Updated: No LNG in PVD demands National Grid halt construction at Fields Point


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

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

Fields Point Construction 04

The No LNG in PVD coalition is demanding that National Grid immediately halt construction and excavation work at 642 Allens Ave, the site of the proposed liquefaction facility in Fields Point. The proposed facility, which is opposed by Mayor Jorge Elorza and nine state legislators, is currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). National Grid has requested that FERC not hold any public hearings or grant fast tracked approval for the project. No LNG in PVD, a coalition of residents, organizations, and elected officials opposed to National Grid’s LNG facility, calls on the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) to revoke a recently granted permit which authorized soil excavation at the site, which is contaminated with numerous toxins hazardous to human health.

Fields Point Construction 03A group of concerned Providence community members submitted a petition to RIDEM on August 31st which requested that RIDEM revoke the soil management permit until concerns are addressed and a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) is put in place. RIDEM site remediation regulations, amended in 2011, require a PIP – a formal process for public participation and community oversight of the cleanup plan for activities that occur on contaminated sites. RIDEM formally initiated the PIP on September 6th, notifying National Grid “to initiate the process of developing an approvable PIP associated with the planned environmental cleanup of the Providence Gas Company site, and any other site redevelopment activities requiring remedial actions that fall under the jurisdiction of the Remediation Regulations.”

National Grid was required to respond to RIDEM within seven days with proposed plans and a schedule for developing a PIP with the community, writes No LNG in PVD, but says National Grid has ignored this requirement. In addition to violating this regulatory request, says No LNG in PVD, National Grid has begun excavating soil in a large portion of the site along Allens Ave and Terminal Road. Community members have observed uncovered piles of dirt with visible airborne dust.

Fields Point Construction 02The project’s location, 642 Allens Ave, has a long history of industrial contamination dating back to the earliest days of the gas industry. Providence Gas Company operated a “manufactured gas plant” from 1910 to 1954 which resulted in the release of many toxic substances which polluted the soil and groundwater. The site has also been host to an ammonia plant, a toluene facility, a propane works, and most recently an LNG storage facility. Numerous substances which pose a risk to public health, safety, and the environment have been recorded at the site, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), phenolic compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and naphthalene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), ferri­ and ferro cyanide compounds, asbestos, and metals including lead and arsenic. Many locations in the site contain multiple hazardous substances at levels that far exceed allowed standards, and while some specific areas have been remediated since 1994, the majority of the land has not been remediated.

The petition submitted to to RIDEM articulated a number of community concerns about construction at the LNG site exposing workers or community members to toxins.

Fields Point Construction 01“This is our community, people live here and kids go to school here, why does National Grid think it’s okay to put our lives and our health at risk? It’s our legal right to be involved in these decisions,” said Gina Rodríguez, a community resident and leader in the No LNG in PVD coalition. Monica Huertas, another coalition leader said, “It’s outrageous that there’s a known toxic site this close to my house, and we can go down Allens Ave and see clouds of dust blowing off from the piles that National Grid is digging up. The whole point of this Public Involvement Plan law is to address things like that, but National Grid is just ignoring our concerns and DEM isn’t doing anything to stop them.”

A growing number of elected officials are working with the No LNG in PVD coalition and have declared opposition to National Grid’s unnecessary, expensive, and dangerous LNG proposal. The coalition denounces National Grid’s rush to begin work at the site before any public oversight is put in place. “This is exactly what RIDEM’s site remediation regulations are for,” said Representative Joseph Almeida. “In cases like this, where a project could release extremely dangerous contaminants, it is vital that the affected community have a role in overseeing remediation activities. Members of my district are already overburdened by environmental and health hazards. It is vital that DEM stop National Grid from kicking up a new load of previously buried poisons and toxics without giving this community any say.”

David Graves, spokesperson for National Grid, responded. “Construction work now underway on the property is not related to the liquefaction project. All of the work has been properly permitted. As part of our normal procedures, the earth excavated from the site is being covered.

