|
0001
1
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
2
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING
3
AIR PERMIT TO INSTALL FOR
4
FDS COKING
5
6
- - -
7
8
Transcript of the Public Hearing taken in
9 the above-captioned
matter, conducted by Hearing
10 Officer
Mary McCarron, taken before Nicole D.
11 Blaker,
Registered Merit Reporter and Notary
12 Public
in and for the State of Ohio, at the Oregon
13 City
Hall, Seaman Road, Oregon, Ohio, on Thursday,
14 May 13,
2004, commencing at 8:32 p.m.
15
- - -
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0002
1 OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
Mary McCarron
2 Public Interest
Center
P.O. Box 1049
3 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 (614)
644-2160
4
- - -
5
MS. MCCARRON:
The purpose of this public
6
hearing is to accept comments on the official
7
record regarding a permit to install four coke
8
batteries at the proposed FDS Coking plant in
9
Oregon, Lucas County.
If approved, the permit
10
would allow the installation of four coke
11
batteries consisting of 240 coke ovens that would
12
produce 1.44 million tons of coke. The permit
13
would regulate the following pollutants: Carbon
14
monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile
15
organic compounds, particulate matter, hazardous
16
air pollutants, and lead.
17
Ohio EPA published a public notice to
18
announce the hearing and public comment period
19
regarding the expansion -- or the permit
20
application in newspapers in the area. This
21
notice was issued in Ohio EPA's Weekly Review,
22
which is a publication that lists, by county, all
23
agency activities and actions taking place in the
24
State of Ohio.
25
Written
and oral comments received as part
0003
1
of the official record are reviewed by Ohio EPA
2
prior to a final action of the director. To be
3
included in the official record written comments
4
must be received by Ohio EPA by the close of
5
business on May 24th, 2004. Comments received
6
after this date may be considered as time and
7
circumstances permit but will not be part of the
8
official record for this hearing.
9
Written comments can be filed with me
10
tonight or submitted to Matt Stanfield, Toledo
11
Division of Environmental Services, 348 South Erie
12
Street, Toledo, Ohio, 43602, and this address can
13
be found on your agenda for this evening.
14
It is important for you to know that all
15
comments received in writing at the agency, all
16
written comments given to me tonight, and all
17
verbal comments given here tonight are given the
18
same consideration.
I ask that all exhibits,
19
including written speeches, maps, photographs,
20
overheads, and any other physical evidence
21
referred to in your testimony be submitted to me
22
tonight as part of the official record. If you
23
choose not to submit the information, Ohio EPA
24
cannot ensure the accuracy of your testimony. A
25
court reporter is here to make a stenographic
0004
1
record of tonight's proceedings.
2
Questions and comments made at the public
3
hearing will be responded to in a document known
4
as a responsiveness summary. The director, after
5
taking into consideration the recommendations of
6
the program staff and comments presented by the
7
public, may issue or deny the permit. Once a
8
final decision is made by the director, the final
9
permit decision, along with the responsiveness
10
summary, will be communicated to the applicant,
11
all persons who have submitted comments, and all
12
persons who present testimony at tonight's
13
hearing.
14
Final actions of the director are
15
appealable to the Environmental Review Appeals
16
Commission or ERAC.
This board is separate from
17
the Ohio EPA and reviews cases in accordance with
18
Ohio's environmental laws and rules. Any ERAC
19
decision is appealable to the Franklin County
20
Court of Appeals.
Any Court of Appeals order is
21
appealable to the Supreme Court of Ohio.
22
If you wish to present testimony at this
23
hearing tonight and have not already completed a
24
blue card, please do so at this time and return it
25
to me or another Ohio EPA representative, and the
0005
1
cards are available at the registration table.
2
Each individual may testify only once, so
3
I ask that you use your time wisely and that you
4
are respectful of others providing their comments
5
and questions.
There is no cross examination of
6
the speaker or Ohio EPA representatives in public
7
hearings of this type.
Ohio EPA's public hearings
8
afford citizens an opportunity to provide input.
9
Therefore, we will not be able to answer questions
10
during this hearing.
The hearing officer or an
11
Ohio EPA representative may ask clarifying
12
questions of speakers to ensure the record is as
13
complete and accurate as possible. If you have a
14
question, please phrase your comments in the form
15
of a question and the agency will address your
16
concerns in writing within the responsiveness
17
summary.
18
Out of courtesy for elected officials here
19
tonight, I request that they make themselves known
20
to me at this time, which I believe I have a
21
number of cards from elected officials, and I will
22
give them the chance to testify first.
23
We will now be receiving testimony. The
24
first card
I have received is Mayor Brown.
25
MAYOR BROWN: Thank
you. First of all, I
have
0006
1
a letter from Commissioner Thurber that she wishes
2
to be read into the record.
3
Please accept this letter in lieu of my
4
appearance at this hearing. I would like to voice
5
my personal support of the U.S. Coking Group's
6
plant being proposed in Lucas County.
7
This project is not only a tremendous
8
economic benefit for Lucas County but for the
9
entire United States.
A new coke plant will be an
10
important step in making the U.S. less dependent
11
on foreign coke.
Currently the U.S. imports a
12
significant portion of coke for steel production.
13
However, throughout the world coke is scarce and
14
is considered a strategic commodity to any economy
15
that includes an industrial manufacturing base.
16
This project is not destroying a
17
greenfield piece of property such as a farm field
18
or wooded land.
This plant will take full
19
advantage of an underutilized brownfield site. In
20
addition, Lucas County is one of the few places on
21
the Great Lakes that offer the infrastructure
22
needed for this project. The site is ideally
23
suited for this type of facility because we offer
24
rail access, seaport access, freeway access,
25
proximity
to markets, infrastructure, parcel size,
0007
1
zoning, water, and, most importantly, a skilled
2
and dedicated workforce.
3
Not only will the project create between
4
150 to 200 permanent jobs, but the approximate 350
5
million dollar investment will also create about
6
1,000 badly needed construction jobs for the
7
various skilled trades of our area.
8
The Ohio EPA recently reviewed and issued
9
a draft approval for the coke plant's air permit
10
to install, meaning that the emissions controls
11
from the plant will meet the Clean Air Act
12
regulations.
This plant will use the most
13
innovative and environmentally sound technology
14
available, including the best available controls
15
technology to minimize air emissions.
16
I have confidence, after reviewing the
17
proposal for the plant, that the proper
18
environmental concerns are being addressed in the
19
plant design, the equipment specifications,
20
specifically, flat push technology, and in the
21
operation, once the plant is built. I urge the
22
approval of the permit to install. And I will
23
give you this when I give you mine.
24
After many months -- this is mine, okay.
