RPL-East LLC is in the process of purchasing the power plant property (130 Acres located on River Road in the I-3 Zone) of Upper Mt. Bethel Township.  They have also signed an agreement with the Bangor Area Commercial and Industrial Development Authority (BACIDA) to have them file applications for EPA grant monies.  The purpose of these grants is to assess this Brownfield site in order to estimate the cleanup costs.  While a noble cause, the path that the participants are taking has a potential to create financial liabilities for the BACIDA and potentially the municipalities they represent.  RPL-East is asking the BACIDA to take “Temporary Title” to the property that they are purchasing under a non-disclosure agreement.

Owners have responsibilities for brownfield cleanup and as such, BACIDA having ownership (through a temporary title) raises the risk of being drawn into the cleanup.  Because of the non-disclosure agreement, it is not known what the original owner’s responsibilities for cleanup are.   There is presumably both above and below ground contamination on this site not yet discovered.  Phase II testing could disturb this contamination or worse, determine that it is moving underground.  This would require long term management. 

Brownfield clean ups can run into the tens of millions of dollars and if insurance policies are not adequate to cover these costs, the municipalities represented by the BACIDA may be responsible for the outstanding balance.  RPL-East is an LLC and therefore would have some protection against this liability where the municipalities would not.  Agreements of this type should not be entered into without conducting the necessary due diligence prior to entering into one. 

We the undersigned residents of the municipalities represented by the BACIDA, and who’s tax funds may be impacted by the BACIDA, wish to voice are objections to the following:

A.   The BACIDA approving such an agreement without the review and approval of the municipality attorneys.

B.   The BACIDA applying for grants for a private organization under the “guise” of a temporary title to the property.

C.   The BACIDA conducting meetings with RPL-East LLC without sufficient notification to the public as to their occurrence and agenda to allow for full public participation.

D.  The BACIDA applying for Federal EPA Grants for Phase II assessments without first having a municipality approved development plan that has been vetted through the LVPC.

E.   The BACIDA employing a staff paid for by RPL-East to administrate the agreement that does not include:

a.   An Environmental Attorney and,

b.   Municipal planners

F.    The BACIDA failure to conduct due diligence with regard to RPL-East and other shell companies affiliated with Mr. L. Pektor.

G.  The BACIDA failure to consider ramifications if cleanup cannot be completed as planned if additional contamination or contamination movement is discovered in Phase II testing.