“There are or will soon be two projects underway in the immediate area. One is construction of an access road to accommodate equipment that will come on site to make improvements to containment dyke wall that surrounds the LNG tank. The other is to cap approximately five acres of land at 642 Allens Ave that is part of a remediation project that was started several years ago. Both have been approved by DEM.”

No LNG in PVD coalition member Aaron Jaehnig responded to Graves’ statement. “The petition to DEM for a Public Involvement Plan related to that property clearly requested a halt to any construction or remediation projects until a Plan was in place. DEM’s request to National Grid, for that plan did not alter our request or sepcify that prior permits were exempt. The PIP process exists so the concerned residents, potentially effected by the disruption of toxic materials, are legally granted oversight to such projects. Its great that that National Grid believes they are above participation in this process, it just confirms our suspicions that their actions do not take the public’s well being into consideration. They have already shown a blatant disregard for the community by ignoring DEM’s request for response to the PIP order within seven days. All construction and remediation activity should be halted immediately until that process is completed.”

National Grid has responded a second time, denying some of the allegations made by the N o LNG in PVD coalition: “The work underway at our property at 642 Allens Ave. property, which has been properly permitted, is unrelated to the liquefaction project. One element of the work is environmental remediation. It is enhancing public safety not endangering it as claimed by one group. Also, at no time have we requested to FERC that they not hold public hearings and we responded to DEM on the matter of the Public Involvement Plan (which is unrelated to the current work on the property) within the required time. Every project we undertake is planned and executed under rigid safety and environmental standards and the work currently underway is no exception.”

EFSB Public Hearing in Warwick a time for reflection on the process


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

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

20160921_180702The Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) public hearing in Warwick Wednesday evening, coming near the end of the process to decide the fate of Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, was filled with almost philosophical reflection, with many speakers, who have sat through dozens of EFSB, town council, zoning and department meetings and honed their public speaking skills, commenting with a battle weary determination and steely resolve.

Perhaps no one summed up the emotional toll of the process better than Kerri Fagan, who reminded the board of the promises made regarding the fairness of the process by elected officials such as Governor Gina Raimondo and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse as well as by the board members themselves, then launched into a long list of irregularities and seeming violations of the process that tend to favor Invenergy and disfavor the towns people.

Six of the twelve advisory opinions, said Fagan, maintain that, “Invenergy did not provide enough information before the deadline for them to submit an appropriate advisory opinion.”

Fagan explained that the process allows for the RI Public Utilities Commission advisory opinion, “to be completed by a single person, [Herbert DeSimone Jr]” after one of the other members recused themselves because they “previously expressed support for the project.” The process of having one person make that decision was questioned, said Fagan, but was ruled appropriate by the single board member, DeSimone Jr.

“The process allows Invenergy representatives to falsely testify at open meetings,” said Fagan. “Did the process require them to acknowledge their misinformation? No. There are probably people who still believe they will receive great rate savings,” if the power plant is built. Fagan says the process also allowed Invenergy to falsely advertise meeting locations and times.

The process, said Fagan, requires that the Burrillville Town Council remain neutral throughout the process, yet Governor Raimondo and Senator Whitehouse can express their support for the project.

The process allows attorney Richard Sinapi to represent the Harrisville Water Board, but also lobby against Burrillville Representative Cale Keable‘s EFSB bill on behalf of labor unions, while also allowing his law firm to write a position opposing the Town of Burrillville’s Motion to Dismiss. “The question of conflict of interest was raised, but [Sinapi] continues to represent parties on both sides of this proposal.”

The process allows the Governor and labor unions to advocate for the process based on the jobs it will create, but the EFSB is not charged with creating jobs, but with determining energy needs and judging environmental impacts. “I don’t believe the EFSB has a responsibility to create jobs,” said Fagan,” and I don’t believe it is an appropriate outcome to consider in this setting. Yet the process has allowed this to be a major rallying cry for those that support the process.”

