City councillors are looking for more information about a proposed Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facility at 0 Muzzey Street.
The council may have little say over whether the facility gets built, but approved a motion filed by Councillor-at-Large Michelle Kelley at Monday night’s meeting asking for a public safety briefing on the project proposed by Flatiron Energy for the battery storage system facility.
In the motion, Kelley said the briefing from the fire department should address emergency response considerations associated with a facility of the proposed scale, including fire suppression strategies, hazardous materials considerations, potential evacuation procedures, coordination with public safety agencies, and any training, equipment, or operational planning necessary for the City of Revere to respond effectively to an incident involving a battery energy storage facility. The purpose of this presentation is to ensure that the City Council and the public have a clear understanding of the public safety preparedness and emergency response planning associated with a project of this magnitude, the motion reads.
Several councillors noted that the project likely does not need approval from the council because of the Dover Amendment, a state law which restricts municipalities from using local zoning bylaws to prohibit or heavily regulate land use for religious, educational, child care, or non-profit farming purposes. However, Councillor-at-Large Marc Silvestri was among the councillors who also asked for clarity on how the project fits within the confines of the Dover Amendment.
Several councillors said that they have spoken to representatives from Flatiron to get more information on the Muzzey Street project. Kelley said the Revere location will be a large-scale facility with dozens of battery units. The city of Chelsea recently approved a similar project with about four dozen of the trailer-sized container units.
Kelley said she wanted to give some background on why she filed the motion for Monday night’s meeting.
“I was contacted by the applicant’s attorney and told about this proposal and it was made clear at that time that this isn’t a proposal that the city council will be voting on in its usual way,” said Kelley. “I’ve had residents call me and say, I hope you’re not going to support that and that you are going to vote no on that, and it is frustrating for me when I have to tell them we will not be taking a vote on that, it is not something that I’ll be voting on. They get frustrated, I get frustrated.”
Kelley said that more and more, there have been decisions driven at the state level where the role of the local government is more limited than people expect.
“Taking all of that into consideration, I think it is even more important to focus on what we can do here at the local level, especially when it comes to public safety,” said Kelley. “This motion is simply requesting that the fire department provide a public safety briefing regarding the proposed battery energy storage system at 0 Muzzey St. Based on the materials submitted so far, this a large-scale facility, including dozens of battery units and associated infrastructure. Given the nature of battery storage systems, it is important that the city fully understand emergency response considerations, including fire suppression, hazardous materials, and evacuation planning.”
Kelley said the fire department’s expertise will be critical in helping the city understand what is required from it regarding response training and equipment.
“This is a reasonable and necessary step for a project of this scale,” said Kelley.
Ward 4 Councillor Paul Argenzio said all the questions he has received about the facility are regarding fire and fire safety and hazardous materials.
Ward 3 Councillor Anthony Cogliandro said he spoke to Hannah Larkin from Flatiron and Larkin said Flatiron will be coming before the council to give a full presentation on the project.
“I highly intend to make sure that my constituents know when that’s happening so we can get them here during public comment,” said Cogliandro. “We are going to do our part to make sure that we bring transparency to this process, but unfortunately, this is out of our control as Councillor Kelley said.”
Silvestri said he sat down with the applicant and asked questions on economic and environmental impacts and fire and safety equipment.
“They gave me their word, they are meeting with the fire department, and any training or tools we need for them to have to put out a fire of that type … will be paid for by the company to our fire department. Also, the units are self-contained units and they keep the fire within themselves.”
Guarino-Sawaya said she supported Kelley’s motion and looked forward to hearing from the fire department.
“Public safety has to be our top priority, especially with a project of this scale,” she said. “It must always be our top priority, especially when we are discussing a project and this project in its complexity, this is not an easy thing that’s going to be coming up.”
Kelley noted that the research she has done shows that the battery storage facilities falling under the Dover Amendment is not settled law, and added that there is a state law that will go into effect later this summer that will require similar projects to go before a state board.
Council President Anthony Zambuto said he would like for the project not to fall under the Dover Amendment, citing his longstanding concerns with electric batteries and their potential safety hazards.