Committee raises concerns about fill at Plourde sand-and-gravel site and seeks state agency inquiry
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
Committee members reported conversations with haulers who said material being deposited at a local sand-and-gravel site included questionable fill; members asked staff to reach out to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) and noted that testing regimes for gravel operations vary.
Several committee members reported they had observed or been told that material being brought into the Plourde sand-and-gravel property included what they described as "nasty" or potentially contaminated soil. One committee member said he spoke directly with an operator who said there is little oversight at that operation and that no consistent inspections appear to be occurring.
Members discussed the town—s role and the likely state agencies responsible for oversight. Committee members referenced prior operations elsewhere in town that had documented testing and scale-house controls; they said the current operation may not be subject to the same controls. Members asked staff to contact the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services to determine whether the activity at the Plourde site is known to DES and whether state rules or permits apply.
Why it matters: Committee members flagged potential risks to groundwater and to nearby residents if imported fill contains contaminants. They recommended staff follow up with state regulators and with the town engineer to determine what inspections, testing and enforcement mechanisms apply to the site.
Clarifying details
- Committee members recalled that other gravel operations in town were required to provide periodic testing and to log receipts at a scale house when accepting material. - The committee did not provide specific laboratory results or a vendor manifest for recent loads; members asked staff to verify whether testing exists and whether DES has records.
Speakers
Committee participants cited in discussion included: Dave (not specified), Grant (not specified), and other committee members who raised concerns during meeting comments.