25
After many months of talking with representatives
0008
1
of the U.S. Coking Group, I feel very confident in
2
their ability to meet the standards outlined in
3
the air permit to install and that they will be
4
very good corporate neighbors. I understand that
5
they will use state of the art technology that
6
will be very clean and efficient.
7
To gain a level of comfort to what a plant
8
like this would mean to our community, I called
9
the environmental manager of another coking plant
10
operating in the United States. I did this
11
yesterday. What
I found was that today's plants
12
operate with many complex environmental controls,
13
unlike the plants of yesterday, and those of us
14
who are from Toledo realize and remember those
15
plants. I was
extremely pleased with their strong
16
environmental controls and community perception.
17
They are considered very good neighbors.
18
I am confident in the USEPA, the Ohio EPA,
19
and the Toledo Division of Environmental Services'
20
ability to complete a thorough review of this
21
permit to ensure to the citizens of Oregon that
22
the plant design and the operations will meet the
23
Clean Air Act requirements.
24
If this plant doesn't build here, they'll
25
go someplace else.
We need the jobs.
0009
1
(Reaction from the Audience.)
2
MS. MCCARRON:
Please be respectful to
3
people providing testimony and keep your comments
4
quiet.
5
MAYOR BROWN:
We need the tax base, we
6
need the boost to our economy, and we need to
7
encourage businesses committed to coming here to
8
meet all environmental standards. Thank you.
9
MS. MCCARRON:
I am sure Mayor Brown
10
appreciates your applause, but if we could please
11
not applaud after every speaker or we will be here
12
very
long. One thing that I
forgot to mention
13
before we got started is that when you come up to
14
the microphone, if you would please state your
15
name, spell it for the record, and state where you
16
are from, and that's it. We are going to provide
17
five minutes per person for their speeches.
18
The next public official wishing to
19
testify this evening is Tina Skeldon
Wozniak.
20
MS. WOZNIAK:
Good evening.
Tina Wozniak,
21
W-o-z-n-i-a-k, Lucas County Commissioner. I
22
support this permit.
We need two things in our
23
community. We
need jobs. We need them
badly.
24
This is a good investment. It is an investment in
25
a product that is in constant demand. This
0010
1
product, these jobs are less subject to the whims
2
of a difficult economy.
3
The second part is we need a strong
4
economy, and although legitimate environmental
5
concerns are being discussed, I reject those who
6
say that we have to choose between jobs and a good
7
environment. I
refuse to accept that because I
8
want both. Our
community needs jobs, good jobs,
9
good paying jobs, and a good environment and a
10
clean environment.
11
I challenge this plant to use the most up
12
to date technology to ensure that they meet all
13
environmental standards for safety, both for the
14
residents and for the workers. If they do that,
15
and that's what they say they will do, their plant
16
will be just as good for the economy as our
17
health. Again, I
support this permit.
18
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you.
Again, if you
19
could please hold your applause. Mayor Jack Ford.
20
MAYOR FORD:
Madam Chair, thank you for
21
this courtesy of being able to speak. A recent
22 news
report indicated that the proposed plant had
23
raised some flags regarding possible dangers.
24
When I read that early one morning, I was deeply
25
concerned about the tone of the news report. We
0011
1
convened a group at city hall in Toledo and asked
2
that there be a thorough review, literally a
3
de novo approach to it.
4
After going through that process, I was
5
informed and I believe that there were some errors
6
or exaggerations in the description. In fact,
7
there will not be 680 pounds of mercury emitted
8
each year from the plant, and secondly, on that
9
issue, the report did not take into account
10
technology that will be in place that would reduce
11
whatever emission occurs by 90 percent, and so it
12
is just not accurate.
There was some comment with
13
respect to this new plant would emit more mercury
14
than the Bayshore plant. Again, in looking at the
15
technology, again, in fact, it would be far less.
16
The article also assumed that all coal is
17
to be combusted in the coke plant when, in fact,
18
it will be cooked.
Now, when I was told this, I
19
didn't know what the hell that meant. I asked for
20
that to be explained further to me. As I
21
understand it, cooking coal does not drive off all
22
the mercury as does combusting it.
23
Only after strong internal review did my
24
comfort level reach the point that it's at today
25
where I could say I support this. There's been a
0012
1
lot of good arguments made about the jobs.
2
Commissioner Thurber I think was very accurate to
3
point out it is a national security argument that
4
is also embedded in the possibility of this plant,
5
but the health concern was the threshold issue for
6 me, and had I
thought or was convinced that there
7
was the risk that was originally described, I
8
would not be here today in support, but I'm
9
convinced otherwise, and I support it. Thank you.
10
I'm sorry, I'm Jack Ford, Mayor, F-o-r-d.
11
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. James
Seaman.
12
MR. SEAMAN:
James Seaman, Oregon, Ohio,
13
Oregon city councilman, S-e-a-m-a-n. I would just
14
like to say to everyone and to the Ohio EPA that,
15
you know, Oregon has a strong track record of
16
caring about their environment. We've put in
17
millions of dollars in the sanitary sewers
18
recently. We've
improved our wastewater treatment
19
plant when we had an EPA difficulty with the flow
20
equalization project.
We spent over five million
21
to six million dollars for that project, which is
22
a lot of money for a city the size of Oregon, so
23
it shows we care
about our environment.
24
We spent over ten million dollars out of
25
the -- out of local Oregon money over the last
0013
1
five years to expand our water treatment plant
2
from eight million to sixteen million gallons
3
production per day.
The total project is twenty
4
million, and we're taking a loan of from nine to
5
ten million dollars over this five-year period of
6
time, so we're working hard to do what we can to
7
improve the environment.
8
We have the Wynn Road buffer that we're
9
planning that our legal department and our mayor
10
is working hard to deal with the facility three
11
dredgings. We're
concerned. We don't
have a
12
complete answer for that, but that's a tough
13
situation. We
care about that part of the
14
community. We
care about northwestern Ohio and
15
Oregon.
16
We have the James Haley Boardwalk that
17
we've implemented and built over the last few
18
years, and, of course, we have our beautiful state
19
park which Representative Barney Quilter helped us
20
build, so we have a lot to be proud of in Oregon
21
and northwestern Ohio.
22
Our educational system in northwestern
23
Ohio emphasizes certified apprenticeship programs.
24
It emphasizes education for our young to go into
25
these kind of skilled jobs that this plant would
0014
1
produce. We
can't just stop in the middle of
2
things and we have plans to educate people and
3
provide them the knowledge they need to function
4
properly and work in these plants and then all of
5
a sudden say nope, the plants aren't here, we're
6
going to send your jobs overseas.
7
We need this plant.
We need these jobs.
8
I work as a psychologist and an educator, and I
9
see first-hand what happens when people are
10
unemployed and underemployed, and I see this as an
11
opportunity to strengthen our base of employment.
