Hearing Set on Specialty Minerals Landfill Permit

Staff ReportsiBerkshires
09:36PM / Tuesday, September 03, 2024Print Story | Email Story

ADAMS, Mass. — Specialty Minerals is requesting a revision to its landfill permit to create another landfill at its quarry that will last it nearly 100 years.

The Board of Health will hold a public hearing on Wednesday at 4 p.m. at Town Hall. It will consist of a presentation by SMI, questions from the board and questions and comments from the public as time permits.

The company uses the landfills to dispose of solid waste comprised of mineral products such as crusher waste, pond solids and waste flousolids from its mining and production facilities.

According to plans filed in 2019 with the state Department of Environmental Protection, "the existing landfills will reach capacity in 2024." Specialty Minerals is proposing to locate the new landfill on 122 acres adjacent to its existing landfills.

It would have a maximum disposal capacity of 135,000 tons per year and have an estimated lifespan of about 92.4 years.

The state has approved waivers related to the groundwater protection system based on the nature of the wastes and that they will be placed at a minimum 4 feet above the groundwater level since monitoring over the past 30 years has not shown impacts from existing landfills.

The landfill will be constructed in three phases, with the first two cells having a projected lifetime of about 30 years each and the third about 33 years.

"The full projected buildout of the landfill will have a footprint of 53.8 acres, a total capacity of 8,709,125 [cubic yards], and an estimated lifetime of 92.4 years. The perimeter of the landfill will be over 250 feet from the nearest surface water (Upton Brook), over 100 feet from the property line, and over 1,000 feet from the nearest residences," according to the permit narrative.

The draft permit is dated Feb. 9 and the comment period for MassDEP was through April 8. During this time, an abutter on Brown Street expressed concerns over noise and dust from the landfill and the stability of the former stockpiles located to the west of Old Columbia Street.

The Hoosic River Watershed Association has concerns over increased temperature downriver and with the expansion of SMI operations creating discharges into the river.

MassDEP noted that the permit does not approve expansion of operations or discharges and that the company must operate within its permit regarding noise and dust.

The full proposal can be found here.

SMI has so far passed preview of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, the DEP review and a third party inspector.

SMI will also hold at least one other public hearing at a time and place to be determined. The Board of Health may hold another public hearing, depending on the sense of the community.

Tags: board of health, landfill, specialty minerals,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

RIBCO Supply

Check out our great lineup of Boss Plows, and spreaders. 2 Locations Clarksburg & Pittsfield!

ribcosupply.com

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Progress Means Moving on Paper Mill Cleanup

Letter to the Editor05:00PM / Wednesday, February 11, 2026

To the Editor:

Our town is facing a clear choice: move a long-abandoned industrial site toward cleanup and productive use or allow it to remain a deteriorating symbol of inaction.

The Community Development team has applied for a $4 million EPA grant to remediate the former Curtis Mill property, a site that has sat idle for more than two decades. The purpose of this funding is straightforward: address environmental concerns and prepare the property for safe commercial redevelopment that can contribute to our tax base and economic vitality.

Yet opposition has emerged based on arguments that miss the point of what this project is designed to do. We are hearing that basement vats should be preserved, that demolition might create dust, and that the plan is somehow "unimaginative" because it prioritizes cleanup and feasibility over wishful reuse of a contaminated, aging structure.

These objections ignore both the environmental realities of the site and the strict federal requirements tied to this grant funding. Given the condition of most of the site's existing buildings, our engineering firm determined it was not cost-effective to renovate. Without cleanup, no private interest will risk investment in this site now or in the future.

This is not a blank check renovation project. It is an environmental remediation effort governed by safety standards, engineering assessments, and financial constraints. Adding speculative preservation ideas or delaying action risks derailing the very funding that makes cleanup possible in the first place. Without this grant, the likely outcome is not a charming restoration, it is continued vacancy, ongoing deterioration, and zero economic benefit.

For more than 20 years, the property has remained unused. Now, when real funding is within reach to finally address the problem, we should be rallying behind a practical path forward not creating obstacles based on narrow or unrealistic preferences.

I encourage residents to review the proposal materials and understand what is truly at stake. The Adams Board of Selectmen and Community Development staff have done the hard work to put our town in position for this opportunity. That effort deserves support.

Progress sometimes requires letting go of what a building used to be so that the community can gain what it needs to become.

View Full Story