try to scare New Hampshire legislators, town officials and residents into letting it do whatever it wants, every assumption and conclusion in the DSM study should be taken with a grain of salt, at best.

Casella did make available the 3-page Executive Summary of the DSM study, but has so far refused to make available the full 20+ page study, despite repeated requests to do so. As the saying goes, “the devil is in the details,” which suggests that Casella has something to hide.

I did manage to talk to the author of the DSM study, who had a number of interesting things to say, some of which significantly undermine the credibility of Mr. Casella’s conclusions. For example:

• Casella provided all of the assumptions used in the study about trash volumes, customers, etc., rather than allowing for an independent assessment of what assumptions should be used
• The analytic tool used in the study was a re-run of a 2009 input-output study, because Casella did not want to pay for an updated study
• And he said there is “plenty of room for pluses and minuses” in all of the conclusions reached in his DSM study
  

What did Mr. Casella say about the study and the conclusions reached? And how believable are those conclusions? Let’s see. First, “Actively choosing not to add additional capacity…would result in an estimated $75 million in added costs…and the loss of over $190 million in economic benefits.”

There are so many things wrong with this conclusion. Where to start? At the top of the list, no one is “actively choosing” to limit additional capacity when it is needed and sited appropriately. In fact, just this past week NHDES gave permit approval to a major expansion at the Mt. Carberry landfill. It’s important to note that throughout the permitting process there was virtually no public opposition.

The true fact is New Hampshire residents are “actively choosing” to protest the Dalton project because there’s plenty of room already in our state’s existing landfills for all of the trash generated in New Hampshire; Casella intends to reserve up to half of the capacity in Dalton for out-of-state trash; and the site Casella chose in Dalton is in the middle of a sand and gravel pit, and represents a significant risk of contamination to wetlands, habitat and especially nearby water bodies.

In fact, if the site Casella chose were in Maine instead of New Hampshire, Maine environmental regulators would not even entertain a landfill permit application.

He also said “Casella has also proposed to invest in a recycling facility that is estimated…to create more than 50 new jobs and result in an economic benefit of over $200 million to the state’s economy.”

To which everybody in New Hampshire should say, if that is true, please go ahead and do it! But it’s apparent from Casella employees’ statements that the company will hold the recycling facility hostage and only make that investment if the state agrees to allow Casella to build its misguided and unneeded Dalton landfill project. Mr. Casella, you are not a pirate, and you are not a kidnapper, so please don’t hold the new recycling facility hostage.

Finally, he says, “In addition to the economic benefits…there are reductions in greenhouse gas emissions…due to recycling rates and avoidance of additional transportation…” Good, another reason to go forward with the recycling facility.

But he does not make clear that the estimated reduction in emissions comes solely from construction of the recycling facility, and that in fact, construction of the Dalton landfill is likely to significantly increase emissions due to transportation of solid waste from sources in southern New Hampshire and the rest of New England all the way up to New Hampshire’s North Country. And he conveniently forgets to mention that his company seems to have no concerns about the increased emissions that will result from routing trucks going to the Dalton landfill 25 miles out of their way to avoid political entanglement with Littleton, the most politically powerful town in the region.

We are at a moment (certainly not quite as dramatic) similar to Ronald Reagan saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

Mr. Casella, you need to make available the entire DSM study, sit for interviews with the very newspapers you are using to spread your message of benefits to the state, and make your employees available to engage in public debate with people that are skeptical of your idea of “true costs.”

If you do all three of those things, you will be on the path to restoring your own and your company’s credibility.

Greetings Friends of NCABC!

Your support of NH HB 1454 helped “the water bill” advance toward the Senate with resounding House support. (It’s about smart landfill siting to protect NH water bodies.)

Thank you! And now, please…

Will you make brief phone calls to the offices of the four influential NH democratic Senators listed below? Their votes are essential for the success of the bill on the Senate floor. Please ask for their support of HB 1454; leave a short voicemail if necessary. You may say why you care about protecting NH’s waters from the spills and leaks that endanger rivers and lakes near landfills.

