Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

NEW BEDFORD — The Conservation Law Foundation announced it will help defend the New Bedford Board of Health’s decision against an appeal by South Coast Renewables, LLC, the latest update in a long-running saga over a controversial waste transfer station proposal.

The environmental nonprofit filed a motion Monday to intervene in the appeal on behalf of New Bedford community members who have long opposed the project “to continue ensuring that local residents and public health remain at the forefront of this fight.” The organization will act as a third party with an interest in the outcome of the appeal, while the city solicitor will defend the board itself.

“The Board of Health already looked at the facts – and the truth is, the facts are on the community’s side,” Alexandra St. Pierre, director of communities and toxics at the Conservation Law Foundation, said in a statement. “This facility is unnecessary and doesn’t belong in New Bedford. It’s an intrusive operation trying to force its way into a place that has clearly said ‘no.’ This appeal is an insult to the people who have fought so hard to protect their homes, their health, and their future.”

South Coast Renewables, also known as Parallel Products, filed an appeal in October after the Board of Health rejected its proposal for a waste transfer station at 100 Duchaine Blvd. in mid-September. If approved, the station would have sorted roughly 1,500 tons of solid waste per day before its final destination at out-of-state landfills or incinerators — making it the largest waste transfer facility in the state. The Conservation Law Foundation had intervened on the original proposal before the board, representing nearly a dozen New Bedford residents who opposed the project.

During the lengthy public hearing process, the Conservation Law Foundation cross-examined witnesses brought forth by South Coast Renewables who claimed the transfer station would be minimally disruptive to nearby residents. The nonprofit had also attempted to bring forth a rodent control expert, but South Coast Renewables succeeded in striking down the witness testimony. 

In a 2-1 vote, board members ultimately denied the project, citing concerns about fire, air quality, traffic, and rodent control. The decision came after more than 300 New Bedford residents turned out to a public meeting in August, the vast majority of which vocally opposed another waste transfer station in the city.

The Conservation Law Foundation credited the board’s decision in part to the long-running mobilization efforts against the proposal by local activist group South Coast Neighbors United.

“We know what it takes to win – because we’ve done it before,” St. Pierre added. “It takes a community with a strong voice and an unwavering spirit. That’s the fuel behind this legal battle, and it’s why we’re confident justice will prevail again.”

Editor’s note: Adam Brodsky is the attorney representing the Board of Health in this appeal. A previous version of the story incorrectly reported the board’s legal representation.

Email Brooke Kushwaha at bkushwaha@newbedfordlight.org.