Thursday, February 24, 2000 Older Editions

State wants more info on Nickel Hill

By Rebecca Lipchitz

Environmental officials reviewing the proposed Nickel Hill Energy power plant on the Brox property in Dracut say they need more information from developers before approving the plan.

Robert Durand, secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) announced Friday that in order to meet requirements of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), Nickel Hill must file a supplement to its Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR).

"It's not rare, but it's not the norm," says Doug Pizzi, spokesman for the EOEA.

The EOEA calls for more information about water versus air-cooling technologies, pollution control alternatives to ammonia, and expected noise level created by the plant.

While the EOEA calls for more information, Pizzi says the plan is not in much danger of being rejected under MEPA.

"This certainly should not be seen as anything that denies the project, but we want to make sure we get the best technology now. Changing things after the fact can be very costly and hard to achieve," Pizzi says.

Merrimack Valley Residents for the Environment founder Laura Jordan, who penned letters, both personally and as a member of the that group to the state urging the agency to get more information, says she is pleased.

"It was very clear that the FEIR was inadequate. I'm encouraged that the EOEA is advocating on behalf of citizens," Jordan says.

The Andover Board of Selectmen has also called for a study of the public health impacts of the proposed plant, and a set of restrictions on the plant if it were to be approved by the state.

In a five-page letter to the EOEA, selectmen responded to the Nickel Hill environmental impact report.

The letter was produced with the help of Andover's Director of Public Health Everett Penney, a Dracut resident, along with legal and environmental consultants working with the town.

"I think we've made a significant case that there are deficiencies in the FEIR," Penney says.

He hopes that even if EOEA rules that the Nickel Hill plan meets MEPA regulations that it will put restrictions on the plant, especially on the use of ammonia and noise pollution.

Despite the requirement of local, state and federal reviews for the project, no public health impact or analysis is required, making "our worst fears manifest," selectmen say.

"The proponents have limited their analysis to what they determine is significant," the letter says.

Selectmen call for analysis of the cumulative impact of pollutants in the air, a requirement that the plant use a cooling technology, specifically SCONOx, that does not use ammonia, a requirement that the plant employ an "air-cooling" system over a "water-cooling" system that would draw water from the Merrimack River, and a more specific analysis of what the noise from the plant would be like.

The letter calls for a study of the region's public health that would develop a set of data for the region.

"Contrary to (EOEA) Secretary Durand's expressed opinion that he is not convinced that this proponent ought to be held solely responsible for conducting their analysis, we are convinced that the proponent must be held responsible. If not the proponent, who? If not now, when?"

The letter urges the EOEA to reject the impact report as "inadequate in its attempt to protect the public health and environment."

Jordan says Nickel Hill should have "held up" the FEIR to include more analysis.

"Nickel hill has tried to cut corners every step of the way. It's time they were held accountable. Why not give the public the benefit of that data? The public deserves a full analysis and to have cleanest and best technology, and we're not going to settle for anything less," she says.

Tom Favinger, local spokesman for the Nickel Hill, says the company was in the process of analyzing the use of SCONOx pollution control over an ammonia-based system, but did not complete the analysis because SCONOx only recently became commercially available.

"It clearly wasn't enough (analysis) and we knew that," says Favinger.

When information became available, Favinger says "we immediately embarked on analysis," and have already held meetings with state agencies about the issue.

Analyses of water-cooling and air-cooling technology is under way as part of a permit application for the state Department of Environmental Protection, Favinger says.

The analysis of noise impact, Favinger says, is complete, and due to an agreement with Brox properties that surround the proposed plant site, the boundaries for noise pollution are greater than the boundaries for the plant.