Palmer Renewable Energy has warned Springfield that any revocation would trigger legal and financial repercussions for the city.
SPRINGFIELD – City councilors said Friday they are considering their options, including the possibility of a permit revocation for a proposed $150 million wood-burning plant in East Springfield.
The councilors’ comments followed a three-hour meeting at City Hall on Thursday when councilors discussed the biomass energy project with the city solicitor, city consultants and project opponents.
Councilor Melvin Edwards said he has asked the Law Department to prepare the proper notices to the project developer, Palmer Renewable Energy, to appear before the council for a revocation vote on its 2008 special permit.
Edwards also has asked the department to consider drafting an ordinance that would restrict the importation into the city for incineration of any wood foreign to New England, citing concerns about insect infestation.
Councilor John A. Lysak has asked the department to draft an amendment to the zoning ordinances to prohibit biomass facilities that use construction and demolition debris. The current project would only burn green wood, but Lysak said he wants to ensure construction debris is never added should it be built.
Lysak also has asked for a requirement that any facility using just green wood require a special permit from the council and site assignment from the Public Health Council.
“I think a few of us are looking at options to bring PRE back in front of us,” said Councilor Timothy Allen.
Palmer Renewable Energy, through its lawyer, Frank P. Fitzgerald, has warned the city that any revocation would trigger legal and financial repercussions for the city.
Project officials have repeatedly defended the safety of the plant, saying it poses no harm to the public or to public health.
The former state secretary of environmental affairs did not require an environmental impact report for the project. The state has issued a “proposed conditional approval to construct.”
Opponents have raised concerns about increased pollution, hazards to health, and traffic issues.
City Solicitor Edward M. Pikula said Friday he “will continue to work with the council to explore various options.”
Approximately 60 people attended the meeting at City Hall on Thursday, and the developer was represented by a stenographer.
Those speaking included representatives of Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc., hired by the city for a limited review of the project.
Some of those speaking at Thursday’s meeting raised concerns about the limits of that review, as did councilors.
The project remains under review by the state Department of Environmental Protection. A public review process ends April 9.
In addition, the state has a hearing scheduled April 5, at 6 p.m., at the John J. Duggan Middle School, 1015 Wilbraham Road, for public comment.