I recently submitted this question to the online PMLP Energy Awareness Forum: “Please tell us more about your plans to add solar panels to your property by Fall 2025. Will the panels be roof mounted? Or, where will they be placed? How much energy will be produced? Is the solar energy produced available to call on when our peaker plants are used by ISO? Is there any solar planned for the PMLP’s former Diesel plant? Panels for the old diesel plant’s new $764,000 PVC membrane roof? Are there any energy efficiency features as part of the new $533,000 windows planned at that site?”

It took a few days to receive verification of their receipt of the question, but my question has never been posted to the forum.

I did get an e-mail reply from John Maihos of PMLP Human Resources. Here is his answer – which again does not appear on the Energy Awareness Forum. “Thanks for your questions. We are researching the feasibility of adding solar panels to our property at 201 Warren Street extension. As opposed to roof-mounted panels, the space under consideration is where the shrubbery is just before coming up the hill to our office. No further details are available at this time, although it may be possible to tie this generation into an on-site battery.

“These assets would not be available for ISO New England as solar panels are not a substitute for on-call demand needs at this time.

“The windows recommended by the architectural engineers are a translucent panel, UV protected on both sides, with a Solar Heat Gain Coefficient of .39 to allow natural solar heat to condition the building.”

Why is the Energy Awareness Forum not updated?

The Forum was originally a live opportunity to ask questions of PMLP administration – although our request was for involvement with the PMLP Commission. No commissioner ever attended the forum when it met live. PMLP then opted to move the forum opportunity online and posted it to the front page of their website. It is now found at the bottom of the PMLP About Us/Getting to know us webpage – three link from the front page.

Why continue with this lack of transparency? Why not publish ratepayer questions and answers as done before? Even though PMLP alloted 60 days to answer a query.

The photo is an aerial view of the former PMLP diesel plant on Warren St. Ext. It is receiving a new roof and windows at a cost of $1.3 million.

