12-5-07

Walpole Zoning Board Weighs Chamberlain Rehearing Bid Tonight

Challenge to October Board Decision on Special Zoning Exception

By Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

          Not satisfied with the Zoning Board’s granting of a special zoning exception to allow Chamberlain Machine from Rockingham VT to build a new machine shop on Walpole land otherwise zoned rural agricultural, a citizens’ group will argue in a special 7:30 p.m. Zoning Board meeting tonight that the Board should set a new hearing on the matter to hear more evidence at a later date.

          “We are not challenging whether Chamberlain is a well-run company, but the Board needs to look at their operation more fully,” according to citizens’ group leader Dr. Jennifer Palmiotto. 

          In commenting two weeks ago on the new action, Chamberlain manager Chris Miller repeated his position stated in the October Zoning Board meeting “we don’t produce or handle any hazardous material.” 

          Dr. Palmiotto, a Walpole resident who is appearing as an individual in this matter, works professionally as Lead Staff Officer and Source Water Protection Specialist for Granite State Rural Water Association and assisted Walpole in 2002 in drawing up its wellhead protection plan. She is joined in the petition for rehearing by Walpole residents Dr. Peter Palmiotto who teaches Environmental Sciences at Antioch New England Graduate School in Keene, John Hansel, Clancy Houghton and Delores and Chas Street.

“While the Zoning Board visited Chamberlain before the October meeting,” noted Jennifer Palmiotto, “they never actually inventoried the types and quantities of solvents the company uses and stores on site.  We need to see their Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) to see what they actually use and how much of it they keep on site.”

The citizens’ petition for rehearing notes that the special exception site is in the Walpole wellhead protection district and cites Sec. 3, sub-section J. of the Town Well Source Protection Ordinance that prohibits, “All on site handling, disposal, storage, processing or recycling of hazardous or toxic materials”.  Palmiotto observes that machine shops traditionally have used toxic materials for cleaning and lubricating their machines. The ordinance itself says that it is “intended to limit the uses of land so designated [under well source protection] to those that will not adversely affect water quality by contamination or water quantity by preventing recharge of the aquifer.”

“Even if the current Chamberlain owners and management appreciate well head safety, there is no telling how future or different owners might view it,” concludes Palmiotto.  “We just do not think allowing this plant at this site makes sense.”

Mr. Miller further stated that the facts surrounding Chamberlain’s production processes “were well-represented at the October public hearing, and any issues were or could have been raised at that time.  Most of the solvents and other fluids we use are aqueous based, and we recycle all of it.  We use it until it is not further usable and then we send it back to the supplier.”

Miller did note that “once upon a time fluids as well as ‘chips’—industry jargon for metal shavings and other scraps—were land filled, but we don’t do any of that any more. The fact is that all of our metal shavings are pretty valuable by-products now.  Every two weeks we ship metal to recyclers.”

                              --30--