“It is very hard for the residents to respect the process,” said Fagan, “as it seems to be flawed in all areas. The EFSB board works for the Governor. The Governor supports the project. Companies such as Goldman Sachs and General Electric appear to be partners in both this proposed project as well as working with the Governor on statewide initiatives.

“Why has there not been a comprehensive environmental impact statement completed?”

“We can only hope that [the EFSB] will truly listen and read through why this is the wrong project and in the wrong location,” said Fagan, wrapping up, “We hope that you have the strength to fight the state wide politics and make a decision on the merits of the project and truly consider the negative, long lasting detrimental impacts  that this project will bring to the Town of Burrillville.”

Other speakers that leaped out at me include Paul Roselli of the Burrillville Land Trust, who praised the RI Department of Enviornmental Management‘s advisory opinion.

Cranston native Rhoda Northup said that this was “not just a Burrillville issue, but a statewide issue. It’s also a Connecticut and Massachusetts issue. “Do we go thirsty and the power plant gets the water?” asked Northup.

Suzanne Dumas

Sally Mendzela spoke about the reality of climate change, and how plants like the one proposed by Invenergy will doom our planet.

Lynn Clark

Mary Gauvin

Smart energy conservation could easily absorb the 10,000 megawatts going offline, the power plant is not needed said Vito Buonomano.

Lisa Petrie explained her concerns as a mother, and explained why she chose to be arrested outside Governor Raimondo’s office.

Donna Woods told the EFSB members, “You do know better” than to approve this plant.

Denise Potvin

This public comment meeting was scheduled for after the last of a dozen advisory opinions were filed with the EFSB. Many who spoke at the hearing pointed out that at least six of the advisory opinions are incomplete, because Invenergy could not supply required information.

The testimony and hearing was also colored by the fact that the Burrillville Town Council will be voting tonight on whether or not to oppose the power plant in a meeting at the Burrillville High School Thursday night, and will be voting on whether to approve or reject a proposed tax treaty between the town and Invenergy on Monday evening. The groups in opposition to the power plant from Burrillville do not want the town council to approve the tax treaty, which may characterized as selling the town for a measly $92 million.

There will be one more public comment meeting, originally to be held on October 3 but not postponed, date to be determined due to Invenergy’s request for a thirty day extension as they work to secure a water source for their plant. In the meantime, the EFSB board will hold a meeting to decide on two motions to dismiss Invenergy’s application, one from the Town of Burrillville and the other from the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) based on Invenergy’s incomplete application and failure to provide adequate or timely information when requested.

Here is the video of all the speakers:

Richard Dionne said that Invenergy should be required to submit all requested information.

Doug Geblinske of TEC-RI spoke in favor of the power plant.

Eugenia Marks, noted environmentalist former head of the RI Audubon Society, spoke against the plant.

David Brunetti questioned Invenergy’s “cicular logic” in determining that Burrillville was the location for this plant.

Kathryn Scaramella questioned the “small but meaningful savings” ratepayers will receive if the plant is built. She pointed out that the extension Invenergy requested was a violation of terms EFSB Chair Meg Curran set out in May, when she said “all deadlines are set in law.”

Mary Jane Bailey said the location chosen for the power plant was rejected when the Ocean State Power Plant was built in the 1980’s. “If it wasn’t right in the ’80s it’s not right now,” said Bailey.

Ben Weilerstein, of the Toxic Action Center said that the same kind of action taking place in Burrillville is what helped defeat the pipeline project in Massachusetts.

Meg Kerr, senior policy director for the RI Audubon Society spoke against the plant.

John McMullen, business agent for the Plumbers and Pipefitters union spoke in favor of the plant, saying there was a need for the energy and the jobs. He said that RI Building Trades supported Deepwater Wind and that a life of temporary jobs allowed him to raise his daughters and send them to college.

Irene Watson noted that her community’s public speaking skills have improved because of the countless meetings they’ve been to.