PEABODY — A controversial 60 megawatt peaker plant is now online on Pulaski Street. But developers behind the $85 million plant won’t share how often it’s running — or if it’s running at all.
      The natural gas and oil-powered plant is operated by the Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Energy Company and sits on a Peabody Municipal Light Plant site at 58R Pulaski St. The site is owned by the city of Peabody.
    It’s meant to operate only during “peak” energy use times. Typically, to prevent the power grid from becoming overstressed on especially hot or cold days.
    The plant is expected to run for 239 hours annually, well below the cap of 1,250 hours per year as regulated by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, according to PMLP’s website. It supplies capacity to 14 municipalities across the state who signed on to the project, including Peabody, Marblehead and Wakefield locally.
    The peaker went online June 1.
    When asked by The Salem News how often the peaker has run since then, or if it has operated at all, developers behind the project said they cannot say. Doing so violates rules designed to protect “competitively sensitive information” by grid operator ISO New England, MMWEC spokesperson Kate Roy said.
    “It is not that MMWEC ‘won’t release the data,’ it is that MMWEC can’t release the data,” she wrote in an email. “The electricity market is competitive and … the (peaker) can be called upon by the ISO when needed.
    “If suppliers of electricity to the competitive market knew what units were supplying power when, then there is the clear danger of market price manipulation,” Roy continued. “So the ISO requires the confidentiality of this information.”
      ISO does release aggregated data on the types of fuel used to power New England’s grid each day and how many megawatt hours of energy they produce. Just nothing on individual generators.
    “This policy is designed to maintain a fair and competitive energy market by protecting generator-specific data to prevent unfair advantages and by ensuring electricity prices are driven by supply and demand — not strategic exploitation,” ISO spokesperson Mary Cate Colapietro said.
    The Peabody Lighting Commission itself is not privy to when the peaker runs as it is an MMWEC owned and operated project, Commission Chair Raymond Melvin said.
    “It might have started once or twice, but I don’t believe it’s fully operational,” he told The Salem News Wednesday. “When it does run, I’ll issue a press release.”
      Peabody resident Susan “Sudi” Smoller, founder of Breathe Clean North Shore and one of the loudest voices against the project, said the ISO’s rule “is a convenient way to not tell people what’s going on.
      “Do I have to organize a viewing party to see when the smokestack is running? At this point, yes,” she said.
      Smoller already hosted a handful of protests against the plant in 2021 and 2022, around the time construction started on the project, with other environmental groups in the state and was featured in the documentary “#StopPeabodyPeaker,” released over the winter.
    Facilities such as the Peabody peaker are typically required to submit annual CO2 emission reports to the DEP each January, a MassDEP spokesperson said.
      Peabody Health Director Sharon Cameron asked MMWEC this spring if the city’s Board of Health will receive air quality testing results from the peaker, along with notice of when the plant will run.
      Revealing when the plant operates violates “trade secrets,” Cameron was told, and emission data would later become available through MassDEP and also Form EIA-923 reports on the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s website.
      MMWEC is required to report operation data through this form annually for its plants that provide capacity to the grid and can produce at least 1 megawatt of power, according to the EIA. These plants can also be selected to submit this data for less comprehensive, monthly versions of this report released throughout the year, as was the case for MMWEC’s Stony Brook Plant in June.
      Purple Air monitors operated by the city track air quality data around Peabody. However, the one on Pulaski Street near the peaker hasn’t been working properly and Cameron had to apply for a new device from MassDEP in May. She has yet to hear back on the request, she said.
    As of now, there’s no public source for real-time data about Peabody’s new peaker.
    “You’d think (plant developers) would be eager for people to know how well it’s going, right?” state Rep. Sally Kerans said.
    Kerans, the Peabody Board of Health, state Sen. Joan Lovely and Wakefield Town Councilor Julie Smith-Galvin have been critical of a fossil fuel plant being built in an environmental justice area with higher rates of health disparities among residents and without any environmental or health impact studies done before the construction of the plant.
    The project wasn’t required to conduct the studies during its approval process, though it would have to if it sought approval today under the state’s Climate Policy Roadmap passed in 2021.
    The peaker is more energy efficient than the two existing generators at PMLP’s Pulaski Street substation. The oldest, built in the 1970s, will be delisted by June 1, 2026, PMLP General Manager Joe Anastasi said.
      The peaker is also capable of burning hydrogen, a green energy source. But the original equipment manufacturer is still testing the use of hydrogen in similar units and it is unclear when or how much hydrogen will be used in the peaker, Roy said.
    “MMWEC has supported efforts at the federal level to develop green hydrogen sources in the region,” she said. “Unfortunately, the federal government has not selected the region for a green hydrogen hub.”
      Nearly a decade on, the approval process of the plant itself remains a sore spot for opponents.
    Originally named Project 2015A for the year it went into development, discussions about the peaker started locally in executive sessions of the Peabody Lighting Commission in June 2015.
    The peaker’s name was changed to the Northeast Reliability Center earlier this year.
    The commission voted unanimously in late 2015 during one of these executive sessions for Peabody to participate in the project’s early development stages. The project was brought before the public by the commission for the first time at a regular meeting in October 2016.
    This was to keep the bidding process and other aspects of the deal that could be considered trade secrets confidential, Commissioner William Aylward, who was on the commission at the time of the vote, told The Salem News last year after the minutes of these 2015-2016 executive sessions were released.
    “(MMWEC) was still in the process of getting bids on who was going to do the build and who was going to do the equipment, where they were buying all this stuff from,” he said at the time. “That’s why some of these things have to happen in executive session.”
    Outcry against the project began in late 2020, when the state issued an air quality permit for 2015A. While the project had been discussed in general Lighting Commission meetings prior, residents hadn’t been adequately notified of the project, Ward 3 Councilor Stephanie Peach said.
    Peach represents the neighborhood where the peaker is situated and lives nearby. She told The Salem News she didn’t know until a reporter’s phone call this week that the peaker had been operational as of June 1.
    “We should be able to know when it’s running, not just as neighbors to the plant but as consumers in general,” Peach said.
      “People who pay PMLP for these services, it’s good for us to know when we’re peaking so that we know to conserve energy.”

