Burrillville Planning Board

September 13, 2016September 13, 2016

Burrillville files motion to dismiss Invenergy application

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Because Invenergy “has either refused or is unable to provide timely information regarding its proposed water supply… its Application should… be dismissed” writes Attorney Michael McElroy, representing the Town of Burrillville, in a motion filed with the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) today.

Invenergy is proposing to build a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville, a project that has the support of both Governor Gina Raimondo and the Providence Journal. The residents of Burrillville and every environmental group in Rhode Island oppose the plan.

Invenergy’s original plan was to pump water from a well contaminated with MTBE, but on Aug 19 the Pascoag Utility District voted unanimously to deny Invenergy access to that water. Under EFSB rules and the Act that established the EFSB, “Applications must include information regarding all required support facilities, including water resources.” Without such information, writes McElroy, “The Application cannot be evaluated in a meaningful way.”

McElroy’s motion to dismiss also notes that the Town of Burrillville, the Burrillville Planning Board and the Burrillville Zoning Board of Review “have formally requested information regarding Invenergy’s water source on multiple occasions” and that “Invenergy repeatedly promised to provide such information, but to date has failed to do so.”

“In fact,” writes McElroy, “in a Motion for Extension filed by Invenergy last Friday, Invenergy stated that its ‘expects’ to have a water source ‘within the coming weeks.’ This is uselessly vague.

Jerry Elmer, Senior Attorney for the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), “supports the Town of Burrillville’s Motion to Dismiss the Invenergy case, which was filed today. In fact, CLF has been preparing its own Motion to Dismiss on the same grounds as the Town’s Motion: The Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) process cannot go forward without the required Advisory Opinions from the Town; and the Town cannot prepare the required Advisory Opinions because Invenergy has failed to provide legally required information.

“Invenergy’s application to build a new fossil fuel power plant in Burrillville is incomplete, and the EFSB must dismiss the application. CLF argued its first Motion to Dismiss last January because Invenergy’s application was incomplete then; and CLF will continue to argue the same point now: Invenergy’s application remains incomplete. It is past time for the EFSB to dismiss this case.”

August 24, 2016August 26, 2016

‘Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing’

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Burrillville Planning Board meeting, held on Monday evening, was a confusing muddle that revealed the structural weaknesses of the “process” that Governor Gina Raimondo implored the people of Burrillville to trust in.

The board was meeting to vote to approve the final version of its required advisory opinion to the EFSB (Energy Facilities Siting Board) concerning Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, a scheme that is wildly unpopular with Burrillville residents.

The powerlessness of a small, town appointed board in the face of a multi-billion dollar company with state government support was aptly demonstrated when board chair Jeffrey Partington lamented that “one of the weaknesses of this entire [process] is that we haven’t seen plans” from Invenergy.

The “process” is designed so that a town planning board has to decide to endorse or oppose a plan that will have enormous impact on the town, without seeing the actual plans.

This is by intent.

Conservation Law Foundation attorney Jerry Elmer has pointed out that the process “was designed to take the power to stop a proposal like Invenergy’s out of the hands of the local people… and put it into the hands of the EFSB.”

Hours of meetings and endless discussions have consumed the board’s time and the energy and efforts of local townsfolk. Yet the board’s own attorney, Michael McElroy, succinctly summed it up when he said, “Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing. It’s simply an advisory opinion. The EFSB can take it, they can take it in part, or they can reject it.”

At this meeting we learned that though Invenergy is confident that they can design the power plant to meet the noise ordinances set by the town, they have no intention of posting a bond to insure that this goal is met. An expert hired by the town has said that though he has never seen a power plant meet noise requirements so low and that such a thing has never been done, he believes it might be possible.

“It may be difficult and it may be expensive,” noise expert David Hessler cautioned, adding, “I think it can be done.”

Later in the same meeting Hessler admitted that he had “never seen a power plant meet the noise levels” but reiterated that he thinks this plant can be designed to do so.

Maybe this is why Invenergy won’t post a bond: What bonding company wants to insure a project that may well prove to be impossible? Not agreeing to post a bond may also be a legal strategy. The EFSB, when they decide on the final terms of the deal, might include a bonding that Invenergy agreed to, but more likely the EFSB will simply give Invenergy a waiver on the noise level, allowing the company to disregard Burrillville’s ordinance, without bringing up the bonding issue at all.

Why post a bond to meet a requirement you intend to have waived?

So all the sturm und drang over low octave vs. decibel limits on noise may well be for naught. “Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing,” said McElroy.

Here in Rhode Island we call that, “the process.”

Here’s the full video of the Burrillville Planning Board meeting.

August 11, 2016August 26, 2016

Attorney Sinapi denies conflict of interest

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

About a half hour before Tuesday evening’s Harrisville Fire District and Water Board meeting started, attorney Richard Sinapi was engaged in semi-private conversation with board chair Ronald Slocum and vice chair James Scotland Sr inside the meeting place. Sinapi was apparently selling Invenergy’s idea to open a new well in Harrisville to cool its power plant to the commissioners, essentially telling them that Harrisville would lose out on $10 million if they did not accept the deal.

