Court challenge to Meath biomass heat and power plant is lost

Thirteen local residents have lost their High Court challenge to the granting of planning permission for the construction of a biomass heat and power plant in Nobber, Co Meath.

Mr Justice Michael Moriarty said he understood the anxiety of local people abou the development, however he ruled their legal complaints were unfounded.

The residents, who live in the townlands of Nobber, Kingscourt and Kilmainhamwood, sought to quash the decision of An Bord Pleanala granting permission for the development by College Proteins Ltd, a biowaste management company, of the Combined Heat and Power Plant, and associated ash landfill facility, near its existing meat rendering plant in the townlands of College and Rathgillen, College Road, Nobber.

The case was against the Board and the State with Meath Co Council and College Proteins Ltd as notice parties.

The residents claimed there was a failure to properly transpose the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive into Irish law.

College Proteins first applied for permission for the proposed development in May 2009. An oral hearing in October 2009 ran for 18 days before an inspector of the Board, who, on May 5th, 2010, recommended permission for the development be refused. Alternatively, the inspector said, the board could seek further information about a number of issues of concern.

After getting the relevant information from the company, An Bord Pleanala granted permission for the development.

In his judgment, Mr Justice Moriarty ruled the residents concerns about the EIA “do not arise as a matter of fact or as a matter of law”.

On the basis of the evidence before the court, it was neither fair nor accurate to assert the Board says that the inspector’s report is the only EIA, or that no EIA took place, he said.

He said the EIA was an evolving process and it was clear the Board’s assessment of the environmental impacts was informed, not only by the inspector’s initial report, but by further information, submissions and reports by the board’s inspector and external consultant.

The issue of liability for costs will be decided later.