– BCNS/Sudi Smoller – I agree with Commissioner Lazares. We are only trying to get more information. Can’t you see how you come across as being untransparent? Because, when we ask you things, you don’t tell us. And, that has long been the history of our relationship….I’m thrilled that we are involved in the battery project. I feel like you haven’t told anyone about it. The fact that it is one out of 14 communities.…Where exactly is it going? How will it impact Peabody? We haven’t heard any of that. And people want to hear that. And, when you say, send me an email and I’ll email you back, people don’t hear that.

– Commissioner Thomas D’Amato – At the risk of extending this, I get your point. This a cultural change….

-Audience Member – We can’t hear you. Use your microphone.

(D’Amato turns on his microphone and the sound in the room improves, but not on video, because the mics are not connected to the mixer.)

– D’Amato – It’s become a cultural thing. I used to remark that we liked to fly under the radar, great service…(inaudible)… You want us to be more public or higher profile. I don’t know if that can happen overnight. We have a new board; we have more tolerant board members. I understand but we’re not in the business of (inaudible) taking it public. We’re in the business of …(inaudible) service… and in due time, you’ll hear all that. But questions around an empty lot and wanting to know what that is, I don’t know what to say to that.

(referring to a question raised by Stewart Lazares earlier in the meeting.)

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – We want to make sure that you are taking action towards a sustainable future that does not involve greenhouse gasses.

– D’Amato – Yea that’s part of it. That’s not our complete mantra. What’s going on today… is not going to happen overnight….

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – It has to be part of all of our mantras.

– D’Amato – It’s part of our mantra… The federal government is writing checks it can’t cash. It’s part of our mantra. We can’t write checks that we can’t cash. I get it, but it’s not going to happen overnight.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – We have to keep chipping away at it…I think you have the best rates and great service. But, I think your mission statement has to be expanded. In today’s world, it has to be more than that. You have to give leadership to the future on

sustainability…(inaudible)….People are feeling like you’re not telling us the good or the bad.

– D’Amato – I think we’re doing as good as anybody. Do you think we’re not doing a good job?

– Commissioner Tracy Valletti – To Sudi’s point about emailing and people not hearing it because it is internal, can we treat that as correspondence and address it publicly?

-Joe Anastasi, PMLP Director – We can do a number of things but that is one of the reasons why we created and transitioned to the Energy Awareness Forum online – for that exact purpose to contain a list of questions and answers that the public has asked.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – The deadline (on the PMLP website) still says January 21.

– Anastasi – So, it’s out of date. You can still submit a question.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – And then, when will we see the answer? And then, once you publish it after 60 days, where does that answer go?

– Anastasi – Right there on the energy awareness age.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – Well, I can’t seem to find much information on that page. (BCNS checked the page on 3/30 and found the deadline has been updated to: If you ask a question and wish to follow up, please use our Contact Page or call Community Relations at 978-531-5975. https://pmlp.com/229/Energy-Awareness-Forum)

– Anastasi – It’s only because there’s only been two questions asked in two-and-a half ears.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – It’s a bit disheartening when we have to make a deadline and the latest deadline is last January for several months.

– Audience Member – If you don’t answer our questions, then we are really in trouble.

– Anastasi – In my opinion, actions speak louder than words. And, we have made every action in the right direction. If our words are not up to date then we apologize and we’ll be better at that. But, our actions have been unanimously fantastic for the last 50 years and no one is going to make us feel that we haven’t done enough because we’ve done more than almost everyone. We are ahead of the curve.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – And I’ve said you have, but for the one part: lack of public and community engagement. It’s about the future.