I arrived at the meeting site about a half hour early. Outside was Burrillville resident Robert Woods. Woods is a recently appointed member of the Burrillville Planning Board. An outspoken critic of Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, he recently recused himself from planning board business concerning Invenergy out of “an abundance of caution.”

Woods told me he could see inside the building, where Harrisville attorney Richard Sinapi was talking to the chair and vice chair of the Harrisville Water Board. The door to the offices were locked but after knocking, Woods and I were let in. Attorney Sinapi, as seen in the video, was engaged in conversation with two members of the board.

“I don’t know what plan C is, it’s very secret,” said Sinapi, “All I know is that it’s a lot more expensive than the ten million dollars… So… It’s ten million dollars.”

“Gentlemen,” said Robert Woods, “it seems like this is a little out of order, no? The meeting hasn’t started…”

“I’m the attorney, the meeting hasn’t started,” said Sinapi, “and there’s no quorum.”

“I realize that but you shouldn’t…” began Woods, before Sinapi wheeled around on him.

“There’s no quorum, and the meeting hasn’t started yet,” snapped Sinapi, “and I’m the attorney.”

“I realize you’re the attorney,” said Woods, “you’re talking about that to members of the board, I don’t know, I’m not an attorney but it just seems a little out of order to me, that’s all.”

“You’re entitled to your opinion,” said Sinapi.

“That’s why I’m voicing it,” said Woods.

Fifteen minutes later, and about ten minutes before the start of the meeting, Sinapi took another commissioner into an office, where he could be seen speaking privately. What they were talking about is not known.

The laws governing open meetings are complex, but on the face of things, Sinapi seems to be correct. His advocacy on behalf of Invenergy’s proposal does not seem to have violated the Open Meetings Act. Certainly there was no quorum, but if Sinapi was having this conversation with multiple commissioners in small groups over time, it might constitute what is called a “rolling quorum.” But of course, I’m no lawyer.

There are, however, other considerations at play. Many Burrillville residents have told me that they feel that Sinapi should have recused himself, since he is not only the lawyer for Harrisville, he is also the lawyer for the New England Mechanical Contractors Association. In that capacity Sinapi has apparently advocated for Invenergy’s power plant at the State House.

In his capacity as Harrisville’s lawyer, should Sinapi have been advocating for Invenergy’s proposal to the water board? Sinapi says that there is no conflict of interest. I spoke to Sinapi by phone. He maintains that in his capacity speaking for the Mechanical Contractors Association at the State House, he was working to “defeat a bad bill that would be bad for business, not to support or oppose the power plant.”

In his capacity as attorney for Harrisville, Sinapi says his job is to protect the Harrisville water supply and the financial integrity of the water board. If “Invenergy brings water into town, through a pipeline,” said Sinapi, “it could render the Harrisville supply redundant. We provide half the water to Pascoag.”

While he had me on the phone, Sinapi wanted to correct me on two points. I listed the Harrisville Water Board vote against Invenergy’s proposal as 5-1 (and the ProJo reported it as 6-1) but Sinapi claims the vote was 5-2 in favor of turning Invenergy’s offer down.

Sinapi’s other objection to my piece was my contention that a lawyer for the Harrisville Water Board “should have known” more about MTBE than his testimony at the State House seemed to indicate. According to Sinapi, water containing up to 40 parts per million MTBE is acceptable for drinking. In Connecticut, up to 70 parts per million is acceptable. Though MTBE is dangerous, said Sinapi, “it’s not like Benzene or something.”

June 22, 2016June 24, 2016

Experts testify on how power plant will impact Burrillville

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Setting up my camera at Monday night’s Burrillville Planning Board meeting, I saw one of the town’s two lawyers, Michael McElroy, turn suddenly from his place on stage and wave enthusiastically and with a smile at some friends who had just arrived. Turning, I noticed that the arriving friends were the lawyers and expert witnesses from Invenergy. The small cadre of Invenergy lawyers waved back collegially and I thought, “Who represents the people of Burrillville here?”

The meeting was held at the Burrillville High School, and was four hours long. The meeting did not end. Invenergy still had expert witness testimony to present, and 30 Burrillville residents had signed up to testify, only to never get their chance to speak. In the end, a decision was made by planning board chairman Jeffry Partington to continue the meeting on July 11.

This meeting was held to discuss Invenergy’s proposed fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. The Town of Burrillville and Invenergy had both hired experts to delve into the power plant’s plans and provide opinions as to whether or not the power plant would be able to control for such issues as air quality, water use and quality, noise levels, traffic and wetlands impact. The sometimes technical details were presented in a way that could be generally understood by a layman, and both the planning board and Invenergy’s lawyers were able to ask questions.

