Westford board plans to take closer look at emissions data

Common Sense, you always complain that you want facts so here are some facts from last night's Westford Planning Board meeting.
The gentleman from TRC during his speech, admitted that there are 14+ items in trace amounts that will be emitted from the proposed plant including but not limited to the follow, VOC's(volatile organic compounds)Benzine, Sulfer Dioxide(SO2), formaldehyde(CH2O), Carbon Monoxide(CO), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and PM(particulate matter)10 and 2.5. Yes, while these are trace amounts, and fall within current EPA and DEP air guidelines, these are items that without the plant there, wouldn't even exist in trace amounts.

Another point, after the initial 120 day stack test, following stack tests only have to be conducted every 3 years. During the span of 3 years a lot can happen with the way equipment functions, possibly leading to an increase in emission that might not be detected/tested for in years.

When the gentleman from TRC was questioned if he ever air modeled for an asphalt plant before, he didn't give an answer, which might lead one to believe the answer is "no".

It was also mentioned that to achieve PM's in line with DEP guidelines that trucks within the plant travel at 10 mph to keep the dust kicked up to a minimum, who is going to enforce that? Plus when asked about the emissions between natural gas and #2 fuel oil, the TRC rep stated that in a 24 hour period,#2 fuel oil has higher emissions, now since that will be used as a back up source, it may only be used in short period bursts, thus adding to the emissions from the plant.

Finally on mobile emissions, it was stated(as it was all night) that in a worst case senario there would be 258 truck trips per day from the plant. While that may be the average, let us look at a worst case. As per Newport's own submission to the DEP their mixer can mix 400 tons per hour or 9600 tons in a 24 hour period, but that amount would burn up their 300,000 ton limit in 31 days, so I'll use 6,000 as my mark, this will give them 50 day production at that rate, and in the busy season of July and August they may hit that. During a 24 hour period producing 6000 ton of asphalt, this is 500 truck trips, 250 in and 250 out (24 tons average per truck), and dosn't include liquid asphalt tankers. I feel that 500 truck trips should have been used as the worst case mark and not 258.

These are just more reasons Westford doesn't need an asphalt plant, it's not a good idea for the children, the environment, the traffic or the property values. Let us keep Westford...well Westford.

Common Sense wrote:

Ok well a couple of notes here;
1. The clean facility entraps 99.99% of particles. Yes,.01% will escape,.....
What you fail to tackle however, is what are those proposed levels, related to existing background conditions?
Meaning, do you heat your home with natural gas?.... What emissions are given off, relative to those proposed by Newport Materials?
What about a neighbors electric dryer? There is an escape vent on the side of the home right? What is the measure of particles released into the air via that dryer vent? Compare those to the levels proposed by Newport Materials.

How about dioxins and Hydrogen Sulfide emissions? The Veterans Administration has determined that any exposure to dioxins at any concentration can cause pancreatic tumors, liver tumors, brain tumors in individuals exposed and spina bifida in their offsprings.

The point being, no one lives in an oxygen bubble.

I hope not since clean air is 78% Nitrogen. A 100% Oxygen environment would be a highly toxic.

The measure is not whether or not the facility releases minor traces, the question is, what are those levels when compared to normal every day items?

For dioxins it is zero. For Hydrogen sulfide and sulfates the amount tolerated in a single day has to be adjusted for the accumulation properties of these compounds that generate "ACID RAIN". Based on Acid Rain reports, it appears that NM will operate a total of 10 days before it exceeds the thresholds for a single point polluter.

Further, if it was not Newport, who would it be? There are hundreds of acres of open land. Would you rather a strip mall, office complex, restaurant, or other facility types that would definitely increase traffic by greater than 1%, and would more than likely release emissions into the air? Or would you rather a single neighbor,.. who cares about the Westford residents,...?

Mixed zoning is prohibited by the 1978 Zoning By-Laws.
The land could be rezoned to residential or the Town of Westford can take the land over by eminent domain.
It is my understanding that a STM is being considered to take over not only the parcel under discussion but other polluters that have been flying under the radar.

2. You are speculating that the equipment might fail. It is a brand new state of the art facility.

YadaYada YadaYada . New Technology, state of the art, etc when the 60,000 gallon asphalt tank catches on fire, the newness of the facility will have little to do with it.

