BRUNSWICK

Lawyers, engineers and expert witnesses squared off Wednesday over a stormwater permit application for a controversial passenger train layover facility in Brunswick.

Attorney John Shumadine represents the Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition in their fight against plans by the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority to build the facility in their area.

“I think they haven’t done enough of an investigation that they need to do,” said Shumadine, speaking with reporters. “There’s a lot of missing materials in the application. It just hasn’t been thorough enough for them to meet the standards and be entitled to receive the permit.”

Wednesday’s hearing for intervenors was the first of two proceedings held that day by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection. Intervenors include those deemed by the state to be “substantially and directly affected” by the project or a government agency.

NNEPRA Executive Director Patricia Quinn has stated that the permit is the only thing holding up the project’s construction.

During Wednesday’s hearing, much of the testimony revolved around technical minutiae of NNEPRA’s stormwater plan.

Trains carrying 1,800 gallons of fuel will typically refuel one-third to one-half of their tanks while at the facility, via a vendor’s fuel truck at the site. About 330 to 440 gallons of lubricating oil will be stored on-site.

During at times conten- tious testimony and cross-examination, Shumadine noted the site sits over a “signficant” sand and gravel aquifer, and maintained there could be more runoff than predicted by NNEPRA, depending on the soil at the site.

Rick Pershken, a geologist and engineer testifying for the opposition, said that aspects of NNEPRA’s application were incomplete or outdated, and he noted that there was no plan for addressing groundwater contaminants that “may be mobilized during construction.”

However, engineer Steve Bushey, who designed the stormwater management, said he wouldn’t change anything in the application submitted to DEP.

“I’m comfortable with what we’ve designed,” Bushey said.

The site was first developed for use by the railroad as far back as 1850, according to geologist Steve Marcotte. Coal ash was used as fill at the site, and an underground petroleum storage tank was removed in 1991.

NNEPRA witnesses testified that there has been no evidence of significant groundwater impacts as a result of past use of the site.

Questioning at the hearing was at times contentious, such as this exchange between Shumadine and Marcotte over oil contamination:

“Isn’t it true that there’s the potential for other contaminants on the property” in addition to coal ash, said Shumadine.

“There’s no evidence,” replied Marcotte.

“That wasn’t my question,” said Shumadine.

“There’s the potential for petroleum release anywhere,” said Marcotte.

Speaking for the opposition, David Snyder of Mance Railway Specialists testified that the Downeaster will be bringing to the facility contaminants picked up along the rails on its daily trips to Boston.

Locomotive exhaust within an enclosed building would create an untenable working environment, Snyder said, before acknowledging under cross-examination that the facility’s purpose is to allow the engines to power down.

The battle over the permit is a last stand for neighbors who don’t want the 52,000-square-foot, $12.2 million train shed in their vicinity.

“It is a contaminated site,” said Charlie Wallace, who is not a Brunswick West member, but had plans to build a 10-house subdivision in the area.

The site had been used for decades by freight companies, and proponents say the facility will eliminate the need for trains to idle along Cedar Street, which has drawn the ire of those in that neighborhood.

Wallace disagreed, stating that diesel engines inside the facility will “release toxic, partially burned diesel fuel and soot, which will settle out on and off site and contaminate the surroundings, which will be exhausted from the building without any treatment or filtration whatsoever. It’s going to make the situation worse.”

There are low-impact alternatives such as idle-stop technology, said Wallace.

However, Quinn noted that trains must idle when temperatures drop below 40, and that bringing the trains inside in order to shut them down would eliminate the need to idle them.

Speaking with reporters, Quinn said she was confident that NNEPRA would get its permit.

“We’re really trying to make this the best facility that it really can be,” Quinn said. “What the team has demonstrated here today is that we’ve always, throughout this process, taken the comments of the public seriously. … Our desire at the end of the day is to build a facility that does not have a negative impact on the surrounding community, and is actually an asset to the community.”

Patricia Aho, who attended both hearings but, with the exception of a few pointed questions, was mostly silent, will ultimately rule on the application.

Aho held a hearing because she was wanted an open process that would allow intervenors and the public to express their opinions, said DEP Director of Communications David Madore. It wasn’t done at the behest of any other state official, including the governor.

DEP will now review information provided during the hearing and wait two to three weeks for a transcript of the hearing to be produced.

A decision may not be reached for another two months or more, said Madore. “We can’t predict a really hard date,” he said.

jswinconeck@timesrecord.com