Before the meeting got started though, the planning board dealt with correspondence from Barry Craig, a retired lawyer recently returned to Burrillville. Craig had filed a motion to have the town’s lawyer, Oleg Nikolyszyn, recuse himself because of allegations that he and the town council had violated the open meetings act when issuing a resolution last week, a resolution that many feel gave the Senate Judiciary Committee in the RI General Assembly the excuse it needed to vote down legislation that would have vastly improved the town’s position regarding the power plant.

Before Craig could rise to speak, it was learned that Nikolyszyn had in fact recused himself from the proceedings, hence Michael McElroy’s appearance at the hearing, waving to his buddies from Invenergy.

The town called its expert witnesses to give their reports and answer questions from both the planning board and Invenergy’s lawyer, Elizabeth Noonan.

David Hessler discussed the noise the plant would emit during operations. The noise ordinance in Burrillville establishes a very low goal of 43 decibels, a goal Invenergy says it will be able to reach. Though Hessler says he is “leery of [Invenergy’s assumptions in their model” regarding operating noise levels, he is confident that “Invenergy will do whatever they have to, to meet the limits].

“It may be difficult and it may be expensive,” Hessler cautioned, adding, “I think it can be done.”

Later Hessler admitted that he had “never seen a power plant meet the noise levels” but reiterated that he thinks this plant can be designed to do so.

As loud as the power plant might be under normal operating conditions, it will be louder during start up and shutdown. When asked about Invenergy’s estimates about how long start ups and shutdowns take, Hessler said that Invenergy’s estimate of 10-30 minutes is “too short. There’s no way,” and said “I would not trust [Invenergy’s] numbers.”

Eric Epiner was up next, talking about air quality. Power plants like the one proposed for Burrillville are designed to fire pollutants through extremely tall stacks and released high into the atmosphere. Spinner expects that the impact on local air quality will be insignificant. However, the power plant plans Invenergy has submitted so far contain numerous errors and inconsistencies, as well as missing documentation. “We can’t say with certainty what the health risks are,” said Epiner.

The pollution from this plant, says Epiner, will not fall on Burrillville, but on people fifty kilometers away.

Tom Hevner was then questioned about the 40,000 gallons of ammonia to be stored on site. Invenergy’s plans call for 19 percent concentrations of ammonia, because 20 percent requires federal oversight. Ammonia, when released into the air, is extremely deadly, whether the concentration is 20 or 19 percent.

Hefner recommended that the Pascoag Fire Department be consulted on how to deal with such chemicals should they be stored on site, and also suggested that there may be other, less hazardous chemicals that Invenergy might use instead.

James Jackson was called upon to discuss the impact the new power plant will have on traffic in Burrillville, especially during the plant’s construction. He seemed to think that the impact would be minimal.

Jackson also spoke on the impact the plant might have on nearby wetlands. Right now water run-off from the plant is designed to be put in a pool that will directly abut the wetlands. Jackson said that the storm water run-off issues were not clearly resolved in the plans. The plan seems to call for storing toxic waste water next to a protected ecosystem. “I just don’t feel comfortable with this,” said Jackson.

Tom Hevner was brought back to talk about water use and the re-opening of well 3A, the well shut down 15 years ago by court order, due to MTBE contamination. MTBE is highly carcinogenic and Burrillville has paid a heavy cost because of this. Invenergy wants to use this water to cool their plant, promising to purify the water before it’s sent to a waste water treatment facility.

The “treatment scheme” says Hevner, is to draw water out of the well that will be contaminated at a rate of 55 parts per billion with MTBE. Due to condensation, that number will be 200 parts per billion by the time it reaches the power plant. There the water will be run through two Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) filters (though Hevner recommends three GACs) at which point the MTBE should be at “non-detect” levels.

The danger is not in Invenrgy’s water purification system, which Hevner seems to think will work, the danger is back at the well, where pulling water out of the well “might draw back contaminants” that have leeched into the surrounding area underground.

Since the MTBE disaster in Pacoag, Burrillville has been buying its water from Harrisville, across the Clear River. The river acts as a barrier between the two water sources, but, says Hevner, it “needs to be demonstrated that there’s no hydraulic connection” between Harrisville and Pascoag’s water sources. Other wise, there’s a danger that reopening well 3A might contaminate Harrisville’s water with MTBE.

Hefner also thought that the well won’t provide sufficient water for the energy plant, which will need to draw millions of gallons a day. Hefner suggested that the plant might need to draw water from other nearby municipalities, like Harrisville, or even start drawing water from Wallum Lake. This suggestion certainly agitated the crowd.

After a break, Invenergy called their witnesses. Invenergy’s lawyer, Elizabeth Noonan, could not get all her testimony done before 10pm, so after much deliberation it was decided to continue the meeting on Monday, July 11 at 6pm at the Burrillville High School.

To be continued…