OAKHAM, Mass.- State senator Peter Durant and state representative Donald Berthiaume Jr. are raising concerns about a proposed 180-megawatt battery storage facility in Oakham.
The lawmakers outlined their concerns in a September 8 letter to the Energy Facilities Siting Board, which is reviewing the project.
The proposed Moraga Energy Storage facility would be built at 358 Coldbrook Road, on the site of a former auto salvage yard, according to the company.
Durant and Berthiaume said their offices have heard concerns from residents in Oakham, Barre and surrounding communities since the project was first proposed. They said residents living closest to the site are among their constituents.
The lawmakers also raised concerns about a watershed they said is located about half a mile from the proposed site and serves 53 communities.
They asked the Siting Board to carefully consider whether state intervention in the local permitting process is justified. They argued that state review should not replace local permitting while local officials are still carrying out their legal authority to review the project.
The lawmakers also noted that several permits identified by Moraga Storage had not yet been filed when the company submitted its Certificate petition. They asked whether it is appropriate to replace local permitting processes before local agencies have had a meaningful opportunity to complete their reviews.
Moraga Storage said it filed its initial petition with the Siting Board in March 2025, seeking exemptions from Oakham’s zoning bylaw. The company later filed an application for a Certificate of Environmental Impact and Public Interest on June 30, 2026.
According to the company, the Siting Board’s June 26, 2026, decision found that the project is necessary, would provide public benefits and met the applicable standard for public convenience or welfare after an evaluation of its environmental and public safety impacts.
Durant and Berthiaume said they submitted their letter as elected representatives of the affected community. They said they do not seek intervenor or limited participant status and do not speak on behalf of the Town of Oakham, its boards or any party to the proceeding.
Subscribe to The Shrewsbury Post Updates