– Anastasi – I am very sorry that you feel that way but I disagree that we are not doing enough. I believe we are. I will always try to be better and that’s something that I take on every day of my life. So, we will be better but I don’t accept that we’re not good enough.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – The question that immediately comes to mind: Why are there three pages of public notices in the Weekly News this week from this board and you don’t say one word about it before this meeting or at this meeting. What any of that means,

people don’t understand. (Go to pages 12-14.

– Anastasi – Because a lot goes into those decisions and we barely got it out in time. You’ll find out more information is going to be available tomorrow.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – That’s like saying to me ‘you can see the budget once we pass it.’

– Anastasi – The newspaper article today is about Monday. So it’s not live until Monday.

– D’Amato – Can I add one thing because you have a feeling like we’re not forthcoming or whatnot – not public enough. I have a feeling sometimes like you are looking to trip us up. That we’re under the microscope, that you.. say nice things but it comes across….I can feel that we’re under the microscope with you guys within the last year and a half.

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller = Can I be frank. That’s because…

– Commissioner ? – asks “of 2015A?” (the new 60MW peaker)

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – Because, you don’t share anything with us. You turn off the microphones. The way you treat us and treat public engagement is not very welcoming. So, we’re constantly feeling – we better get there early to make sure the microphones are not

missing again. We better get there early, so we can record this and then people don’t use their microphones so we can’t hear it. It seems no matter what we do, you all are trying to nix it. I’d like to get past that too but that’s been our history since we first found out about the Peabody Peaker. That’s been the history of our interactions. You still have not released your budget. You are publicly elected and you don’t let us see it or talk about it until it’s

been passed?

You ask why we seem to be resisting you? Because other boards don’t do that. They publish their budget. They have a way of communicating. They publish minutes in their entirety, not just a tweaking of the agenda. They record their meetings not necessarily on video but on audio.

– D’Amato – What if everything is the way you wanted and our rates were terrible and our service was terrible? Would that be good?

– BCNS, Sudi Smoller – I’d be here working to address that.

– BCNS: Ron Smoller – Regarding the forum, I truly believe that you are not aware…I’ve sent questions well ahead of what’s shown as the Jan 21 deadline. It’s March 28, there has not been a question posted, including questions that I did send you last September. There should have been a posting in December, it’s a quarterly forum. There should have been answers to questions in December, maybe there weren’t any, mine was before December but it was shortly after. There should been another one (posting) this month, March 21 would be the (traditional) deadline date. It should have been a posting of my questions I submitted before Jan 21. There’s nothing there.

– Anastasi – Every question that has been submitted through the forum is posted on the forum. If you send a question in another fashion it doesn’t …

– BCNS, Ron Smoller – I submitted through the forum, two questions, prior to Jan 21 and they’re still not there. That’s over 60 days. (The two questions, as of 3/30, were not on the update on the Energy Awareness Forum page.)

– Anastasi – I remember seeing them there.

– Audience member – Maybe they are gone now.

– Anastasi – Potentially, that is when we cut over to our new website, maybe.

– BCNS, Ron Smoller – They were meant to be on the Forum…

.Everything I have ever submitted to you ….. I have always followed your rules. I’m always trying to follow all of your rules. I don’t think they’re all great but I get it.

Peabody TV – 8:03 is where BCNS “remarks” begin. Stewart Lazares spoke just prior to 8:03.

Last year, we never saw the complete proposed budget but were provided with a working document and had all of our questions answered before the ’23 PMLP budget was passed. They’ve changed that up this year. Want to know how the PMLP will spend millions and on what? Me too. Not sure when that will happen. Why?

The Commission meets at 6:30PM, 201 Warren St. Ext. PAT coverage of meeting will be available Jan. 26.

(Psst – Seems our spectral visitors are infatuated with the audio of PMLP meetings. Who’s controlling the mics? No volume?! We’re working on it! Stay tuned!) On Halloween, 10/31. the audio was restored. Thanks PAT!

The parcel is located within an Environmental Justice (EJ) Area, census track 2108, with a population of 1,260 in 596 households. The area meets the minority and income characteristics to be identified as an EJ community with a minority population of 43.1% and the median household income is $31,833. Households with language isolation total 16.9%.

