Question and Submission History

We completely agree, and we want you to hold us to that standard. Since we do not live in Charlton, we rely on local residents to tell us what matters. We aim to protect the local environment and act as a good neighbor throughout this process.

Yes. We have modified the site design since our first petition to amend the zoning bylaws for an energy storage overlay, transitioning from Megapack 2XL units to Megapack 3 units. We believe the Megapack 3 design offers the best solution for several reasons. It features safety improvements and a more efficient physical footprint. Its integrated design also means the manufacturer delivers it from the factory ready to install with inverters, transformers, and switchgear built directly into the unit. Having said that, we remain willing to investigate other designs with community input because many other battery storage options exist.

The plan is being drafted so that each funded item states its purpose, amount, recipient, and how it is enforced, and a public tracker shows whether the project delivers on it. Committee members have told us that specificity is what distinguished past promises that were kept from those that were not, and the plan is being drafted to that standard.

Environmental impact. The project requires site development, vegetation clearing, and stormwater management. Clearing outside the transmission right-of-way is limited to no more than 10 acres of a 47-acre parcel. Hydrology and stormwater studies, a sound study, a cumulative impact analysis, and a site suitability analysis are part of the state process and will be public. State reviewers have asked for a formal wetland delineation and a rare species information request.

Local benefits. The facility supports the regional grid, not only Charlton, and local benefits come through the Community Benefits Plan, which residents are shaping. Topics under discussion include payments to the town, fire equipment and training, senior center support, tree replanting, local hiring, and road bonding. The draft plan has 34 open decisions, and comments are open into 2027.

Long-term stakeholders and local voice. ESA expects to sell the project to a long-term owner. Permit conditions, the decommissioning bond, and the commitments in the public tracker are written to bind any future owner. Residents have a role in the Citizen Advisory Committee, at public meetings, in the comment period, and in the state's formal hearings.

Independent review. The Energy Facilities Siting Board conducts the state review, which includes public hearings and environmental review. An independent third-party review of the Emergency Action Plan is committed, selected by the town and paid for by the project.

The comment is recorded in the engagement log. Charlton's bylaw limits battery projects to 5 megawatts, and this one is 150, so the state's Energy Facilities Siting Board reviews it and can issue a consolidated approval covering some local permits. Many residents object to that, and the objection is recorded. The state process includes public comment and hearings, and the town can take part. Residents can comment on the draft Community Benefits Plan into 2027, and every comment receives a written response.