Sludge Watch ==> Hinkley -Court Hears Nursery Products open air sludge compost project

[Maureen Reilly]

Sludgewatch Admin:

IN 30 days the jude will rule on whether the  Environmental Impact Report 
done for the  Nursery Products  open air sludge compost proposal was 
adequate.

..................................................


http://www.desertdispatch.com/news/composting_2541___article.html/facility_site.html

Composting controversy goes to court

Judge hears arguments for, against Hinkley facility

By Jason Smith, staff writer
BARSTOW — The company has spoken. Hinkley residents have spoken. The 
lawyers have spoken. And now the judge will have his say about the 
controversial biosolids composting facility to be built near Hinkley.

Lawyers representing Nursery Products, LLC., the County of San Bernardino, 
and residents of Hinkley were in the Barstow courthouse Friday to present 
their arguments before Judge John Vander Feer. Vander Feer heard arguments 
from all three parties and will issue a written decision on the case in 
about 30 days, he said.

The proposed facility would ferment waste, including human waste, to form 
compost. Shortly after the project was approved in February 2007, members of 
HelpHinkley.org which opposes the project, sued Nursery Products and the 
county to block its development.

Vander Feer made it clear to the audience that he would only review legal 
arguments and would not decide the matter based on the parties’ opinions.

“I’m not here to decide whether this is a good idea or bad, whether or 
not this facility is environmentally friendly or not,” he said. “I’m 
here only to decide if the analysis that the company provided complied with 
the law. That’s all.”

Lawyers supporting HelpHinkley.org, who are representing the group for free, 
allege that the county-produced study analyzing the potential negative 
effects of the composting site on the environment is flawed. They say the 
study didn’t fully consider the facility’s potential to pollute nearby 
groundwater and air.

“This obliterates the very role of the California Environmental Quality 
Act, and its role in sounding the early-warning environmental alarm 
bells,” said Ingrid Brostrom, attorney for the Center on Race Poverty and 
the Environment.

Her co-counsel, Alicia Pradas, of Golden Gate University’s Environmental 
Law and Justice Clinic, argued that the study didn’t look closely enough 
at the option of enclosing the composting site.

After giving HelpHinkley.org’s lawyers a chance to speak, the judge 
allowed Nursery Products and the county time to defend its case. Company 
representatives called enclosure of the composting site impractical because 
the area lacks the needed access to water and electricity.

“There is sufficient evidence to show the impact on the profits and 
revenues on the facility (if enclosed) would be so bad as to render it 
economically unfeasible,” said the company’s attorney Kevin Haroff.

He said the composting method used at the site would have almost no impact 
on local water supplies.

“The fact of the matter is, this project uses a very small amount of 
water, less than 1,000 gallons a day,” he said.

Attorney Bart Brizee, representing the county, argued that once built, the 
composting site would help the environment.

“This is not some pollution-generating plant,” he said. “The facility 
is in fact an environmentally friendly way of dealing with the pollution 
that every one of us in this room contributes to.”

More than a dozen members of HelpHinkley.org attended the trial, but none 
testified about the project. Still, they said they felt they were listened 
to, said Norm Diaz, an activist with the group.