The appeals were filed by the Toxics Action Center, based in Boston and Amherst, and by the Conservation Law Foundation, based in Boston.
An artist's rendering of the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy biomass plant off Page Boulevard in East Springfield.SPRINGFIELD – Two organizations have filed appeals with the state Department of Environmental Protection, saying the state’s recent conditional approval of a 35-megawatt biomass wood-burning plant in East Springfield would worsen air pollution and harm public health.
The appeals were filed by the Toxics Action Center, based in Boston and Amherst, and by the Conservation Law Foundation, based in Boston. The foundation stated it was filing the appeal on behalf of itself and its members, the Springfield-based Arise for Social Justice and its members, and residents.
The state issued a conditional air quality plan Approval to Palmer Renewable Energy on June 30, the final approval needed by the state for the $150 million power project to proceed.
Palmer Renewable Energy and its founder, David J. Callahan, are proposing the plant at 1000 Page Blvd.
The company and its consultants have defended the safety of the plant and said it will not adversely affect public health.
The state has assigned a hearing officer who will file a recommendation with the Department of Environmental Protection commissioner, said Edmund J. Coletta, a state spokesman. The appeals will be combined as a single case.
The commissioner, Kenneth L. Kimmell, has final say and could decide to uphold the permit, uphold the permit with added stipulations, or deny the permit, Coletta said. Any further appeal would be a court matter, he said.
The City Council voted in May to revoke the city’s special permit for the project, which was granted in 2008. The developer filed a lawsuit in June in Land Court, challenging the council’s action.
Both the Conservation Law Foundation and Toxics Action Center stated within their appeals that the plant will emit “substantial amounts of particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, ammonia, and hazardous air pollutants into a region of Massachusetts with significantly degraded air quality and high rates of pediatric asthma and other health impacts associated with, and/or likely to be exacerbated by, increased air pollution.”
Frank P. Fitzgerald, a lawyer for the developers, said they are confident the permit will be upheld.
“After a detailed and comprehensive review of our project, public hearings and extended public comment periods, the (state) found that our biomass plant met every one of the commonwealth’s strict environmental standards,” Fitzgerald said.
The Toxics Action Center, which lists its mission as working with communities to help prevent or clean up pollution, said the Department of Environmental Protection “failed to adequately take into account the existing air pollution and public health burden in the community that will be most significantly and directly affected by PRE’s project air emissions.
The plant would burn green wood chips, switching from an earlier plan to burn a combination of construction and demolition debris and greed wood chips.
The Conservation Law Foundation said the plant would be within an “environmental justice community,” which is a community that “already suffers from disparate adverse health impacts” and should receive added protection, according to the appeal. In addition, the group said the state “failed to adequately assess and limit air pollution from the plant.”