It is helpful if ALL NCABC supporters make these calls and folks who live in the Manchester/Nashua, NH area are especially important as these Senators are your representatives in Concord. Even if you live outside NH, your call will be accepted and helpful. You can state why NH is important to you.

Manchester:

Sen. Donna Soucy (Minority Leader)—(603) 271-3207

Sen. Kevin Cavanaugh—(603) 271-4063

Sen. Lou D’allesandro—603-271-2117

Nashua:

Sen. Cindy Rosenwald—(603) 271-3207 (same number as Sen. Soucy)

Portsmouth:

Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka — (603) 271-2104

HB 1454 replaces an outdated, inadequate regulation with only a 200′ buffer between landfills and NH waterbodies like rivers and lakes—less than the length of a football field! The bill’s new formula, based on the science of water flow, requires testing for new landfill sites to determine how quickly contamination from the area will endanger nearby waters. HB 1454 is a smart bill for NH. It protects public health and brings no additional cost to taxpayers.

Please make your calls soon, well before the noon deadline this Wednesday (April 20).

NCABC sends ongoing thanks for your dependable action in contacting public officials.Our supporters’ participation is among our most essential tools to prevent unnecessary and ill-considered landfill development.

Cheers for springtime!

NCABC Board of Directors
Sarah Doucette, Gary Ghioto, Erik Johnson, Mary Menzies, Wayne Morrison, Tom Tower, Eliot Wessler

YOU can help preserve NH’s outdoors! New Hampshire bill HB1454 will protect our rivers and lakes by establishing a science-based landfill setback based on groundwater flow. The current setback of just 200′ doesn’t give experts enough time to detect and mitigate landfill contamination issues.

Casella has acknowledged that if this bill is passed it will kill the Dalton project.  Consequently, their lobbyists are pulling out all the stops to defeat this, claiming it will reduce landfill capacity in New Hampshire, raise tipping fees and carbon footprints of truckers, and is really “spot zoning”  and therefore, unfair to developers or business.  None of this is true, of course, but we have several senators who need to hear from you.  This has nothing to do with landfill capacity in NH or tipping fees.  This about safe siting of new landfills based on the science of hydrology.

HB1454 has already passed House review and will be in Senate committee on April 5. WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT to ensure our senators hear that our public overwhelmingly wants them to act to protect our rivers, streams and lakes. Please take one minute now to add your name to our supporter list, which will automatically register your support with the Senate and influence their voting in favor of HB1454.

On March 15 or 16, the NH House of Representatives will vote on HB 1454 which establishes a science-based setback for landfills from state bodies of water. In summary: scientific studies must show, prior to landfill permitting, that any landfill leak would not reach a nearby body of water for at least 5 years. This will provide officials time to proactively address such issues. Today’s setback of just 200′ is arbitrary and has resulted in reactive mitigation at sites such as the NCES landfill in Bethlehem at the Ammonoosuc River.

We’re asking our supporters and all supporters of NH clean lakes, rivers and wetlands to write their state representatives a personal note and ask them to support this bill. To determine your state rep, visit this page to search for them by town, then click their link to see their e-mail, physical address and phone numbers. Supporters who live outside of NH can write the representatives for their favorite towns or those they visit regularly.

E-mailed letters should be sent no later than Monday evening, March 14. Please be sure to sign your letter with your full name and town of residence. Along with stating your personal concerns about safe water in NH, feel free to use any of the points below.

• HB 1454 is a bill that provides a science-based, site-specific setback distance to provide urgently needed protection for water bodies including lakes, rivers and drinking water supplies from any new landfill development. 

• HB 1454 remedies the current, arbitrary, one size fits all 200-foot setback regulation that has no foundation in hydrogeology. 

• Setback distances are meant to provide the necessary protection for a landfill leak to be detected, a remediation plan designed, approved and implemented before the contamination reaches a water body. 

• NH’s soil and bedrock conditions vary greatly across the state and thus HB 1454 ensures setback distances are scientifically determined to provide the site-specific protections necessary.

• At the Mt. Carberry landfill in Success, we have an excellent example of a landfill sited where the clay soil and bedrock is very protective of the nearby Androscoggin River. That’s the type of site we want, if we ever need another NH landfill, not one with a porous soil structure and fractured bedrock that will imperil nearby waters.
  