Kenneth Putnam Jr spoke from the heart. He’s 76 and 1 day old.

Betty Mancucci

John Anthony Scott

Jeremy Bailey

Roy Coloumbe said he represents two dozen iron workers from Burrillville who support the project.

Attorney Greg Mancini is Richard Sinapi’s law partner and represents the RI Building Trades.

“The power plant will be around 30-40 years from now, says Stephanie Sloman. “”I’ll be dead, you’ll be dead,” she told the EFSB members, “75 percent of the people here will be dead. I’m not trying to be funny.” It’s about the future.

Sloman gave each member of the EFSB this picture, to remind them of the species they will either help to save or destroy, depending on how they decide on the power plant.

20160921_200358

Cynthia Crook-Pick compared the power plant to 38 Studios, both are being pushed forward with inadequate information.

Karen Palmer

Jason Olkowski

Sierra Club seeks clarification from Elorza on LNG statement


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

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

2016-06-08 NO LNG 003The Rhode Island Sierra Club has responded to Mayor Jorge Elorza‘s statement on National Grid‘s proposed liquefaction project for Field’s Point in the Port of Providence.

“The Rhode Island Sierra Club is glad the Mayor has publicly agreed to not offer any subsidies to National Grid related to the LNG liquefaction project in Fields Point. We would however urge him to clarify whether his definition of subsidy also includes Tax Stabilization Agreements and if it doesn’t, we would would ask him to take the same strong stance against those type of subsidies and end TSA negotiations immediately.

“While Elorza is correct in saying the decision will ultimately be made by FERC, we would argue his assertion, ‘the city will have little input into that decision’ is false. The mayor can’t abdicate his responsibility on this. Local officials can be hugely influential on Federal decisions. An outcry from public officials immensely helped in 2005 when a similar project was ultimately denied.  Not sending in a letter, like the one nine Providence legislators sent to FERC last week, is a statement and a betrayal of his rhetoric on climate change.

“At the absolute minimum, we would ask the mayor to join the thousands of residents, and many businesses, environmental, community and religious organizations in signing the NoLNGinPVD campaign’s petition letter to FERC.

“The mayor also needs to hold the City Council accountable and ask them to follow through on their resolution to provide wide-scale public involvement, on which no action has been taken.   They resolved to host meetings between National Grid, Dept. of Health, DEM, Coastal Resource Management Corporation and city residents, and city residents deserve nothing less.”

Patreon

CLF announces historic settlement on Johnston Landfill


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

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

clf conservation law foundationConservation Law Foundation (CLF) announced a historic settlement agreement today in its lawsuit against the owners and operators of Central Landfill in Johnston, Rhode Island. In December 2013, CLF filed a Clean Air Act suit against the Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation (RIRRC), Broadrock Gas Services, LLC (BGS), and Rhode Island LFG Genco, LLC (RILG). RIRRC owns Central Landfill, BGS operates the gas collection system, and RILG uses the gas to fuel their electricity-generating facilities located next to the landfill. CLF’s suit alleged that the gas generated at the landfill was being inadequately collected or destroyed and that the landfill’s owner and operators failed to obtain the legally-required operating permit since 1997.

“Landfills produce gases that must be controlled in order to avoid risks to the health and wellbeing of surrounding communities,” said CLF attorney Max Greene. “Today’s agreement goes a long way toward enhancing gas generation and collection at Central Landfill in Johnston. By harnessing the gas for electricity generation and preventing it from escaping into the atmosphere, we protect our neighborhoods for generations to come.”

Under the settlement, RIRRC, BGS and RILG will hire an engineering firm to perform an assessment and recommend projects that will enhance gas generation and the performance of the collection system. The engineering firm also will examine and recommend improvements to an existing network of ambient-air monitors that test for hydrogen sulfide, a landfill-gas component, in the surrounding neighborhoods. The parties will evaluate these recommendations and undertake such projects.

