Planning board raises water‑safety and containment concerns for M & M terminal fuel tank

The North Smithfield Planning Board reviewed a pre‑application for the M & M Transportation Services terminal at 44 Railroad Street after the company constructed fueling pads and an aboveground Enviro‑vault fuel tank without completing the full permitting sequence.

Damien Dimitryk of Conoco Engineers and Scientists, appearing for the applicant, described a 10,000‑gallon Enviro‑vault protected aboveground storage tank and two fueling pads that were built and said monitoring wells have been installed and initial groundwater tests showed no current contamination concerns. He said the applicant is seeking to lawfully permit the completed work and will submit a unified plan development review application with a special use permit under the town’s unified plan process.

Board members raised multiple concerns about the site’s location inside a wellhead protection/water‑overlay district, the tank’s unpermitted installation, and the potential consequences of a large spill on groundwater and downstream water bodies. Dr. Benoit and other members stressed the need for tertiary containment and robust stormwater controls; one board member suggested researching an underground bladder or other tertiary containment able to hold the tank’s full volume.

Planner Mark Carrillo and the applicant’s engineer described proposed mitigation measures including replacing or upgrading catch basins, installing trench drains and proprietary water‑quality units (vortex separators), adding positive limiting barriers around fueling pads and additional bollards, and maintaining monitoring wells. The applicant said the tank currently contains no fuel and that the concrete pads and tank were installed in 2023. The engineer said the tank is in an aboveground concrete vault and that monitoring and alarms are part of the system, but promised to submit manufacturer specifications and design documentation in the next application.

Board members asked for additional documentation before formal approval: full manufacturer specifications for the tank (double‑wall construction and containment details); soil/subgrade and slab construction records or cores to verify the pad and subgrade; stormwater design showing how runoff and potential spills would be contained and treated; an evaluation of bollard placement and vehicle maneuvering to prevent accidental impact; and a containment plan that demonstrates capacity to contain a large release (the tank’s 10,000‑gallon capacity was cited repeatedly).

The board did not vote. Members said they were conceptually amenable to permitting the tank and related fueling infrastructure if the forthcoming application demonstrates compliance with wellhead protection standards and includes the requested containment and stormwater safeguards. The board recommended the applicant pursue further design detail, consider tertiary containment options (including a bladder), and coordinate as needed with the state permitting authority and the town’s building and fire officials before returning for a formal application.

The applicant estimated the additional impervious area at roughly 6,500 square feet and said the proposed drainage improvements would aim to minimize net increases in stormwater runoff; the board pressed for precise calculations and documentation as part of the next submission.