• HB 1454 is a smart, simple, urgently needed bill that protects some of the state’s most valuable natural resources at no cost to taxpayers. Please vote to pass HB 1454.

Thank you for your support, every voice makes a difference!

You might have seen the recent headline in the Caledonian Record— Chick Ingerson saying at a Dalton Planning Board meeting that the proposed Dalton dump is not going to be built on the land he owns and has optioned to Casella Waste Systems.

Mr. Ingerson’s statements are inaccurate and misleading.

If you keep reading you’ll see that Casella seems fully committed to building the dump in Dalton even in the face of strong public opposition.

And why not—  Casella still seems to think it can convince DES to let it hide a new mega-dump in the North Country that is right next to a state park and in the middle of a gravel pit that risks contamination of groundwater and water supplies.

Casella is losing its grip on Bethlehem, and it desperately wants to cash in on potential revenues from a Dalton dump estimated at $1 billion.

At this point it doesn’t matter what Mr. Ingerson says or wants because Casella is calling the shots. It has an option to buy a big chunk of Mr. Ingerson’s land, and nothing Mr. Ingerson says makes any difference as to whether or not they will proceed with plans to build the dump.

Mr. Ingerson has many plans for his land.

First it’s a dragstrip, the next day it’s a dump, and it sounds like tomorrow it’s going to be a campground. One thing Mr. Ingerson should realize is that he is not above state law, and not above local land use considerations. Like everybody else, he needs to recognize that he is free to do whatever he wants with his land—as long as it complies with law!

The upshot? We have to work as hard as ever to stop Casella from turning NH’s North Country into the dumping ground for all of New England. 

This coming Tuesday, February 15, the NH Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will be reviewing a bill that is critical to our goal of modernizing New Hampshire’s waste management policies and preventing the siting of landfills inappropriately. 

Please electronically register your support for Senate Bill  – SB380 – by Monday evening February 14.

See below for a brief description of this bill and a screen shot example of the registration form. 

This process will take 5 minutes but each registration of support will influence the committee to send the bills to the Senate for a floor vote.

1. Visit the Senate hearing website here.
2. Select the date February 15.
3. Select the committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources
4. Choose the Bill – 9:00 AM – SB380.
5. Designate yourself as a Member of the Public
6. Select the option I Support This Bill
7. Click Continue
8. On the next screen enter your name, town, and e-mail address, then click Continue
9. On the next screen, confirm your selections by checking the box, and click Continue

Again, thank you so much for your help in this important matter. Every voice counts.

SB380 will:

I.  Creates a committee to study the prohibition of any landfill in the state from accepting waste from municipalities with no solid waste plan.

II.  Creates a committee to study the development of a solid waste disposal site evaluation committee.

III.  Requires statutes and rules in effect at the time an application for a solid waste permit is complete to apply to the application.

IV.  Requires the department of environmental services to consider the net public benefit when reviewing an application for a solid waste permit.

On Tuesday, January 18, the NH Environment and Agricultural committee will be reviewing bills that are critical to our goal of stopping the landfill at Forest Lake and modernizing New Hampshire’s waste management policy. 

Please electronically register your support for these bills – HB1420, HB1454, HB1121 – by Monday evening. 

This process will take 5 minutes but each intention of support will influence the committee to send the bills to the house for a floor vote.

1. Visit the House hearing website here.
2. Select the date Jan 18
3. Select the committee: House Environment and Agriculture
4. Choose the Bill – HB1420, HB1454, or HB1121
5. Designate yourself as a Member of the Public
6. Select the option I Support This Bill
7. Click Continue
8. On the next screen enter your name, town, and e-mail address, then click Continue
9. On the next screen, confirm your selections by checking the box, and click Continue
10. Click Sign Up Again and repeat the process for the other two bills. 

You may also send an e-mail to houseenvironmentandagriculturecommittee@leg.state.nh.us expressing your support for this critically important legislature.