In addition, for the first time, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management intends to issue a single Clean Air Act operating permit to govern the landfill.

“The issuance of a single operating permit covering the entire landfill is deeply important,” continued Greene. “Judges have called this type of permit ‘a source-specific bible for Clean Air Act compliance.’ Now, Central Landfill will finally have this important tool.”

[From a press release]

What Governor Raimondo should expect in Burrillville


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

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

With the opposition to Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant intensifying every day, Governor Gina Raimondo might be worrying about the reception she’s likely to receive when she visits Burrillville Monday evening. Having visited Burrillville many times myself, and having met and chatted with dozens of residents there, I can safely say that the Governor can expect a strong rebuttal to her support for the plant, but also a courteous and respectful reception.

13734805_1757318031217216_1739501848_n

This may be a career defining moment for Governor Raimondo. Does she listen to the concerns of her constituents, or does she cave to the desires of foreign billionaires? She says that the ultimate decision as to whether the plant gets built is in the hands of the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB), but if she drops her support, that will go a long way towards stopping the plant.

13729047_1616793121965952_2291090577071282064_n-1

Residents are looking forward to her visit. It’s not often that the state’s leaders get to Burrillville, especially on an issue of such grave concern. Residents are rolling out the red carpet for her visit. She can expect to be well treated.

The residents of Burrillville have been polite to a fault when dealing with Governor Raimondo. Her invitation, by Kathy Martley from Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion (BASE) was accompanied by a flower and a home made card. When protesters hold signs at her events, they don’t attempt to disrupt the event, they simply remind the governor of the public’s concern.

This is not to say that Governor Raimondo can expect to charm Burrillvillians into accepting the power plant. The residents there have done their research, and they know that Invenergy has not been honest about the proposed plant’s environmental impact or about the need for the plant in the first place. She should expect to be confronted by the recent RIDEM data requests, which accuses Invenergy of submitting an application that contains, “several confusing and conflicting assertions about the purpose and need for the project.” She should expect to hear about the research that’s been done, the environmental tragedies Burrillville residents have already endured, and a case for saving the world from the ravages of the fossil fuel industry.

But though the meeting is bound to be emotional and the arguments will be made with passion, Burrillville is a town of good people.

Raimondo

Patreon

RIDEM issues blistering critique of Invenergy’s power plant application


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

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

2016-03-31 Burrillville EFSB 002RIDEM’s third data request to Invenergy, released yesterday, reads as a devastating critique of the proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. If Governor Gina Raimondo was serious when she recently told ecoRI News that, “…if there are issues then the plant won’t go forward,” then the project is dead on arrival.

In addition to “missing info” that renders the application incomplete, on page 3 the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management notes that impact of the the various projects in Burrillville has been fragmented, making the cumulative impact of Invenergy’s proposed power plant; Spectra Energy’s Aim Project; Eversource Energy, National Grid and Spectra Energy’s Access Northeast project and TransCanada’s Ocean State Power difficult to determine.

“For the purposes of comparing costs and benefits to wildlife, all of the existing and proposed work related to increased natural gas operations (processing and transport) in Burrillville should be reviewed as a single and complete project,” says RIDEM, “Piecemeal review of related projects in different stages by different applicants undercounts their cumulative impacts from loss of forests and fragmentation, air, noise and light pollution etc. in an area of the state that has been a longstanding conservation priority.”

On page 7, RIDEM alleges that the “applicant makes several confusing and conflicting assertions about the purpose and need for the project…

“The emissions and cost-benefit analyses both primarily only list benefits. A proper analysis should include costs, yet there is no mention of loss of forests, biodiversity, ecosystem services etc… This seems particularly important since the application notes that the majority of the benefits outlined (e.g. construction jobs and energy costs savings) would be rather short-lived and the majority of the foreseeable costs would be long term or permanent.”

