Thank you for providing a link that backs my point,

https://pbn.com/dem-denies-permit-for-contest...ent-plant/

Now all thesexoncerns existed when RI-DEM intended to approve the project.

Quote:

---

The DEM decision also pointed to several inconsistencies and deficiencies in the application, such as how much waste will be stored at the facility and how rejected waste will be handled. The application also contained “insufficient detail and specifics” about contingency plans, which were also not submitted to the applicable town fire departments; biological testing protocols to determine if the process to store and treat waste meets state and federal regulations; closure costs and what will happen to the waste if the plant shuts down; and buffer areas between the site and neighboring properties, according to DEM.

---

Yet RI-DEM was satisfied with how SNPW would handle those situations, other wise they would have denied and not intent to approve the project.allowing it to reach its final stage.

And as the article clearly states

Quote:

---

Opposition to the project was also the inspiration behind legislation passed by the General Assembly that limits where high heat waste treatment facilities can operate, preventing them from opening near schools, child care centers, residential-zoned areas and open space or water, among other areas.

The DEM in its decision cited this law, which was signed by Gov. Daniel J. McKee, as additional support for its denial.

DEM said the “clear prohibitionary language of the law” applies to the project, which is located near residential areas, an elementary school, the New England Institute of Technology and a golf course.

---