HB1420 Prohibiting the issuance of new landfill permits until the state’s solid waste plan is updated: https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB1420/2022

HB1454 Relative to permits for the siting of new landfills, groundwater: https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB1454/2022

HB1121 Relative to new solid waste sites, this bill requires an applicant for a new solid waste landfill to provide proof of insurance and obtain a surety bond against all damages: https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB1121/2022

(This Dec, 22, 2021 letter to the editor is reprinted with permission of the Caledonian Record)

John Casella’s Letter to Dalton—It’s Full of Holes

To the Editor of the Caledonian Record:

Casella’s Chairman and CEO sent an open letter last week to the residents of Dalton “…to inform you of (Casella’s) intentions to withdraw our wetlands permit application…and to resubmit in 2022.”  He reached out directly by letter, he said “…so you would read it from me.”

Well now we’ve had a week to read his letter and if you’re like me, his letter raises a number of troubling questions.  For example:

First, he says: “This decision was not made lightly as it comes at a significant cost to our company…” We don’t know for sure what significant cost Mr. Casella is talking about, but one thing is clear—DES told Casella in no uncertain terms that it is not going to review the GSL permit applications until Casella does all of the hydrogeological (and other) field testing that DES requires.  So it seems the cost Mr. Casella would have preferred to avoid is the cost of the testing that DES says it needs to evaluate Casella’s permit applications.

Second, the letter says that the permit withdrawal “…will allow us to take into consideration the public opinion that we have gathered, and will continue to solicit, throughout this process.”  Is it really possible that Casella doesn’t know there is overwhelming opposition to GSL throughout NH’s North Country? It’s true you can find some GSL supporters in Dalton.  But one wonders whether Casella finds it regrettable that GSL’s most vocal supporters have employed smarmy tactics, including spreading false information, and attacking the integrity and competence of Dalton’s town officials.  Casella is quick to slap its opponents with defamation suits, so maybe this is just a case of the apple not falling far from the tree.

Third, the letter says: “GSL will have an opportunity to perform additional field work to support the multiple applications.” To which we should all say: “Good, do it”.  And this time around maybe Casella will not prohibit Dalton’s wetlands expert from doing the field testing that he believes is necessary to provide the town of Dalton with an accurate picture of the environmental damage that a landfill at the GSL site will cause.

Fourth, Mr. Casella says: “We have confidence in our permitting and compliance teams…” Are these the same permitting teams that told DES and the public that GSL’s design is so good that contamination of surface and groundwater was impossible?  “Can’t happen” is what DES and the public was told.  Are these the same compliance teams that had oversight of the landfills and other Casella facilities that have been cited for multiple violations in NH and all over the Northeast?  And will the same team preside over GSL that allowed a 154,000 gallon leachate spill at the Bethlehem landfill, and took two days to discover the spill?  One sure hopes not!

And finally, the letter says: “…the reality is that New Hampshire will be facing a waste disposal capacity shortfall based on its current permitted capacity.”  That very well may be true—but not for about 25 years!  Given the existing capacity and the planned capacity that exists at the Mt. Carberry and Turnkey landfills, there is no landfill capacity crisis.  A more accurate statement of reality is that Casella is in crisis because without GSL, and with the Bethlehem landfill closing, Casella’s future profits from NH operations are in doubt. 

I’m certain that a lot of what I’ve said here Casella will find fault with.  If so, the grassroots organizations that oppose the GSL project are prepared to engage in public debates with Casella on these or any other topics.  Debate is healthy, and if Mr. Casella has the confidence evinced in the letter that GSL is “…of vital importance to New Hampshire’s health and environmental safety infrastructure…”, he should want that public debate to take place.

Paul Damiano

Dalton, NH

“It seems to most of us that every time that DES has applied discretion in its rules it’s applied it in favor of the applicant…”     –Eliot Wessler

“The risk profile of this project is even higher than I thought it was… because you’ve [DES] described this as one of the most complicated, if not the most complicated project that you’ve had to deal with; and my guess is that that’s the same for the applicant, they have not done something on this scale either.”          —Wayne Morrison

It took five hours to address a broad range of questions posed to NH DES during their Sept. 29 information session. 130 community members, including legislators, conservation groups, NCABC board members and friends attended the virtual meeting intended to outline DES’s permits and procedures related to the proposed landfill in Dalton. Among about 40 speakers, all were opposed to the project.