Further, you are insinuating that Newport does not care about emissions, and are assuming that they will not be running their own tests. What leads you to believe that they do not want the cleanest air possible as well?

Capitalist pigs and their mouth pieces have killed hundred of thousands- How about Bopal, India; Agent Orange in Nam; Chromium6+ in California; petroleum products in the Love Canal; etc., etc....,etc.

3. In regards to dust; you are worried about an applicant that will increase traffic by less than 1%, on a road that sees 15,000 unique vehicles daily.

That 1% will be composed of trucks weighing in excess of 90,000 lbs. How many school busses will have to be crushed to lumps of metal before NM recognizes the danger. How may children will have to be crippled or killed before the insanity of this proposal is recognized.

4. As for your last hypothetical scenario, which is just that, an un-relative hypothetical scenario conjured up to favor your supposed argument;
Why would Newport operate their facility 50 days a year, when the construction season lasts 7+ months?......

Why would Wall Street gurus generate securities that required a $750 billion rescue to prevent a worldwide economic collapse?
Hire a bunch of spin doctors and ethically challenged lawyers to lie to the local approval authorities.

Common Sense wrote:

And just to further add to Newport Materials vs other possible land uses - it should be noted that AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, those hundreds of acres could be used for major blasting, mining, and drilling, all within the allowed right - with numerous trucks entering and exiting the property. That could to into effect tomorrow.

It appears that is is time that eminent domain be done on these pieces of property.
BTW Just be cause it as been done in the past the grandfathering clause assumes that the operation is not detrimental to the health of the neighbors. There was a case of chromium6 in California that shut down quite a few plants.

Hey! I like that approach. Kinda like going to the ballot booth and voting for the lesser of two evils.

I question the accuracy of your blasting scenario. There is a long and arduous approval process that any company, grandfathered or not, has to go through in order to expand the blasting into new areas. Your suggestion that it could happen tomorrow is just as ludicrous as saying the smokestack emissions will cause wide spread death and destruction. You and your master (assuming you are the lapdog) use the same tactics that you criticize the coalition for.

My problem (well, one of them) with NM is that I do not trust them to inspect and maintain thier equipment in order to make sure thier operation is in fact 99.99% clean. Its one thing to construct a facility that operates that cleanly. Its a totaly different thing to keep it that way. It takes money, time and resources in order to maintain the system. BASED ON NEWPORT MATERIALS PREVIOUS DECEPTIVE AND DISHONEST BEHAVIOR I do not trust them to maintain the equipment to the level it needs to meet the 99.99% cleanliness that CS and other NM lackey claim it will do unless routine state inspections are iminent. They have already proven they cannot be trusted. Will we put our health and the health of the kids going to the RM school in the hands of such a company?

rt 40 neighbor wrote:

Hey! I like that approach. Kinda like going to the ballot booth and voting for the lesser of two evils.
I question the accuracy of your blasting scenario. There is a long and arduous approval process that any company, grandfathered or not, has to go through in order to expand the blasting into new areas. Your suggestion that it could happen tomorrow is just as ludicrous as saying the smokestack emissions will cause wide spread death and destruction. You and your master (assuming you are the lapdog) use the same tactics that you criticize the coalition for.
My problem (well, one of them) with NM is that I do not trust them to inspect and maintain thier equipment in order to make sure thier operation is in fact 99.99% clean. Its one thing to construct a facility that operates that cleanly. Its a totaly different thing to keep it that way. It takes money, time and resources in order to maintain the system. BASED ON NEWPORT MATERIALS PREVIOUS DECEPTIVE AND DISHONEST BEHAVIOR I do not trust them to maintain the equipment to the level it needs to meet the 99.99% cleanliness that CS and other NM lackey claim it will do unless routine state inspections are iminent. They have already proven they cannot be trusted. Will we put our health and the health of the kids going to the RM school in the hands of such a company?