12
The construction phase will put a lot of the
13
electricians to work, people who are on the list
14
who don't have a job right now. We've got a lot
15
of other skilled laborers that need -- Local 500,
16
our general laborers, they need to get to work.
17
Some of the councilmen said the ironworkers are
18
doing good with the bridge right now, but that
19
won't last forever either.
20
We need to employ people so that they can
21
spend the money back into the community. That
22
multiplier effect is tremendous. The property tax
23
the schools will reap will be tremendous. You
24
know we have a lot of pressure for proficiency
25
tests. It takes
a lot of new technology.
We need
0015
1
new buildings in the City of Oregon schools. The
2
money from the tangible personal property for the
3
equipment that that plant will provide, even
4
though it will be a form of abatement, will be
5
more money than that school district would have
6
had previously.
7
So we have a lot of positive things
8
happening.
There's a lot of positive impact a
9
facility of this nature can create for the city of
10
Oregon. We're
going to hold your feet to the
11
fire, and I think we all want to do that. There
12
are environmental concerns, but I think they'll
13
meet all the guaranteed requirements of clean air,
14
and that's very important for all of us.
15
We need to -- we need to work together.
16
We need to trust each other so that we can grow
17
together. The
impact of something like this is
18
very positive.
We have -- we have a lot of -- we
19
have some difficulties, but, you know, with the
20
addition of the water treatment plant, we have the
21
capability of providing the infrastructure for a
22
plant like this.
They're going to need over a
23
million gallons of potable water on a daily basis.
24
We have a water treatment plant that's capable of
25
providing that, and we're proud of that, and I
0016
1
guess all of Oregon's proud of our water treatment
2
plant because it kinds of makes us unique in terms
3
of the suburbs in that we have our own independent
4
water supply.
5
So the bottom line is that we do have a
6
positive track record, we care about the
7
environment, and we'll continue to care, and we'll
8
continue to hold their feet to the fire to make
9
sure they live up to all the regulations. Thank
10
you very much.
11
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Betty
Shultz.
12
MS. SHULTZ:
Thank you. I'm
Betty
13
Shultz. I'm a
City of Toledo city councilwoman,
14
and that's S-h-u-l-t-z.
15
First of all, I want to thank you for
16
giving me the
opportunity to testify.
I will not
17
go over those things that have been presented by
18
the previous speakers but only to say that I would
19
reiterate every point made.
20
The bottom line is that the price of steel
21
is ever escalating and holding us hostage.
22
Recently that occurred with construction of the
23
new bridge. We
need to be able to produce it and
24
produce it easily and effectively. That can
25
happen with this facility.
0017
1
More importantly, we in this community
2
have been begging jobs to come to northwest Ohio.
3
These are good jobs.
It will provide construction
4
jobs. We've had
our people sitting in the halls
5
asking for jobs for too long. The economy in this
6
community can only go upwards by permitting this
7
to occur. We
have people who want to invest in
8
our community.
9
To echo the sentiments of Mayor Brown, if
10
they don't build here, they will go someplace
11
else, and if they go someplace else, they're going
12
to take at least 150 jobs that pay 25 to $35 an
13
hour, not to mention the hundreds of construction
14
jobs that have been so desperately needed in this
15
community.
16
Maybe many of us who stand here tonight
17
will have political differences. We are united in
18
our appeal to bring work to our citizens, to bring
19
good economic conditions to our citizens, and I
20
encourage you to approve this.
21
I would end my testimony with my thanks
22
for expediting the process. We know that many
23
times we are all accused of creating bureaucracy.
24
I believe that you've done a service to this
25
community by expediting this permit process.
0018
1
I've had the opportunity, unlike maybe
2
some of my colleagues, to speak with some people
3
who are known experts in this field. This has
4
been put together with input from all of them, and
5
to those people who are the experts and wish to
6
remain unnamed for whatever reasons, many of them
7
in this room, I've trusted my life to them, and I
8
would trust the life of my grandchildren to them.
9
Thank you very much.
10
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Frank
Szollosi.
11
MR. SZOLLOSI:
Frank Szollosi, councilman
12
for the City of Toledo, S-z-o-l-l-o-s-i.
13
Leaving some of the legal details to my
14
brother who's going to speak here in a moment, but
15
let me just say that I stand in support of Mayor
16
Brown and Mayor Ford and Commissioner Tina Skeldon
17
Wozniak in support of this permit. I applaud
18
Mayor Ford for conducting his own environmental
19
review as it were.
20
If there was a threat to the public
21
health, we would be opposed to it, but we
22
appreciate the Ohio EPA assessing the science,
23
assessing the technology, and I feel fortunate
24
that we in this community don't have to choose
25
between jobs and the environment thanks to new
0019
1
technology, so as one councilman for the City of
2
Toledo, I pledge to work with Oregon and with the
3 Ohio EPA and with
the company to help make this a
4
success for everybody.
Thank you.
5
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. That
is the last
6
of my public official cards. What was your
name?
7
MR. SZOLLOSI:
Matthew
Szollosi.
8
MS. MCCARRON:
Mr. Szollosi, step up to the
9
microphone.
10
MR. SZOLLOSI:
Matthew Szollosi,
11
S-z-o-l-l-o-s-i.
I serve on Oregon City Council.
12
I am chairman of the Economic Development and
13
Planning Committee, and I serve on Council
14
President Mike Sheehy's Public Utilities and
15
Environmental Committee. Approximately four years
16
ago I was appointed by Governor Taft and the
17
director of the Ohio Department of Natural
18
Resources to be Lucas County's representative on
19
the State of Ohio Coastal Resources Advisory
20
Council. I've
served several years on the Public
21
Utility and Environmental Committee for the City
22
of Oregon.
23
During my five years on Oregon City
24
Council, I've certainly not always agreed with
25
decisions made by the Ohio EPA, and as a matter of
0020
1 fact, I have
fought tooth and nail with many of
2
the people in this room on issues that I felt very
3
strongly about, people that I have a great deal of
4
respect for and that are certainly very
5
intelligent and capable people. I certainly have
6
not been shy about expressing my thoughts with
7
respect to opposition to issues in the past.
8
However, I am here tonight to express my
9
absolute support for what I consider to be a once
10
in a generation opportunity for the City of
11
Oregon. I live
-- my wife and I just completed
12
construction of our house approximately one mile
13
from where the facility is going to be, if
14 permitted,
constructed by our local building and
15
construction trades workers. I can state
16
unequivocally that I would not be in support of
17
this project if I didn't feel assured that the
18
operational monitoring, reporting, and testing
19
requirements would be at the highest and most
20
restrictive nature.
21
Over many months as the city has engaged
22
in this process, state and local regulators have
23
assured us that
the operations of this plant will
24
utilize the best available controls technology to
25
minimize air emissions.
