PORT ANGELES — The seven environmental groups who lost an appeal of the shoreline development permit issued to Nippon Paper Industries USA Inc.’s $71 million biomass project are now investigating appealing the City Council’s decision.
The groups are mulling whether to find a way to appeal the council’s ruling Monday night to affirm the Planning Commission’s approval of the permit, said Diana Sommerville, spokeswoman for all seven of the groups, on Tuesday.
The groups are Port Townsend AirWatchers, the Olympic Forest Coalition, the Olympic Environmental Council, No Biomass Burn of Seattle, the Center for Environmental Law and Policy of Spokane, the World Temperate Rainforest Network and the Cascade Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Nippon has proposed a 20-megawatt cogeneration plant at its landmark paper mill at the entrance to Ediz Hook.
The plant would burn waste, known as biomass or hog fuel.
The council’s ruling Monday night to uphold the Planning Commission’s Sept. 21 approval of a shoreline development permit is but one hurdle Nippon must take before construction can begin.
City Attorney Bill Bloor said the protesting groups might be able to appeal the council’s ruling to the state Shorelines Hearings Board but that there were many possibilities dependent on the approach they want to take.
Even if the shoreline development permit decision is not appealed, the groups plan to file an appeal with the state Pollution Control Hearings Board after a decision is made on an air emissions permit.
Harold Norlund, manager of Nippon’s mill in Port Angeles, said Tuesday that the company will request an air emissions permit from the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency once the City Council officially adopts the legal written decision at its Dec. 21 meeting.
“We would like to get going in February or March — probably March,” he said.
He said the mill hopes to have the biomass up and running for the second half of 2012.
The council formally voted Monday night on five points of law brought forth by the appellants, siding officially with the Planning Commission’s decision.
Those five votes will be used in a legal opinion to be written by city staff, the council unanimously decided Monday.
Four of the issues the council voted on were unanimous, with council member Brad Collins absent because of a death in his family.
The only opposed vote, and the most contentious issue Monday night, was whether the Planning Commission should have designated the biomass project as a utility, since it will be generating electricity.
On that issue, the council voted 5-1, with council member Max Mania opposing the idea that the Planning Commission had correctly categorized the biomass as an accessory to the mill.
The four issues unanimously voted on were:
• The Planning Commission had adequate procedures and time lines during the open-record hearing for the permit.
The environmental groups said the time at the hearing was inadequate.
• The commission’s action was not clearly erroneous, as had been claimed by the appellants.
• The commission acted within its jurisdiction.
• The commission correctly interpreted the law.
Five of the groups that filed against the Nippon project — excluding the Center for Environmental Law and Policy of Spokane and the Cascade Chapter of the Sierra Club — also have filed an appeal challenging a state permit allowing Port Townsend Paper Corp. to expand its biomass generation.
__________
Reporter Paige Dickerson can be reached at 360-417-3535 or at paige.dickerson@peninsuladaily news.com.