Hey rt 40 neighbor, are you another one of those that say it's ok to build my house but don't build any more ? Sounds like it to me. I haven't heard of any health problems from Dracut residents living next to the Brox Asphalt facility. Wake up neighbor, you live next to an Industrial Zone, get with it you screwball yuppies !!

ok good point lets get air and water samples .around brox and look at all the trucks racing down 110 to a delivery.Il bet the river shows lots of toxins .from that plant .as well do a cancer study for that area ..newport should stop the smoke screen approach.And if u call that light industry . ur wrong just like a steal plant.Thay will poison the kids,then leave town.we dot need a nother plant we have chelmsford on one side and brox on the other

Common Sense wrote:

pse.
Lets see ... someone with an obvious agenda, who has obvious problems with corporate America, who is using non-relative scare tactics to insight fear into readers.
Must be Alisa.

Poor Alisa. She gets improperly blamed by delusional Macho Men like COMMON SENSE. Alisa has done a commendable job in exposing the dangers of the proposed asphalt plan. Much like Elizabeth Michaud defeated Walmart's desire to open a store in Westford, Alisa will defeat the asphalt plant proponents and you will be out of job, COMMONSENSE.

Gone Crazy wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey rt 40 neighbor, are you another one of those that say it's ok to build my house but don't build any more ? Sounds like it to me. I haven't heard of any health problems from Dracut residents living next to the Brox Asphalt facility. Wake up neighbor, you live next to an Industrial Zone, get with it you screwball yuppies !!

You live in the big Hazardous Waste site called Billerica and you have the gall to critize someone for living over a mile from the proposed NM asphalt plant. Are you related to Tommy and Mike McGlauhin?

There are a few factual errors in the story that need to be corrected:

1) The background air monitors were chosen to be the most representative of the regional background air quality, which usually means closest, but if the closest one was in a city it would not be representative of Westford and would not be chosen. Lloyd Schulman said that the Chelmsford monitor should overestimate the background that would be measured if there was a monitor at the Westford site.

2) The Lowell monitor measures CO, not CO2

3) With respect to the line in the story “The only issue was with 2.5-micron particulate matter samples taken at the Drum Hill site, which were over the limits, according to Schulman.”
I checked back on my meeting notes and spoke to Lloyd. Lloyd never said the monitored values exceeded any limits. What he said was that the predicted concentrations for PM2.5 and PM10 from the facility were the only pollutants that exceeded the Significant Impact Levels (SILs)- which is the threshold to even be required to conduct further modeling. These are the de minimis values for air quality impacts from a facility. The sum of the facility-predicted impacts and the monitored background are still below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards or the DEP would not have granted the air permit.

Thanks,
Scott

Hobo42 wrote:

<quoted text>
Poor Alisa. She gets improperly blamed by delusional Macho Men like COMMON SENSE. Alisa has done a commendable job in exposing the dangers of the proposed asphalt plan. Much like Elizabeth Michaud defeated Walmart's desire to open a store in Westford, Alisa will defeat the asphalt plant proponents and you will be out of job, COMMONSENSE.

No, Alisa has done a commendable job of spreading falsified fear amongst the Westford Community.

This has been done by spreading false rumors, handing out false propaganda pamphlets, speaking out in meetings, and never once validating any of the coalitions claims with actual relative facts or studies. She has exposed nothing that could be backed up by actual relative data.

As I said before, if she truly cared, and was not on a crusade, she would have met with Newport officials, and sought out the answers to her concerns. She did not. She immediately made Newport the enemy, and casted unfounded assumptions about their company, and the proposed facility.

Why don't you invite her on here to speak for herself?

Unless she does not want to subject herself to certain questions that she cannot, and does not want to answer. Starting with a simple question like backing up her claims with relative studies .... to more complex ones like, how does a small group of Westford residents compile the funds to hire high priced Boston Law and Engineering firms?

Common Sense wrote:

......

Which would require the town to purchase the land at fair market value.

You better get your lawyers working on this one. MGL states that if a town has revalued in the last 5 years, which Westford has, the fair market value of that property is its assessed valuation.

Maybe you missed the article printed last week, where the Westford Fire Lt., let the boards know that Newport has taken all safety measures -- above and beyond that which is deemed necessary, for any potential fire issues -- and that he was confident the fire dept., could handle any issue that might occur.

A fire LT. and Chief who have never fought a petroleum based fire in the their 20+ years of professional experience, do not give me confidence.
An analysis of the proposed foam system would have you believe that 9,000 gallons of water/foam will handle a 60,000 gallon asphalt tank on fire.