Without fail, we've been
0021
1
assured the most up to date and stringent
2
regulations will be put in place and enforced to
3
ensure the safety of the facility's workers.
4
And as an Oregon city councilman, I don't
5
feel that I would be doing my job had I failed to
6
look at the economic impact of this facility on
7
our community. I
have a commitment to bring high
8
paying jobs to this community. We must
9
continually as a city, continually and
10
consistently strive to diversify our tax base.
11 The
city has an obligation to stretch taxpayer
12
dollars to the fullest extent while continuing to
13
provide exceptional city services. I have pledged
14
to do that, and I will continue to do that.
15
Investment on this scale coupled with the
16
spin-off development we anticipate to occur will
17
allow the city to continue to provide exceptional
18
city services, assist our schools, and provide
19
much needed jobs for our community while taking
20
the burden off the backs of Oregon's taxpayers.
21
I strongly urge the Ohio EPA to grant this
22
final permit to install. Thank you for the
23
opportunity to speak here this evening.
24
MS. MCCARRON:
Mike Sheehy.
25
MR. SHEEHY:
Thank you. My
name is Mike
0022
1
Sheehy. I'm
president of Oregon City Council, and
2
my comments do not reflect all the members of
3
council's opinions, but those of my own. However,
4
I'm quick to comment that I agree whole-heartedly
5
with the comments made by both of my colleagues,
6
Mr. Seaman and -- Councilman Seaman and Councilman
7
Szollosi. I'll
point out that also our other
8
colleagues are present at this hearing, Sharon
9
Rudess and Mr. Jeff Keller.
10
I want you to know that I have a strong
11
and abiding commitment to public safety. I am the
12
only member of city council that has taken a
13
strong position, for instance, against smoking
14
cigarettes at -- where people eat, in a restaurant
15
where people eat.
Now, this may seem to some of
16
you maybe not like a very strong, tough position
17
to take, but believe me, after talking to some of
18
the entrepreneurs who think the other way, I
19
assure you it's not a position that's easily
20
taken.
21
Like
Mr. Szollosi, I have worked very hard
22
to see that the environmental concerns of this
23
community are met.
We have objected strenuously
24
to certain corporations in the community who we
25
have felt were not meeting the specifications to
0023
1
the USEPA or Ohio EPA.
We will continue to find a
2
solution to facility three about the dredgings in
3
the port to protect not only the lake but also the
4
lands in our community.
And so believe me, if I
5
felt in any way, shape, or form that this was the
6
wrong project and the wrong place, I would let you
7
know and I would object strenuously.
8
Much has been said this evening from the
9
very beginning of Mr. Hopkins' comments and in the
10
local newspaper about the breakneck speed at which
11
Ohio EPA has come to the conclusion this permit is
12
to be -- was going to be allowed. Normally
13
working in government and if something doesn't
14
happen quickly, quickly, now or yesterday, then we
15
hear nothing but criticism and scorn and concern
16
because you folks in government, whether it's
17
municipal, state, or local or federal, don't work
18
quickly enough, and now the EPA with this permit
19
works in a quick and efficient manner, puts aside
20
some concerns that maybe should be set aside, and
21
does what the community -- what the community
22
leaders and I think what the overwhelming number
23
of people in the community want is to work on that
24
permit and get that permit through, and then you
25
are roundly criticized.
For that I say we're very
0024
1
sorry that you are -- that you were criticized,
2
and I think that you did the right thing.
3
Coking facilities, they're not really
4
pleasant places.
I've been 40 years in the rail
5
industry, and I've been in some of the worst and
6
some of the best coking facilities in this country
7
between here and Chicago, Illinois. I've waded
8
almost ankle deep in pollutants over in the former
9
coppers over on Front Street in East Toledo. I
10
breathed the stuff.
I blew my nose after 12 hours
11
in the facility delivering and pulling coal and
12
coke in those facilities, so I know what I'm
13
talking about.
14
And so it was grave concern -- it was with
15
grave concern that I found out about two years ago
16
that a coking facility was coming to Oregon, but I
17
did some investigation about the group, and I
18
investigated the new technology, and I am
19
satisfied that the U.S. Coking Group is concerned
20
enough that they will comply with the U.S. and
21
Ohio EPA regulations and that they are consistent
22
with the modern day technology for this industry.
23
One of my major concerns in my political
24
life is to have watched in the last 20 or 30 years
25
as jobs and industry and progress have gone south
0025
1
and west in this country, and finally the
2
opportunity has -- the world has turned, and we
3
have an opportunity to have something to change
4
things in this community, not just for Oregon, not
5
just for northwestern Ohio, but for the entire
6
region. Our
congresswoman stated very recently in
7
Washington, D.C. in one of the hearings on
8
economic development, and her concerns were that
9
this -- what we need in the industrial midwest is
10
a rebirth, a rebirth of industry where there are
11
jobs where young people don't have to go away to
12
find work.
13
In the rail industry, I've been blessed to
14
have been an instructor at some of the rail
15
schools for conductor and engineer training
16
throughout the entire eastern part of the United
17
States, and especially in this part of the
18
midwest, I have seen people come in who have lost
19
jobs, fellows that have been -- with Master's
20
degrees, highly technical people, and, frankly, I
21
would take them aside, and I would say are you
22
sure you want to become a railroad conductor, are
23
you sure that's what you want to do, and they'll
24
tell me, hey, there's nothing out there, there's
25
nothing -- this is the best job that I can find,
0026
1
and so they continue, and so they're happy to come
2
into the industry where there's good payroll and
3
good benefits.
4
The environment -- the environmental
5
concerns are real to us all, and if I felt in any
6
way, shape, or form that they could not be -- that
7 those
-- the concerns could not be met, I would
8
oppose this.
9
For you folks who are here in opposition,
10
believe me, study the facts, don't listen to
11
Chicken Little, the sky is falling, the sky is
12
falling, again, because believe me, the sky is not
13
falling, and we're looking for progress and we're
14
looking for a rebirth in not just the steel
15
industry but heavy industry and all industry in
16
the American midwest.
17
And I thank you for your time, and I want
18
to go on record as for the permit. Thank you.
19
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Would
any other
20
elected officials like to submit testimony before
21
we -- yes.
22
MR. STANOYEVIC:
My name is Carl Stanoyevic.
23
I am a councilman in the Village of Harbor View.
24
I'll spell my last name, S-t-a-n-o-y-e-v-i-c. I
25
know we need jobs in this area. I'm in the
0027
1
transportation industry. I go in and out of steel
2
and coke mills, and they're very dirty, very
3
dirty.
4
We're a small community that's on the
5
northwest end of Oregon here. At our May 11th
6
council meeting we wrote a resolution, and it was
7
voted on unanimously against this facility as we
8
are being polluted upon right now by Toledo Edison
9
and by the B.P.