PMLP submitted a Release Notification Form to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) on May 25, 2023 indicating that there is or has been a release of Oil and/or Hazardous Material…MassDEP has reason to believe that the subject property or portion(s) thereof is a Disposal Site.”

PMLP has legal responsibilities under state law for assessing and/or remediating the released pollution. A licensed site professional must be employed to manage the necessary actions to remediate the pollution.

“MassDEP encourages parties with liabilities under M.G.L. c. 21E to take prompt action in response to releases and threats of release of Oil and/or Hazardous Material. By taking prompt action, you may significantly lower your assessment and cleanup costs and avoid the imposition of, or reduce the amount of Annual Compliance Fees for Response Actions” payable under law.

Files submitted electronically by PMLP to the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) provide details on the 20 gallon, #2 diesel oil spill that resulted from work on the new power plant.

According to PMLP representative Bryan Howcroft, “The release was caused by a gasket in a pipe flange.  The piping is all new as part of a construction project and the general contractor, Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Elecric Company (MMWEC) construction team made some errors that led to the rupture.”

The release affected crushed stone and two catch basins that daylight into a nearby stream.  A boom was placed into the catch basins.

The stormwater structure is about 40 feet deep and showed signs of petroleum staining and seeping through a small gap between the structure and the manhole.  “However, no sheen or recoverable oil was present in the water…PMLP operators took swift and decisive initial action, catching the release quickly, and immediately deploying absorbents around the spill site,” said DEP Responder Greg Murray. “The action prevented recoverable product from reaching the stormwater system and impacting the nearby wetland.”

The DEP conducted a field excavation and found recoverable oil to be recovered with absorbents as needed and to remove the recoverable released product from the impacted catch basin.  The spill requires the removal of 30 cubic yards of contaminated soil.

It is a critical bill that ensures the equitable distribution of benefits and burdens of the clean energy transition by requiring municipal utilities (also known as Municipal Light Plants (MLPs) to adhere to the same clean energy goals and requirements as Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs). In particular, the bill requires MLPs to meet the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and the Clean Peak Standard (CPS) by 2030 – requirements that the rest of the state is already required to meet. It also establishes a $50 million fund to accelerate the transition to clean energy for environmental justice communities (like Peabody) , low- or moderate-income housing, and elderly housing that are being served by MLPs.

This bill is essential for Massachusetts to meet its own clean energy targets on time and in an equitable and just way. Take action to advance clean energy, equity, and innovation by calling on your elected officials to co-sponsor this important legislation!

Want to learn more?

Let’s bring the powerful, local MLP model into a clean power future!

Like

Comment

Share

What surprised you about the 2023 plan?

S. Smoller, BCNS – I was surprised to find a voice emphasizing climate resiliency. I jumped up and cheered when I read about plans for a Sustainability Committee and hiring a Sustainability Coordinator! And, how do we get PMLP involved with the Sustainability effort?

What is missing from the 2023 plan?

S. Smoller, BCNS – I live in West Peabody but over the past two years I have fallen in love with the East End. There’s nothing in the plan about the Waters River. It’s too bad there are two gas-and-oil burning peaker plants there now. But, they won’t be there on City-owned land forever. One of the plants is slated to close in 2026. The second plant will be closed eventually as burning fossil fuels becomes more regulated. What is the plan for that space? – especially in a neighorhood with two proposed housing developments, a proposed charter middle school and development of a former Superfund site. There’s no public access to the Waters River now. The Danvers Open Space plan also highlighted increasing the access and use of the Waters River.

Let’s focus on the Waters River the way we have given attention to the North River. Lastly, the river is surrounded on both sides by Environmental Justice areas. As we move forward, how are we going to insure that these neighborhoods are not burdened further? We need a climate resiliency voice that reaches out to all the different city departments and helps us work together. Mayor, please hire a Sustainability Director.Draft Open Space Plan: