Sludge Watch ==> Editor right - Facility Approval Doesn't Address Top Concerns

[Maureen Reilly]

S.A.: As Wes Sperry of Newberry Springs told Nursery Products and 
Supervisosrs of San Bernardino : "Nursery Products: Get a dome or go 
home...."

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

http://www.desertdispatch.com/2006/1172761402210.html

Editorial: Facility approval doesn't address top concerns

It's clear the residents of Hinkley don't see Tuesday's approval of the 
Nursery Products composting facility with conditions as a "win-win 
situation."

The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors voted to allow the facility, 
despite the vocal protests of nearly everybody who lives in Hinkley, the 
closest community to the facility's location. Residents are concerned that 
the facility, which takes solid human waste and converts it into compost in 
an outdoor process, presents an environmental threat to the air and water.

Brad Mitzelfelt, the new supervisor for our district, voted in favor of the 
facility but added some significant restrictions: The facility's operating 
hours will be limited and the facility will only take up half of the land 
the company owns there. The company must also add a special lining at the 
site to keep the waste from polluting the groundwater.

However, the board stopped short at requiring more containment at the 
facility to help keep the air clear of dust and pollution, something that 
would have satisfied many concerns among the opponents. The process of 
turning the sludge into compost produces a significant amount of air 
pollution in the direct area. Residents are concerned about the strong 
desert winds blowing dust and foul smells into Hinkley and Barstow. At the 
company's former site in Adelanto, nearby residents had these exact 
complaints and said odors from the site made them sick.

Nursery Products representatives say they've changed their habits and no 
longer accept the type of waste that made the worst smells in Adelanto. 
However, they've resisted the pressure to put a roof or some sort of 
containment around the facility to reduce the air pollution. Their argument 
is that it's not necessary. Although the facility does indeed cause some air 
pollution, it's within the limits allowed in our community. Because our air 
is so much cleaner than the air in places like Los Angeles County or larger 
Southern California regions, there aren't the kind of restrictions that 
would prohibit this facility from operating openly in other locations.

As you might imagine, residents don't exactly find this argument compelling. 
Why should they accept pollution that wouldn't be allowed elsewhere, just 
because our air is cleaner?

Mitzelfelt came to Barstow Wednesday and spoke as a guest at the local 
Rotary Club meeting. He defended the decision in part because the 
Environmental Protection Agency has determined that the use of sludge and 
biosolids in this situation is safe (a decision disputed by some scientists 
and environmentalists). He said he didn't recommend covering the facility 
because the costs would be extremely excessive. In communities where these 
facilities have been contained, he said, the costs are paid in part with 
fees or taxes from sewage services provided in that area. This wouldn't be 
an option in Hinkley.

Our position on the matter is a little complicated: We believe businesses 
that are operating legally on private property have the right to do so, 
regardless of whether the neighbors like them or want them there.

However, respecting a business's property rights also requires respecting 
the property rights of others. Nursery Products has a moral and legal 
obligation to take whatever measures are necessary to prevent pollutants 
from leaving its property and affecting others. We repeat our suggestion to 
Nursery Products that they contain the facility to avoid even the potential 
of airborne pollution traveling to Hinkley.

Scott Shackford