B.P. has been a pretty good
10
neighbor with us.
Toledo Edison has not, however.
11
We don't want any more dust. We don't want any
12
more dirt.
13
The Village of Harbor View has written a
14
resolution, a resolution opposing the proposed
15
coke facility in Oregon, Ohio, whose prevailing
16
winds will carry millions of pounds of pollutants
17
annually and will seriously impact the health and
18
welfare of the residents of Harbor View and the
19
surrounding area.
We're not the only people that
20
live there.
There are residents of Oregon that do
21
live back there, and it's like they are forgotten
22
by Oregon.
23
Whereas, the existing B.P. refinery, the
24
Toledo Lucas County Port Authority Taconite
25
Facility, and FirstEnergy Bayshore power plant
0028
1
emit pollutants and periodically have incidents
2
that impact the residents of the Village of Harbor
3
View; and
4
Whereas, the Ohio EPA has issued a draft
5
permit to U.S. Coking Group for a new coking plant
6
that will emit up to eight million additional
7
pounds of pollutants annually whose prevailing
8
winds will go over the Village of Harbor View; and
9
Whereas, officials from U.S. Coking Group,
10
the Toledo Lucas County Port Authority, Lucas
11
County, Ohio, and the City of Oregon have failed
12
to inform the residents of the Village of Harbor
13
View of the plans and emissions and risks
14
associated with the facility; and
15
Whereas, Council has been advised that as
16
of June 15th Lucas County will be subject to ozone
17
pollution limits, chemicals in the Clean Air act;
18
and
19
Whereas, Council has been advised that the
20
American Lung Association provides information
21
about the proposed coke plant pollutants causing
22
asthma, allergies, cancer, and other illnesses;
23
and
24
Whereas, Council has been advised that the
25
Ohio EPA has expedited the U.S. Coking Group
0029
1 permit
to beat the deadline for the new Lucas
2
County restrictions and the U.S. Coking Plant
3
would add over one million pounds of pollutants to
4
the air that would not be permitted after
5
June 15th; and
6
Whereas, Council has been advised that the
7
U.S. Coking permit includes the following
8
hazardous and toxic pollutants: Benzene,
9
bromomethane, chloromethane, methyl chloride,
10
phenol, toluene, total polycyclic aromatic
11
hydrocarbons, mercury, arsenic, and lead;
and
12
Whereas, Council has been advised that the
13
proposed coke plant estimates that up to 680
14
pounds of mercury will be emitted annually, a
15
major new source of mercury impacting the fish and
16
water of the western basin of Lake Erie; and
17
Whereas, for all of the reasons stated
18
above with the foremost reason being the public
19
health and
safety of not only the residents of
20
Harbor View but those living and working and
21
traveling through who will be impacted by this
22
plant.
23
Now therefore be it resolved by the
24
Council of the Village of Harbor View. It was
25
voted on unanimously, five yeses, zero nos, and I
0030
1
would like to admit this into the record.
2
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you.
3
MR. STANOYEVIC:
Thank you.
4
MS. MCCARRON:
Sharon Graffeo-Rudess.
5
MS. RUDESS:
Sharon Graffeo-Rudess,
6
Oregon city councilwoman. That's spelled
7
R-u-d-e-s-s.
8
I will not repeat what my colleagues have
9
said before me, but I am concerned, like the rest
10
of the Oregon councilpeople here today, trying to
11
bring tax dollars into our community. We know
12
that we have been getting more economic
13
development here.
We are getting more and more
14
residents into Lucas County, but we want to keep
15
our quality of life.
I too don't live only maybe
16
a couple miles from the proposed site. I too have
17
grandchildren here.
I too plan to stay here for a
18
long time.
19
I just want to say that I do support this
20
project. If the
permit is given, especially I
21
know in the room here this evening there are many,
22
many tradespersons here from all the trades, and I
23
too would like to keep some of those men and women
24
working. Thank
you.
25
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you.
Again, if we can
0031
1
hold our applause so that we can get through the
2
testimony. Any
other elected officials that would
3
like to speak tonight?
If you choose to do it
4
later, you can turn in a blue card to me. Rick
5
Hodges.
6
MR. HODGES:
Good evening. My
name is
7
Richard Hodges, H-o-d-g-e-s. I just came from
8
Northwood. I'm
the executive vice-president of
9
the Mechanical Contractors Association of
10
Northwestern Ohio.
I'm here to speak on behalf of
11
my association, the National Electrical
12
Contractors of Northwest Ohio and Southeast
13
Michigan, the Associated General Contractors, and
14
the Northwest Ohio Building and Construction
15
Trades. Together
our organizations represent
16
approximately 500 contractors and 12,000 skilled
17
union craftspeople in northwest Ohio and southeast
18
Michigan.
19
Our industry has been in the midst of a
20
severe recession for the past several years. We
21
have struggled with high unemployment rates that
22
have, at times, exceeded 30 percent amongst some
23
crafts. Needless
to say, the construction of the
24
plant here would bring a great deal of relief to
25
many families who live in this community. This
0032
1
300 million dollar plant will generate as many as
2
1,000 construction jobs and 200 permanent
3
positions. The
economic impact of this project
4
will help to reenergize an area that is in need of
5
such help long after the construction's finished.
6
Additionally, the proposed construction
7
site will improve an underutilized brownfield site
8
and not further encroach on valuable farm land. I
9
myself live in a rural area near here, and I
10
believe the best environmental policy is one that
11
allows for economic growth while maintaining the
12 quality
of our rural communities.
I do not
13
pretend to be an environmental expert, but I do
14
understand that various environmental hurdles have
15
already been cleared and, in the future, the plant
16
will still be expected to comply with air quality
17
standards with the best available technology.
18
Thank you for the opportunity to speak on
19
behalf of this project this evening, and we would
20
all appreciate your favorable consideration.
21
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Nisha
Kapadia.
22
MS. KAPADIA:
Nisha Kapadia, N-i-s-h-a
23
K-a-p-a-d-i-a. I
am from the National Wildlife
24
Federation, Great Lakes Natural Resource Center in
25
Ann Arbor, Michigan.
0033
1
On behalf of the National Wildlife
2
Federation and its members and supporters, I'm
3
pleased to have the opportunity to address the
4
issue of a proposed coking plant for Oregon that
5
is currently in an expedited permitting phase.
6
Though the proposed plant would emit large
7
quantities of a number of pollutants, our comments
8
focus on the issue of mercury contamination. We
9
also wish to stress the critical role meaningful
10
public engagement plays in ensuring sound
11
industrial projects that will benefit communities
12
and the economy over the long term.
13
NWF
is a national conservation education
14
and advocacy organization with over four million
15
members and supporters around the country.
