Editor’s note: This is the second of a three-part series examining the effort being made by Blythe Township and a private entity called FKV LLC to develop the Blythe Recycling And Demolition Site (BRADS), and the battle the neighboring borough of Saint Clair is waging to stop it.
If the Borough of Saint Clair isn’t satisfied with the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board’s upcoming decision on the BRADS issue, the borough may appeal the case to Commonwealth Court, Edward M. Brennan, the borough solicitor, said March 10.
And if the borough isn’t satisfied with the verdict of the Commonwealth Court, the borough may appeal the case to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Brennan said.
“There’s not an automatic right of appeal to the state Supreme Court. You would have to ask the state Supreme Court for permission to appeal. If they grant it, then they would hear it. If they won’t hear the case, then it’s done,” Brennan said.
He said the Borough of Saint Clair won’t be able to take the case any further than that.
Over the past 12 years, the borough has spent more than $1.2 million in its efforts to prevent Blythe Township from establishing the construction and demolition waste landfill proposed for Silver Creek, two miles from the Saint Clair border.
The battle was worth the effort for a few reasons, according to Brennan and members of the council.
“We’re allowed to question what they’re doing. And I think the project has gotten a much more thorough review because of our questioning. Let’s say we get to the point where the permit is ultimately issued and it’s no longer appealable. The fact that we made them dot their i’s and cross their t’s is certainly in the interest of the borough and more importantly we showed that this is just not a good idea,” Brennan said.
“I always thought the borough council was trying to follow the dictates of the people of the town, and they’re overwhelmingly opposed to this landfill proposal,” Richard E. Tomko, mayor of Saint Clair, said Feb. 23.
If the council is not satisfied with the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board’s upcoming decision on the borough’s latest appeal, the council may take the case to Commonwealth Court and, possibly, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Brennan said.
“I don’t mind investing if it’s possible to stop it,” the mayor said.
Permits
“DEP reviews the application for any landfill and allows for public input and comment. If the permit is denied, the applicant has an opportunity to appeal that denial to the Environmental Hearing Board. If the permit is granted, an interested party may intervene and likewise appeal to the Environmental Hearing Board. In this case, both Blythe and the Borough of Saint Clair filed appeals with the Environmental Hearing Board. Listed below is the chronology of this process. As you may know, the landfill was originally proposed sometime in 2003,” Brennan said Feb. 24.
On June 23, 2011, the state Department of Environmental Protection issued “Permit number: PAR502209,” a five-year permit, for discharge of stormwater associated with industrial activities, according to the DEP e-FACTS website.
“That’s an NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permit to discharge runoff from property into sewer system or waterway. That permit has not been appealed,” Colleen Connolly, community relations coordinator with DEP’s Northeast Regional Office, Wilkes-Barre, said Monday.
On July 13, 2012, the DEP issued “Permit number: 101679,” a 10-year permit, to Blythe Township for development of the landfill, according to the DEP e-FACTS website.
“That’s a permit to begin site development of the landfill. That one was appealed,” Connolly said.
“On Aug. 10, 2012, Saint Clair filed an appeal to DEP’s issuance of Solid Waste Permit No. 101679,” Brennan said.
“As soon as the permits are issued, they become active, from the date of the issuance on the permit,” Connolly said.
The borough fears the landfill will pollute local watersheds and reservoirs and cause mine subsidence.
“The general purpose of such appeals to the Environmental Hearing Board is to allow all interested parties to insist that a thorough and adequate review is undertaken by DEP prior to issuance or denial of any permit. You should note that DEP reversed its position in 2011 after Secretary Krancer was appointed by Governor Corbett. The permit has been denied by the Rendell Administration. The ultimate reissuance of the permit on Jan. 20, 2015, was done in the final days of the Corbett Administration,” Brennan said.
There was a three-day hearing on Saint Clair’s appeal before the state Environmental Hearing Board in early February, and Brennan doesn’t expect a decision from the board until April or May.
The Borough of Saint Clair has so far spent $1,266,846.92 on legal and expert witness fees in its efforts to stop it, the treasurer for Saint Clair, Carol A. Sutzko, said March 11.
“What has the borough achieved for its investment? The borough continues to fight for the health and safety of its citizens as well as the citizens of the surrounding communities. The borough was successful on March 3, 2014, when the Environmental Hearing Board remanded this application for further detailed studies with regard to subsidence and onsite weather data,” Brennan said Feb. 24.
“Saint Clair was forced to defend a federal lawsuit where Blythe alleged that Saint Clair interfered with its civil rights by pursuing the DEP appeal. Part of that complaint also suggested that by contacting our federal, state and local representatives to express our concerns, that somehow we violated their civil rights. This case was thrown out by the judge. Blythe appealed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and was likewise unsuccessful. Blythe has been ordered to pay the costs associated with that matter,” Brennan said Feb. 24.
Going forward
Saint Clair Council President James D. Larish, who has been on the council for 12 years, said the council has promised to fight the landfill proposal until it was off the table.
“That’s something we’ve always said. I have not heard any complaints about not fighting it. And if it does get in, and something ever happens, nobody can come up to us and say ‘you did not do enough,’ ” Larish said Feb. 23.
“We can’t put a price on public safety. At the end of the day, we may lose this battle. But I’ll be able to sleep at night knowing that I’ve done everything I can to make it as safe as possible for the citizens of the borough,” council member John R. Burke said Feb. 25.
“Take Flint, Michigan, as an example. Ask those people out there what they pay right now for safe drinking water,” Burke said.
Burke believes the BRADS landfill could pollute the borough’s air and contaminate the soil and, possibly, the ground water.
“So, at the end of the day, whether we win or lose, I think the money’s well spent,” Burke said.
“I feel exactly how he does. I’m totally on his side,” council member Rebecca “Becky” Kovich said Feb. 25, referring to Burke. Kovich is new to the council, having been elected in November.
“I’m new too. And I don’t know everything that’s going on either, but I agree 100 percent with him,” council member Tom Dempsey said Feb. 25, referring to Burke. “I’ve been living in this borough, like, forever, and I don’t want to see garbage up there. That’s how I feel.”
“I also feel you can’t put a price on public safety. You’re talking about a Burma Road that’s unsafe for trucks. You’re talking about contaminating drinking water. You’re talking about our playgrounds at the bottom of the hill. You’re talking about the schools in town. You’re talking about the Little League fields. And I don’t want to see that up there,” council member William M. Dempsey said Feb. 25.
“It’s not like we’re taking the town’s money and letting the town fall apart. We’re upgrading the infrastructure in town overall over the past eight years. We’re been upgrading the roads and the electrical infrastructure. We’re tearing down dilapidated buildings. So we’re taking care of the citizens. We’re upgrading our police force. They aren’t losing anything. But, again, the safety of this community comes first and there are just too many questions right now that are still left unanswered,” Burke said.
“It’s well worth the effort. That has to be the worst spot in the county, and probably in the state, to put a landfill. You have issues including the drinking water up there, and the roads. I run with the fire department up there on accidents. If a landfill goes up there, that will cost somebody’s life. There will be deaths on that road,” council Vice President Michael Petrozino said Feb. 25.