When it comes to selling the idea of a fracked gas power plant, the RIDEM data request accuses Invenergy of circular logic. “A pointed example includes dismissing hydropower in the Power Generation Alternatives section (and omitting it from all other sections) solely because it would not be appropriate on the proposed [power plant] site, which was selected for proximity to the gas line, and then dismissing alternative project locations because they do not have the desired natural gas infrastructure.”

Further, the “premise that natural gas is the only way to meet [New England’s energy] demand is not borne out by the information provided,” says RIDEM.

RIDEM’s report to the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) will be shaped by Invenergy’s answers to these and other questions. Though these questions raise serious doubts about the need for the new plant and Invenergy’s integrity in preparing its application, ultimately the EFSB takes RIDEM’s report as advisory only, meaning the board could choose to approve the project despite these issues.

Yet Governor Gina Raimondo’s words, that “if there are issues then the plant won’t go forward,” ring loudly here. The issues raised in this set of data requests are serious, and the questions raised must be addressed honestly.

Raimondo

Patreon

On Burrillville power plant, Janet Coit shows concern for the environment and/or future lawsuits


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

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

DSC_3258The June 2 open meeting of the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) was a rare opportunity to hear board members Margaret Curran, Janet Coit and Parag Agrawal talk openly about their thoughts regarding the process of the board in approving or denying Invenergy‘s proposed fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville. That said, it’s also a bad idea to draw too many inferences about board members thoughts based on their words.

One example of this came near the end of the 45 minute meeting. Janet Coit, who directs the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) when she’s not on the EFSB, suggested directing RIDEM to expand their advisory opinions on the environmental impact to include impact on wetlands, impact on state conservation areas and the cumulative impact of all fossil fuel development in the area, including pipeline compressors and the Ocean State Power Plant.

Janet Coit
Janet Coit

It would be easy to see Coit’s suggestion, which was approved unanimously by the board, as indicative of a concern about environmental impacts and as a response to the concerns of community members who have spoken at one or more of the open comment hearings held in Burrillville. But Coit’s suggestion may be no more than an attempt to make sure all the bases are covered. Getting advisory impact statements does not take away the EFSB’s ability to rubber stamp the power plant. It just provides the board with appropriate legal cover.

Chair Curran was on board with the suggestion that the cumulative effects the fossil fuel infrastructure in Burrillville might have on wildlife, saying, “I’m partial to the bats.” But again, her concern for the bats might dissipate in the light of Invenergy’s desire to build a new power plant where it is not wanted.

Meg Curran
Margaret Curran

Coit also suggested that the EFSB take “official notice” of the court order that closed the MTBE contaminated well in Pascoag, the same well that Invenergy hopes to use to cool their turbines on the promise of cleaning up the contamination. The well was sealed after many families became due to the MTBE in their water. As a result of Coit’s suggestion the court order has become part of the official record.

There were no public comments allowed at this meeting, and no lawyers from any of the intervenors were allowed to ask questions or comment. The meeting was for the three board members to “discuss, deliberate and decide” on various aspects of the hearing process. They started by denying one “late intervention” of an abutting property owner and approving another. The difference between the two applicants seemed to be that one applicant was zoned for residential and business, a special case that may require a separate lawyer.

Parag Agrawal
Parag Agrawal

Todd Bianco, coordinator of the EFSB, ran through the current status of the advisory opinions the board has requested. Most of the opinions seem to be roughly on schedule. Surprisingly, Invenergy has yet to apply for the proper permits from the RI Department of Transportation (RIDOT). Under current rules, it would take RIDOT three months to process the applications, and Bianco said RIDOT was “unable to determine if the applications will be on time.”

The meeting ended with a discussion of how to do better outreach with the public. Bianco said that he continues to run advertisements for meetings in the ProJo and in two local Burrillville publications. This lead to a discussion of whether or not to have a Twitter account for the EFSB.

“It would be my first,” said Bianco, “I could learn how to tweet, and hashtags are a thing…”

John Niland
John Niland

DSC_3225

Patreon