16
Through our Great Lakes field office in Ann Arbor,
17
Michigan, and working with a number of other
18
groups, including our state affiliate in Ohio, the
19
League of Ohio Sportsmen, we have been actively
20
involved in efforts to reduce and virtually
21
eliminate the releases of persistent,
22
bioaccumulative, toxic chemicals, including
23
mercury, in the Great Lakes region.
24
Mercury is a serious problem in Ohio and
25
nationwide.
Ohio, along with every other Great
0034
1
Lakes state but New York, has a statewide mercury
2
advisory in place.
The statewide advisory was
3
revised last year to indicate that all Ohioans
4
should limit their consumption of any fish species
5
in any Ohio water body to no more than one meal
6
per week. In
addition, more respective advisories
7
due to mercury along with PCBs are in place for
8
common carp and smallmouth bass in the Maumee
9
River, and similar advisories are in place for
10
channel catfish and largemouth bass in the
11
Sandusky River to the east.
12
Mercury that is released to the air by
13
industrial processes can then be deposited back on
14
the land and our surface waters. Once converted
15
to the methylmercury in water, it can readily
16
bioaccumulate in the food chain. In this way
17
predator fish such as walleye can have mercury
18
concentrations over one million times higher than
19
the surrounding water.
So for most water bodies
20
addressing the mercury contamination problem means
21
dealing with sources that release mercury to the
22
air.
23
Working with a number of Ohio
24
organizations, we recently released the results of
25
rain testing carried out in Cleveland that showed
0035
1
mercury levels in Cleveland rain which averaged
2
almost eight times the level the EPA considers
3
safe for the surface waters of the Great Lakes.
4
Because of mercury air pollution, Ohio's rain
5
isn't cleaning our water bodies, it's
6
contaminating them.
7
Mercury contamination of fish has
8
potential economic repercussions as well.
9
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
10
nearly 1.4 million anglers fished in the state in
11
2001, and direct fishing-related expenditures
12
amount to over 760 million dollars annually.
13
Mercury contamination of the environment
14
is a persistent problem that is drawing increasing
15
attention from scientists, policy makers, and the
16
general public.
Mercury is a toxic heavy metal
17
which can damage both human and wildlife health.
18
Based on the most recent data on blood mercury
19
levels obtained by the Centers for Disease Control
20
and Prevention, the USEPA recently estimated that
21
up to 630,000 newborns a year in the U.S. are at
22
risk for neurodevelopmental problems, including in
23
the areas of memory, attention, and language
24
development, due to mercury exposure they receive
25
in the womb.
This figure doubles earlier
0036
1
estimates.
2
The proposed coking plant for Oregon would
3
add to the ongoing mercury contamination problem
4
in Ohio and the region and could impede state
5
efforts, not just in Ohio, but in Michigan and
6
elsewhere to achieve mercury reductions.
7
According to information accompanying the draft
8
permit, the facility would release up to 680
9 pounds of mercury
annually, making it the fifth
10
largest source of mercury in the state. To put
11
this number in context, the total amount of
12
mercury in a 25-acre lake under a mercury advisory
13
would fit in one fever thermometer, so releases of
14
this magnitude are very important.
15
The move to build the proposed coking
16
plant comes at a time of increased activities at
17
state, regional, and national levels to address
18
mercury emissions from all sources. NWF and a
19
number of other groups in Ohio and Michigan are
20
promoting initiatives to reduce the use of mercury
21
in products and processes. Strong regulations
22 have
been adopted in the past decade addressing
23
mercury emissions from incinerators, and we are
24
currently advocating for the development of strong
25
federal standards, as well as independent state
0037
1
regulations, on power plants. While coal-fired
2
power plants account for 67 percent of the
3
emissions in Ohio, coking operations can also be
4
important mercury sources. The proposed plant's
5
emissions would be comparable to those from a
6
large power plant, and to date the company has not
7
proposed any method whatsoever of mercury
8
pollution control.
9
We are very concerned about both the lack
10
of any specific limits on mercury emissions from
11
the Oregon coking facility as well as the
12
expedited process by which the draft permit was
13
developed. It is
not clear that adoption of
14
particulate matter emission limits and work
15
practice standards for fugitive emissions of other
16
pollutants will be sufficient to substantially
17
reduce mercury emissions from the plant. A much
18
more thorough analysis should be done to determine
19
the potential for these measures to affect mercury
20
releases.
21
In addition to the problems with mercury,
22
the proposed plant would also add another source
23
of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and other
24
pollutants to the region's air, contributing to
25
ongoing smog and particulate problems in the
0038
1
region, including across the border in Michigan,
2
and acid deposition in regions downwind. Other
3
pollutants that would be released from the
4
facility include volatile organic compounds, such
5
as benzene and toluene, polycyclic organic matter,
6
and dioxins and furans.
7
For these reasons, NWF believes the city
8
should request that Ohio EPA take the time to
9
develop a more thorough analysis of the proposed
10
plan and potential emissions, ensuring that both
11
the potential for elevated releases of both
12
mercury and numerous other chemicals are addressed
13
in a more systematic manner.
14
While it is important that the industrial
15
and manufacturing sectors in the region are
16
strong, it is equally important to ensure
17
environmental protection and that new industrial
18
development move in a direction of the cleanest
19
production processes possible. Indeed,
20
developing, manufacturing, and installing new
21
clean technologies has the potential to anchor
22
new, sound, long-term economic development in
23
Ohio.
24
This promise can only be met if projects
25
are thoroughly reviewed, the public and experts
0039
1
engaged, and their comments fully considered.
2
Accordingly, we further -- we urge further
3
extension of the comment period for this project.
4
The citizens of Ohio, Michigan, and elsewhere in
5
the Great Lakes, along with the lakes and rivers
6
we depend on, deserve no less. Thank you.
7
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Tim
Susor.
8
MR. SUSOR:
Tom.
9
MS. MCCARRON:
Sorry, Tom.
10
MR. SUSOR:
I answer to anything.
Tom
11
Susor, 105 Cedarwood, Oregon, Ohio. I'm here
12
wearing a multitude of hats this evening, one of
13
which is a father and a grandfather of seven and
14
soon to be eight in September grandchildren. We
15
all live in Oregon a couple miles from the
16
proposed facility.
17
I'm here to say a couple things, one of
18
which is this is not your father's coker. I'm a
19
life-long electrician.
I was a maintenance
20
electrician at the Interlake Steel and the coking
21
facility that was on Front Street, and if we all
22
think of that facility, if facilities were ran
23
that way today, I would be standing here telling
24
you I would shoot you if you decided to permit
25
that.
0040
1
Well, this is not my father's coke oven.
2
This is a heat recovery coking process. We need
3
to keep ourselves focused on the prize. Emissions
4
at a heat recovery facility, they are different
5
than a byproduct producing coke oven facility. Do
6
your homework, environmentalists, on heat recovery
7
coke ovens and find out how the process works.
