November 16, 2004, Front Page

For more information, contact:

Bradley Angel Greenaction

(415) 248-5010

HANFORD - Some say they are left out of the loop. Others say they are being lied to.

Irate citizens have been protesting for four months about the way a New Castle company has been allowed to proceed with its plan to build a plastic-to-diesel conversion plant near Hanford.

At a forum Monday night, people had a chance to vent their collective frustration to a company official and regulatory agencies involved in the permit process.

" Once again, they're trying to do it to us, and it's not fair ... We fought when an incinerator was proposed in Kettleman City which was about to go through without the public being informed," said Daisy Gaona, a member of Kings County Residents United for Health, a group that organized the forum. "I know what we fought for, and I know we need to fight this time because when you have a public meeting or public hearing, they're not here to educate us. We have to be aware of what will be built in our back yard."

The Plastic Energy LLC's plan is not new, but it became controversial this summer as a group of citizens and Bay Area green activists began staging a protest. Last night was the first time - in all three years the project has been under progress - that all the key players gathered at one sitting at the request of the community. The forum was attended by more than 40 people, including concerned citizens as well as the project backers.

Plastic Energy wants to build a plant on the Kings Waste and Recycling Authority grounds on Hanford-Armona Road that uses a new technology to convert discarded plastics into ultra low-sulfur diesel fuel. If the plant is built, it will be the first of its kind in the United States.

But environmental concerns as much as lack of transparency in the process have been the points of contention.

Residents say the company has not been upfront with them, nor has the government been helpful. The backers - like the Kings Waste and Recycling Authority and Kings County Economic Development Corporation - say people had enough chance to get informed, arguing that at least 27 public meetings have been held since 2001.But residents who live near the project say that hasn't helped.

" They were never forthright," said David Clacher, who lives just east of the project. "There was no information that came out. The public meetings were spun around legal semantics. They lied to us because it doesn't look like the golden child business like they say it is. It looks very dangerous. We need to do something to get rid of the plastics, but this is not the correct thing given the current state of technology."

Teresa Barbeiro, who lives just south of the project site, complained about lack of outreach.

" I was not aware of any Plastic Energy plant that is going to be put in my back yard until I saw news on TV [in August]," Barbeiro said. "The fact of the matter is, I live in that community and I have children, and I'm very concerned about the toxic waste that could be coming out of that facility."

The company has long maintained a position that it has done enough by following all the proper legal procedures. But it now admits it should have made better efforts to inform and involve the public.

" I'm here acknowledging that the better job should've been done in public outreach to folks like you in this room," said George Larson, a partner of the company who came to the forum. "We felt like we complied with laws and permits, but I understand your message. I get it loud and clear."

Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice, a San Francisco-based activist group, has been behind the protest against the project. And it has had an effect.

The project is on hold after hitting a series of major setbacks in August. Amid a public outcry over emission concerns, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District suspended the permit to construct. When the company submitted a revised plan, the district rescinded all the permits issued, citing the changing nature of the project.

In essence, it's back to square one for Plastic Energy to prove the project meets all state air emissions standards.
Larson said the company is currently gathering data necessary to complete the new project design and permit application.

" We don't have a project right now, and we're working toward getting that project resurrected satisfying the questions and issues," Larson said.

The company has promised Greenaction that it will hold a similar public forum as soon as it submits a new plan, Larson said. But that will be sometime after March next year, he added.

" Once we're up and running, then you have absolute data coming from that project," Larson said. "You have every opportunity to monitor and evaluate, and if it doesn't meet the rules for air quality in California, they'll shut us down. We're not doing this to get shut down; we're doing this to keep waste from being disposed of, save finite resources of petroleum and produce diesel fuel and probably make a buck or two."