Also for reference - the liquid asphalt tank sits dormant and cold and no substance is heated until, until a purchase is made.

Either a very inefficient operations protocol or a little spin that in order to achieve maximum output the asphalt in the tank will be at temperatures ripe for an explosion ignited by the Hydrogen Sulfide plume generated in the manufacturing of asphalt.

"Capitalist pigs and their mouth pieces have killed hundred of thousands-.....
How may children will have to be crippled or killed before the insanity of this proposal is recognized."
Why, how many have been crippled or killed, due to the proposal to date? Should be an interesting statistic seeings that the facility has not been built yet.

A gun that has not been fired has killed nobody. An asphalt plant that has not been built has killed nobody. I intend to make sure that the outstanding safety record of the NM asphalt plant is maintained by dedicating myself to the task of making sure that ie never gets built.

"Why would Wall Street gurus generate securities that required a $750 billion rescue to prevent a worldwide economic collapse?
Hire a bunch of spin doctors and ethically challenged lawyers to lie to the local approval authorities."
I fail to see the relationship between Newport Material's application, and the Wall Street economic collapse.
Lets see ... someone with an obvious agenda, who has obvious problems with corporate America, who is using non-relative scare tactics to insight fear into readers.

YES, I have an agenda and I like many honest working persons have major problems with the greed that has brought us to the brink of world economic collapse.
If the truth scares the reader then I must plead guilty has charged

Must be Alisa.

BLAME A WOMAN WHEN YOU CANNOT MAKE YOUR CASE.
If you ever meet me face to face, you will piss and crap on your pants.

Common Sense wrote:

<quoted text>
No, Alisa has done a commendable job of spreading falsified fear amongst the Westford Community.
This has been done by spreading false rumors, handing out false propaganda pamphlets, speaking out in meetings, and never once validating any of the coalitions claims with actual relative facts or studies.....

It appears that you believe that your IP address cannot be tracked or you are a fool making slanderous statements about Alisa. A 5'2" female dynamo that apparently is making the NM backers reconsidering their financial risks. The construction season is almost over and it is tough to bid on jobs for early next year if you do not have the asphalt plan on-line prior to April. The next step after the Planning Board are the courts and that should tie it up for a couple of years.

to more complex ones like, how does a small group of Westford residents compile the funds to hire high priced Boston Law and Engineering firms?

The median family income in Westford is overt $110,000/year. The median family income in the area of Westford in the vicinity of NM proposed pollution and toxic waste generator is well over $150,000/year. But the family income is only relative. Don't threaten the health of my wife and children so lackeys like you and the rest of the NM backers can get rich. Some ardent individuals may invite you to sleep with the fishes.
BTW It is my understanding that there is quite bit of pro bono work being done so for every dollar the RT. 40 coalition collects,they get a power of 10 effect.

CS says:

“As I said before, if she truly cared, and was not on a crusade, she would have met with Newport officials, and sought out the answers to her concerns. She did not. She immediately made Newport the enemy, and casted unfounded assumptions about their company, and the proposed facility.”

Alisa is more concerned with the health and well being of Westford citizens, than she is in meeting with a company that lied to the ZBA from the beginning. She and the coalition are doing a great job!

CS says:

“to more complex ones like, how does a small group of Westford residents compile the funds to hire high priced Boston Law and Engineering firms?”

It could be said, who is backing Newport and all of their lawyers and “experts”, business must be real good even without the plant.

Newport just doesn't get it. A whole bunch of Westford folks are pissed and organized and fighting hard against this proposal.

If the Planning Board passes it, expect a long and drawn out lawsuit by residents. And expect the Planning Board to be swept out in the upcoming elections.

Newport just doesn't get it. They are not dealing with a small town where the residents don't have many resources or knowledge. Westford is one of the FEW towns that successfully fought and stopped WalMart. And alot of the folks who successfully fought WalMart are fighting this asphalt plant. Some in the open, some behind the scenes.

We won't stop till that asphalt plant plan fails (via permit denials or legal challenge) or the area becomes rezoned (the owners have shown a complete lack of caring for the town they grew up in... first a toxic waste dump and now an asphalt plant??) or the property is taken by eminent domain.

Newport, just take your loss and find a more guilable and less active town.