8
Find out the technology available and the
9
technology utilized in the new process.
10
That being said, I'm -- I'm an electrical
11
contractor in northwest Ohio and employ about 17
12
guys, formerly about 37 guys, but it's been a
13
little tough times.
Three years ago northwest
14
Ohio produced a little over four million manhours,
15
electrical working manhours in northwest Ohio.
16
The last
year we produced 1.9 million manhours.
17
Do the math. We
need the work. We need
real
18
jobs. We need to
keep our children employed in
19
their homes and by their families, not trekking
20
off somewhere else to find a job that they can
21
earn a living at.
22
These jobs are producing new -- real live
23
jobs that will not only give us short-term
24
employment like a Meijer's store or -- that was a
25
bad analogy -- or a restaurant, we go and we do
0041
1
restaurant -- we build restaurants and we get done
2
and we walk away, and ten years from now when they
3
remodel we'll get to come in and do a little work.
4
We're talking industrial -- heavy industrial jobs,
5
when you're done building the facility, you're
6
there and you're still building the facility,
7
you're improving, you're updating, your service
8
calls and your work there is ongoing and ever
9
changing. This
is continual economic growth and
10
base for northwest Ohio and Oregon.
11
I'm looking at -- I've been involved in
12
the process with our Oregon school system
13
recently, and we are in need of renovations and
14
makeovers. That
money doesn't come from trees or
15
from the air. I
mean, if you're not looking at
16
our industrial base, then you're looking at a
17
sixteen mill levy instead of a six mill levy.
18
You're looking at the unattainable, unreachable
19
tax base problems for northwest Ohio.
20
We need to wake up, see where -- first of
21
all, we need to trust you people to do your jobs
22
and then trust the construction tradesman to do
23
their jobs and trust the plant operators who are
24
investing millions of dollars in an operation to
25
do their job. If
everybody has a little trust,
0042
1
America can recover the steel industry, recover
2
high production jobs, recover top -- real dollar
3
jobs and not -- and you cannot do that with paper
4
or plastic jobs.
5
We need real jobs.
We need real industry.
6
We need to be self-supporting America on our own
7
steel so that we don't have to not build buildings
8
because we can't afford the steel increases, and
9
you don't do that by turning your back on real
10
people wanting to invest in your community. I
11
applaud your speed in which you reacted to an
12
economic situation, and it certainly wasn't -- and
13
there's no bones about it, that was an economic
14
situation, you either get our permit through so we
15
can build this facility in a timely fashion so we
16
can help the economic outlook and our economic
17
outlook of building this facility in a location we
18 feel
is ideal for it, and you reacted the way you
19
should have in response to what's best for
20
northwest Ohio.
Thank you for your actions.
21
And I will submit some of this as -- when
22
you're look at building a new technological
23
advanced facility, you can't project -- I mean,
24
you can do your models and you can project on the
25
output and what's going to be produced or you've
0043
1
got to look to recently built facilities that have
2
similar type operations and see how they're
3
performing and how they're reacting. I have some
4
stuff here on heat recovery coking operations,
5
some environmental concerns and water usage
6
concerns from a facility in northern Indiana I
7
think you'd be interested in. I think I'll submit
8
those to whoever wants those. You can read those
9
through.
10
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you.
11
MR. SUSOR:
Thank you for your time and
12
your patience.
13
MS. MCCARRON:
Mike Clark.
14
MR. CLARK:
My name is Michael Clark,
15
it's Richard Michael, C-l-a-r-k.
16
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you.
17
MR. CLARK:
You can get ADA things in
18
here but not yet.
I grew up here in Oregon, and I
19
was in Columbus for 18 years. Mary, you said you
20
were from Columbus.
We all remember the trash
21
burning power plant in Columbus. Everybody
22
couldn't wait to open it but couldn't wait to shut
23
it down either.
24
I came in here with an open mind tonight,
25
and I still have an open mind. I've dealt with
0044
1
the Environmental Services with Toledo in the past
2
concerning other things going on. They've done
3
nothing. Karen
and Adam, I spoke to both of you
4
prior to this concerning Sun Oil, problems that
5
they have with emissions coming up. They say
6
well, call us when it happens, we'll try to see,
7
and you know what happens, nothing.
8
I was concerned about one thing here with
9 this
plant, emissions, this new coke plant. I got
10
more information tonight listening to the people
11
speaking than I did from the Environmental
12
Protection Agency.
Mr. Ford came in.
He actually
13
did some studies.
I was concerned about a few --
14
a few things coming up, such as -- oh, I only have
15
a small note with me because I'm not a big person
16
here, but mercury, 680 pounds a year is what they
17
were projecting.
I understand that's not a good
18
number because of the fact that the coke ovens are
19
state of the art now.
20
Mr. Hopkins talked about a cyclonic action
21
thing from a stack.
I understand the stacks are
22
200 feet tall, one of them is. There's going to
23
be several that are 60 feet. You know, I'd be the
24
first one in line right now to apply for a job at
25
this plant. I'm
disabled, but I can answer the
0045
1
phone, because the fact that the tax base in
2
Oregon, first, we need -- my taxes went up $400
3
last year for my property. Do you know what that
4
does for somebody on Social Security disability?
5
It hurts big time.
I'm having trouble getting the
6
grass cut. I
can't hardly pay the utilities
7
coming in because I'm -- I'm getting
8
substantial -- under $10,000 a year to live on
9
when our tax base goes up and continually goes up
10
for our schools.
We need new schools in Oregon,
11
which means there's another 4 to $500 a year that
12
it's going to go up.
13
Hopefully -- if Oregon stops other plants
14
from coming in, other things from coming in -- you
15
need to do your job.
We've gotten very little
16
tonight. I don't
know how many of you people were
17
actually doing the application for this plant, but
18
we didn't get a lot of information from you. We
19
got very little information, if anything, and I
20
was very disappointed in that.
21
I'm still for the plant, but I wish that
22
this -- this group of people, they were more
23
forthcoming with the answers we needed to hear.
24
We got them from people speaking. We still have a
25
lot of people in the dark. I'm still -- I'm not
0046
1
completely turned over, but I'm almost there, I'm
2
this close, simply because of the tax base that we
3
have in Oregon, the jobs that we need. I've heard
4
several people speak that they have companies,
5
large companies, they have workers laid off, they
6
have -- we need the work. Toledo needs the work.
7
Oregon needs the jobs here.
8
Yes, it's a brown space, you know. Harbor
9
View, that's been a place that everybody forgot
10
here too. We
need to remember Harbor View because
11
they do have a lot of pollutants hitting them, so
12
if you can guarantee that these pollutants are
13
going to be state of the art, they're not going to
14
get our pollutants that we've got coming from
15
Toledo Edison or from B.P. -- B.P.'s cleaned up
16
their act.
