WINSLOW -- The long anticipated removal of Fort Halifax Dam appeared to clear its final hurdle last month when the Planning Board signed off on FPL Energy's breaching plan.

But two appeals submitted by residents Monday open the plan to a new round of scrutiny.

"Obviously, they have a right to appeal," Town Manager Michael Heavener said. "That is part of the process."

Town Attorney William A. Lee said the Zoning Board of Appeals has 35 days in which to hold a public meeting on the appeals and then another 35 days to render a decision after closing hearings on the matter.

A group of 38 residents, including Rep. Kenneth Fletcher, R-Winslow, submitted a nine-page appeal of the Planning Board decision, arguing that the board failed to upheld the town's shoreland zoning ordinance in several key areas.

Resident Jane Edwards submitted the second appeal, this one concerning a potential public health concern involving chromium.

Fletcher founded Save Our Sebasticook (SOS), a group that has fought against Fort Halifax Dam's removal for about seven years.

SOS consists primarily of residents, many of them property owners on the Fort Halifax impoundment, including Fletcher.

But Fletcher said only about half the people who submitted the nine-page appeal are SOS members and 25 percent don't live on the impoundment.

The appeal, Fletcher said, is not him leading an SOS initiative.

"I am just purely there to help the people in this community who have come forward -- 35 plus -- and said they don't think the Planning Board decision is consistent with the terms of the ordinance as written," he said.

The citizens' group appeal challenges rulings in seven separate sections of the shoreland zoning ordinance.

The most notable of the challenges concerns the board's actions regarding the Dallaire Street riverbank and the decision to allow the Fort Halifax powerhouse to remain -- planners insisted the rest of the dam be removed in its entirety, to which FPL Energy agreed.

Fletcher said the appeal argues that the Planning Board failed to go far enough to ensure the safety of six Dallaire Street homes that sit on the riverbank.

The slope is known to be unstable, he said, and yet planners did not demand that FPL Energy takes steps to strengthen that bank.

Instead, he said, they simply required that the energy company monitor the bank for signs of collapsing.

"The ordinance says maintain public safety and welfare," Fletcher said. "It doesn't say monitor and hopefully prevent somebody from being injured."

The appeal also argues the powerhouse, which protrudes into the river, could present a hazard for those traveling the river, as well as pose a safety issue for people who gained access to the building.

In the appeal, the group requests that the Dallaire Street riverbank be secured to eliminate the risk of slumping and that the powerhouse be removed.

The group also argues that FPL Energy should submit a detailed dam removal safety plan.

Also called into question in the appeal are decisions regarding erosion control, aquatic and wildlife, historic sites, and public access to the river.

Fletcher praised the Planning Board's efforts -- the review process stretched about four months -- but said planners failed to enforce the ordinance fully because FPL Energy submitted incomplete or incorrect information.

"Even though the Planning Board worked long hours, they were not given the opportunity to have full advantage of all the facts in their deliberations," the appeal group stated in a release. " The action to appeal the Planning Board decision is needed to ensure that the people of Winslow are protected and that their interests are fully considered."

Edwards, who lives on Garland Road, centered her appeal on chromium concerns.

She said that both the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Maine Department of Environmental Protection raised concerns that draining of the impoundment could cause chromium in the sediment to be a public health concern -- especially if exposure to air causes chromium 3 to oxidize into the more dangerous chromium 6.

Yet the Planning Board did not address the issue, she wrote.

Edwards called for a study to examine the safety implications of exposing contaminated sediments, as well as steps to take to protect residents and those involved with dam removal from such exposure.

Colin Hickey -- 861-9205

chickey@centralmaine.com