More lawyers in the room. That’s the answer to the question- ‘what has changed at the Nottingham planning board meetings as talks resume between the water bottling company USA Springs and area residents. As NHPR’s Dan Gorenstein reports, the proposal to pump up to 439 thousand gallons of water daily continues to challenge the limits of state law, and rile emotions.
:04 I want ot meet with and directly shake the hands with the individuals representing USA Springs, so they will know who is affected by the groundwater dispersement.
That’s Chris Regan, an abutter to the project and afraid the discharge water from the pump test will find its way to his house.
…most likely in my basement. … :26 real people are affected by the decisions and actions you are taking, I am one of those real people. My family will be there on Freemen Hall rd, when that water comes tumbling down… It’s really getting me a little mad. I just want to meet them right now. (walks over) hi, my name is chris regan…
Nottingham Planning Board observers have come to expect emotional displays like Regan’s. Many residents in Nottingham, and even surrounding towns, have used the meetings to criticize the project. But towards the end of the evening, a former town planning board member addressed the crowd with a different message.
Track 19
1:08 I am not for or against the project. I wish the project to proceed based on state law…I am glad that the SOG group is out there, I guess my only concern is that they have picked this project ot fight against, but there is nothing on their website about how to protect the groundwater, about using salt on the highways, homeowners doing their oil changes, the use of fertilizers…I think if we are really sincere about protecting our groundwater, we need ot look at all these avenues…
During his comments the former planning board member was frequently interrupted and jeered. But when the company introduced the idea of sub-dividing their property into two lots, many in the crowd grew concerned. The company proposed having the water bottling plant on one 80-acre plot. The remaining 20 acres of property would be available for another commercial or industrial interest. But when Nottingham resident Cynthia Rasmuson questioned this plan, she was speaking for many in attendance.
Track 30
:21 …it was sounding like they wanted to sell off that parcel to another company…B/c right now we are dealing with the issue of one very large withdrawal, and I don’t want to be blind-sided that we could have more than one problem on that score.
And while the company insists no current plans exist for the second smaller plot, the sighting of the sub-division falls on both Nottingham and Barrington property. Until now, the town of Barrington hasn’t been formally involved with the project. But should they? That’s a question for the growing lawyer population in the room.
Planning board chair Skip Severins.
Track 35
2:47 as we go through this process more and more dignitaries, or more and more people that are higher up in the chain of expertise in the various fields is elevating this process well beyond the capacity of a small town. This is new. It’s new to everybody, and don’t know where it’s going to go.
Another area that lacks clarity is whether USA Springs will address a town planning board letter with 12 points outlining their concerns over the water that is discharged from the pump test. Attorney Tupper Kinder, who is representing Nottingham’s Selectmen says the company is required to receive town approval before the pump test.
Track 12
:02 My question to the applicant is do they intend to apply for, and receive site plan approval before performing this pump test.
Attorney Greg Smith, representing USA Springs.
…The answer is no. No? No?
:52 It is our honest belief that the state regulates the groundwater withdrawal the pump test, and the permit from groundwater withdrawal and enforces against anyone who doesn’t comply with that, and the town does not have legal authority to do that. So if the question was will we wait for your grant of authority, the answer is we don’t believe you have the authority to impose that.
But Tom Ballestero, a hydrogeologist representing the town doesn’t agree with Smith’s interpretation.
Track 28
:20 …The contention is that the town has no jurisdiction over the pumping test. …the gap that exists now with current law is the fact that…as far as the pumping test discharge water, they are silent on that. The discharge of that water into the environment, you can’t discharge onto property, so there has to be discharge somewhere. B/c exisitnig law is silent on the issue, the town has to step in.
Smith disagrees. But told the people at the meeting the company wants to work with the town, and might address some points raised by the board. When asked if he thinks the company will address their concerns, Planning Board Chair Skip Severins says he doesn’t exactly get a warm fuzzy feeling. USA Springs is expected to present more information to the town on July 24th. For NHPR News, I’m DG