They're still working on it. They've
17
done a lot of work over there.
18
You know, we talked about a million
19
gallons of water they're going to use over here at
20
this coke plant.
What's going to be emitted into
21
the air, what's going with it, and are we going to
22
clean it up or are we going to watch over it --
23
they say the EPA is watching everybody, they're a
24
watchdog for us.
I have an inground pool. It's
25
pretty new. It
was just put in for therapy.
It's
0047
1
fiberglass.
Every summer I have trouble now for
2
two summers cleaning the oil off of that
3
fiberglass.
4
I live over by Corduroy and Otter Creek,
5
which is only a few miles from this new coke
6
plant. The
wind's not going to be blowing my way.
7
There was a gentleman up here telling you what way
8
the wind was going.
Was it northwest?
It's going
9
out to the harbor.
Everything goes out to the
10
harbor, and those people have put up with enough.
11
As long as you can guarantee their safety and not
12
be another plant like Columbus had which killed
13
how many people in the south end of Columbus
14
before they decided to shut that power plant down
15
because it was emitting too many things that were
16
hurting people, if you can guarantee that and know
17
what you're doing, I'm all for this plant, and
18
I'll be the first in line to apply for a job, but
19
if you're not, say it.
If you're rushing this
20
through too
fast, stop it, you know.
21
If it's only because of deadlines that
22
need to be reached by June 15th because of the
23
environment, we all lived through it in Columbus.
24
We all live here in Columbus -- or Oregon rather,
25
we all live here.
Myself, I love Lake Erie perch.
0048
1
With the standards right now, it's scary. I mean,
2
if you limit yourself to one day a week eating
3
perch, any lake fish, what would we do if we
4
couldn't eat fish any more, they all died off. We
5
need to think about that for the future.
6
Everybody says we have grandchildren. I
7
don't have any grandchildren, I don't have any
8
children, but at the same time there's where the
9
Environmental Protection Agency becomes involved.
10
They're to protect, not to get somebody's plant
11
open. Don't cut
any corners. Get it
open, then
12
do it the
best you can.
13
My -- the best thing I've heard from you
14
tonight was you guys implemented how many people
15
to put this whole coke thing together to, make
16
sure that it was expedited as fast as possible,
17
that was the best thing I've heard, because you
18
guys are doing it, but to get it open is one
19
thing, but make sure that you're not cutting any
20
corners and dropping the ball. We'll hold you
21 accountable
to it.
22
There are a lot of things that happened
23
with Envirosafe here.
They're still ongoing.
24
They want to increase.
They want to build more
25
from what I understand.
We need to look at a lot
0049
1
of different studies before that happens, but
2
let's keep Oregon safe.
The main one thing that
3
everybody's trying to see is keeping us safe.
4
If it was your children or your
5 grandchildren
or if you lived here -- I know
6
there's things that's out of your power and it's
7
simply because there's no money for it to happen,
8
for you to investigate some of it, you know.
9
Every time you -- you're letting -- you're putting
10
the wolf in charge of the hen house sometimes when
11
you're letting these companies police theirselves.
12
That's not a good thing. You know, yes, you can
13
come in and they're going to change it when you're
14
there, they're going to see -- you know, you're
15
supposed to implement how they do things, how they
16
test for their pollutants and are they doing that
17
when you're not there.
You know, anyway, that's
18
all I have to say.
19
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you, Mr. Clark.
Thank
20
you. Steve
Davis.
21
MR. DAVIS:
I'm Steve Davis, D-a-v-i-s.
22
I'm with CSX Transportation out of Columbus, Ohio.
23
Thank you for the opportunity to address the
24
panel.
25
I'm here to state CSX Transportation's
0050
1
support for this project. I've been working for
2
economic development in the State of Ohio since
3
1987. It's my
responsibility to bring new jobs,
4
investment, and customers to the State of Ohio.
5
Rail water sites are rare in the State of Ohio.
6
Toledo coal docks have lost jobs and tonnage over
7
the years.
8
Now we have an opportunity to turn things
9
around. I can't
think of a better site in Ohio
10
for this project, and this project represents our
11
best chance to bring jobs and investment to the
12
Toledo coal docks.
Thank you very much.
13
MS. MCCARRON:
Thank you. Terry
Hodge.
14
MR. LODGE:
Lodge.
15
MS. MCCARRON:
Lodge.
16
MR. LODGE:
It's Lodge. For
the record,
17
Terry Lodge is my name.
My experience with the
18
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency largely stems
19
from Envirosafe.
I find it very interesting that
20
Envirosafe's permit, last permit, which I think
21
was a five-year one, expired in 1996, and it's
22
been annually extended just unilaterally by the
23
Ohio EPA for seven, going on eight years, so that
24
has prevented any meaningful reconsideration of
25
the operations and the toxic emissions, the ground
0051
1
water emissions of the Envirosafe dump, so it's
2
kind of interesting to come to a situation where
3
you're now fast tracking a permit also to do the
4 bidding
of another corporation.
Shame on you.
5
I call on the working people who are
6
indeed desperate and mistreated and misused and
7
manipulated by projects like this to look at a
8
little bit of history.
This is a 30-year
9
phenomenon, folks.
It's the jobs versus
10
environment graymail blackmail game where they
11
divide people.
They make environmentalists pit
12
themselves against workers. We all breathe and
13
will have to breathe from the same atmosphere if
14
this plant is built.
15
I want to know what baseline survey the
16
company has indicated to you they intend to
17
perform of their workforce before the plant opens.
18
I want to know about the baseline public health
19
analyses the company proposes to do of the Harbor
20
View and Oregon communities before the plant
21
opens. We look
for leadership from our
22
government, not a permitting mill.
23
This is a real jobs package, folks, but
24
they only discuss the sunshine jobs. They
25
discussed the $50,000 a year -- incidentally, I
0052
1
haven't -- I haven't heard any company officials
2
speak on their own behalf tonight, and I haven't
3
heard from organized labor announcing that the
4
company has committed to unionize the plant.
5
There's a lot of things beyond just granting a
6
stapled together wad of paper that says you get to
7
permit -- you get to pollute our commons.
8
I don't know the identities of these
9
corporate folks behind this either. My
10
understanding is that this may be a much larger,
11
more diverse, and perhaps more polluting project
12
than anyone currently knows publicly, but I can
13
guarantee you that the people who are profiting
14
are not going to be living here breathing the air
15
from that.
16
The jobs aren't just production jobs at a
17
coking facility or Chessie system or truckers.
18
The jobs will also in this area -- there will be
19
an increase in Hospice workers, there will be an
20
increase in respiratory therapists and people who
21
treat allergies and emphysema, but we don't know
22
any specific statistics about that because the
|