Hobo42 wrote:

<quoted text>
You live in the big Hazardous Waste site called Billerica and you have the gall to critize someone for living over a mile from the proposed NM asphalt plant. Are you related to Tommy and Mike McGlauhin?

No I'm related to Hobo42, a real jerk

mike westford wrote:

ok good point lets get air and water samples .around brox and look at all the trucks racing down 110 to a delivery.Il bet the river shows lots of toxins .from that plant .as well do a cancer study for that area ..newport should stop the smoke screen approach.And if u call that light industry . ur wrong just like a steal plant.Thay will poison the kids,then leave town.we dot need a nother plant we have chelmsford on one side and brox on the other

Get all the samples you want, but show me where anyone around the Brox plant that has cancer attributed to the asphalt plant. As far as trucks on rt 110, there are trucks every where, how do you think you got the clothes your wearing or the food you eat or delivered the materials to build your house next to an Industrial Zone, you moron, cry cry cry like a baby

CS, the tape was NOT edited. Deschenes told the ZBA that there was no intention to do any more than recycling asphalt. Clearly a lie. This tape editing accusation is nothing more than ducking the FACT that NM, as a company, is inherently dishonest and will say anything it has to in order to turn a dollar. It does not care about the effect its operation WILL have on its neighbors.

You say you are not employed by NM but it is obvious by the way you compromise your own integrity on thier behalf that you have some ve$ted interest in thier success.

Common Sense wrote:

<quoted text>
Anyone that watches the tape can CLEARLY see that it has been edited. That is not even a question. It cuts in and out.
Further, once again, that permit was for nothing more than recycling materials, and that has been its use since April.
The bottom line is, I have done NOTHING but come on here and present the actual verified facts, which just happen to be opposite of the coalitions claims.
Coalition members can come on and yell, threaten, name call, and use all of those other tactics, but the fact remains that they cannot come on and provide any RELATIVE study that backs up their claims. Science does not lie.
Honestly, for a moment, lets stop hurling insults, and please, provide a relative study that can back up the coalitions claims.

So, not only are you a lacky for Newport Materials, willing to compromise your own integrity and look a fool for the company, you're also an expert in video recording and editing. Your assertion that the coalition edited the tape to suit thier agenda is just so much BS. It is a thinly vieled attempt to dodge the FACT that Deschenes assured the ZBA that there was no intention to develope that operation beyond asphalt recycling. Spin it, lie about it, call people names and make all the false accusations you want to. The ZBA was lied to about the intent to bring asphalt manufacturing to Westford and the ZBA was lied to about the daily number of truck trips the recycling operation would generate. The people at NM have shown themselves to be defunct of any integrity and have already proven beyond a doubt that they will violate any bylaw or agreement that gets in the way of making the company more money.

Why would Westford want to agree to allow such a company to handle hazardous materials such as those used in the asphalt manufacturing process? For the $100K or so it will produce in taxes for the town? The cost to the town in litigation expenses in order to keep NM in compliance of bylaws and safety regulations will far exceed what the company will contribute to the town coffers. There is absolutely no up side to this for Westford. The only thing NM will bring to town is dust, heavy truck traffic along with its noise and the necessity to constantly monitor them in order to keep them in regulatory compliance.

Common Sense wrote:

<quoted text>
Newport did not lie to the Zoning Board. The original permit was for a rock crushing facility that has been granted, and in full operation since April.
The video footage that the coalition spliced and edited to favor their stance, was taken from that original meeting.
The lawyer was asked if the permit in question was for asphalt manufacturing, and the lawyer answered correctly that it was not. As was the case.

Is the lawyer mentioned the same lawyer that was fined by the State Ethics Commission or the lawyer under investigation for interfering in a criminal case?
In either case, I would not credence to their remarks.

Cricket:

If you want to play the lawyer game, I have a few questions myself...

1. Did the Rte 40 Coalition first approach Costello, or did Costello approach them? Who made initial contact?

2. Why would a high-priced law firm dedicate their services pro-bono? Who else would stand to benefit from Newport's proposal being denied?

Don't worry about answering, as those were rhetorical questions, with the answers already known.

I have heard through the grape vine that some very interested parties are watching this whole movie play out.

Stay tuned.