The proposed landfill will require several state permits and another from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.DES saidcoordinating the permitting process has been a challenge on the project “unusual in its scale and scope and complexity.” 

Participants and DES agreed about irregularities in the developer’s application process including the omissions of an expected Alteration of Terrain application, related hydrology information and the Army Corps of Engineers’ permit application.

Speakers persistently questioned whether DES favors the developer over the general public. DES personnel steadily defended their actions, insisting NHstatutes and regulations instruct them to work closely with the permittee to create strong applications. Remarkably, although DES holds hearings, mandates do not require two way communication or dialog with the public during the permitting processes.

DES personnel stated they have neither the time nor any obligation to answer even the most basic questions posed by the public. Except for the recent Information Session, DES has been silent on citizens’ concerns as well as the extensive expert testimony provided to them on the wetlands permit application.

To our further dismay, DES confirmed that several topics very important to us will not be considered in their reviews, including the impact of out of state trash filling 49% of NH capacity under Casella’s plan and the perils of trash and leachate truck traffic in communities throughout the state.

In several instances, DES deferred answering questions, saying decisions would depend on judgements by the Army Corps of Engineers and regulations required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Unresolved questions, among many, include:

• How DES will address the required analysis of alternative sites. The rules were described as “new and pretty non-specific… conceived for much smaller projects.” Phillip Trowbridge of DES noted, “This is the most complicated permitting decision the department will face.” Federal guidelines will have an impact on this decision.

• Whether the Dalton Conservation Commission will be allowed to visit the site with their wetlands expert during the growing season, so they can provide informed comments on the plan.

• How public benefit will be determined in terms of whether NH has any need for new landfill capacity.

• Whether the extensive testimony addressing the original, year-long wetlands permit application will be included in the amended permit application or discounted entirely. The Department of Justice is to decide this question.

• The scope of the Alteration of Terrain application, requiring either a one or three phase review. Federal review will also affect this decision.

• Concerns about missing permits from the towns of Dalton and Bethlehem; existing unpermitted wetlands disturbances on the Dalton site; and the economic viability and transparency of permitting a limited one stage landfill (as proposed now) with no further expansion.

Please see these links for excellent media coverage with more information:

Caledonian-Record—https://www.caledonianrecord.com/news/local/proposed-landfill-most-complicated-permitting-process-ever-for-des/article_f2a8d2f1-7f91-51db-b36c-4da9f3b78c98.html

InDepthNH—https://www.libertymedianh.org/des-attempts-to-connect-with-the-public/

NCABC and its collaborative groups continue to press for answers, review and challenge applications, and support legislative and regulatory reform in the state’s solid waste management program. 

Our thanks for your continued commitment, alongside us, to protect the environment, pubic health, community life and economy of our exceptional state.

Sincerely,

NCABC Board of Directors

Sarah Doucette, Gary Ghioto, Erik Johnson, Mary Menzies, Wayne Morrison, Tom Tower, Stephen Walker, Eliot Wessler

Important Information Regarding the NHDES Information Session

NCABC would like to thank everyone in advance for your support in attending this virtual meeting.  We would like to encourage not only your attendance but we strongly recommend that you take this opportunity to ask questions.

Things to keep in mind:

• It’s important that when you are called– ask a question and do not make a statement!  

• Whatever question you ask should be tied to the “permitting process”.  DES has indicated that those are the only type of questions that will be entertained.

• If you get a chance, try to ask a follow-up question, e.g., to get clarification of DES’ response

Pre-registration is requested. The details and pre-registration information are available here https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/7366093905476679692 

Original post:

The NH Department of Environmental Services has announced that the Sept. 29 public information session will be by remote access only.

So, the rally planned at the White Mountains Regional School is also cancelled.
We still encourage your participation in the session which begins at 6 P.M. Pre-registration is requested.

The details and pre-registration information are available here: https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/7366093905476679692

Your participation is key. We need to let the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services know that a massive landfill adjacent to Forest Lake is not wanted, needed and destructive.