MAMAKATING – In what appears to be a deliberate attempt to subvert town code, Porco Energy, a propane and oil distribution company out of Marlboro, which is in the process of building a storage facility on Route 209 in Mamakating, submitted a site plan to the town building department that was not approved by the town planning board, according to Mary Grass, the town building inspector. Grass made the statement at last week's planning board meeting that the plans she was given by the company were significantly different than the ones on which the planning board had signed off, and that she felt that there was no way this could be a simple oversight.

Grass had been criticized by some members of the community who had wondered why her department had issued a building permit to Porco when the actual construction deviated significantly from the drawings the planning board had approved. The fact that Grass's office had been working with the wrong plans would appear to offer a good explanation for this discrepancy.

The original plans called for three smaller propane tanks, as opposed to the two larger ones that are currently at the site. The plans had also called for the tanks to be farther from the road, and that a safety berm to be constructed along Route 209.

Another issue regarding the Porco site — and what would appear to be a deliberate flouting of the law — has to do with the fact that the company has been storing propane in these tanks, even though no certificate of occupancy had been issued, meaning that the accompanying safety inspections were not performed. In fact, the company currently has as many as 4,000 gallons of propane illegally stored in these tanks.

Joe Porco, one of the principals of the company, stated that the situation arose from a misunderstanding regarding the tanks.

"We thought we had been approved for up to a certain amount of storage space," Porco said.

Originally, the drawings had called for the tanks to be larger — but of a smaller diameter — than the tanks that were installed in late 2008. Porco said that the company had an opportunity to obtain tanks from a close-by facility in Pennsylvania, which significantly lowered the shipping costs, and that the company was simply hoping to save money. Porco also stated that the he was unaware that a certificate of occupancy was needed in order to begin using the tanks for storage, and that he thought it applied only to the other aspects of the building site — maintenance sheds and the like.

Porco went on to say that the company will now do everything within its power to adhere to town code, as well as satisfy skeptical town officials. He also stated that the rest of the propane currently stored in the tanks would be removed within the next several weeks.

Planning Board Chairman John Piazza said that he was not familiar with the drawings Grass's office had received, stating that he had "never seen them," so he couldn't back Grass's assertion regarding the swapped plans. He did say, however, that the planning board is still determined to work with Porco in order to bring the project back into compliance with town code and that the presence of the company in the town would offer an important source of tax revenue.

"They obviously made some mistakes, but they're back in front of the planning board making their best efforts," Piazza said. "We're looking to rectify the situation in the best interests of the town."

Other town officials were less sanguine about the situation, however. Town Supervisor Robert Fiore stated that he wanted to see Porco "do the right thing," and that he wants the company to take responsibility for its actions.

"I want them to know that they've violated the law," Fiore said. "I also want them to respond appropriately."

Fiore said that he would use the full weight of his office to ensure that the building site meets planning board specifications, especially regarding the relocation of the tanks that are currently at the site.

"I'm going to insist that they move the tanks," he said.

Fiore also said that he will not hesitate when it comes to his office doing everything necessary to ensure compliance.

"[Porco] didn't hesitate in putting in the tanks improperly, or putting in the wrong tanks, or following a plan that was not approved, so we aren't going to hesitate in insisting that Porco redress the problem," Fiore said.

The situation with Porco has also prompted a procedural change when it comes to communication between the planning board and the town building department. In the past, it was up to the applicant to forward an approved site plan to the building department, with the town relying upon the honesty and competency of each applicant to ensure the proper drawings were filed and no mistakes were made. This loophole has since been closed. Now, all drawings will come directly from the planning board, thereby ensuring that a mistake — or an intentional switch — will not be possible in the future.

Currently the Porco site sits idle, as the company was hit with a 'stop work' order back in December after it had been determined that building site did not conform to the approved planning board drawings.