When is an expansion not an expansion? It depends on who you ask.
At our Town Hall meeting Mohsen Nazemi of the South Coast Air Quality Management District told us that AQMD is currently reviewing Quemetco’s application to expand its battery processing by 25%, going from 1.2 million pounds to 1.5 million pounds of batteries processed each day. At the same meeting, Rizgar Ghazi of the Department of Toxic Substances Control told us that DTSC is reviewing Quemetco’s application to renew its hazardous waste permit without taking into consideration at all the proposed 25% expansion and how this will necessarily increase Quemetco’s generation of hazardous waste.
Why are these two powerful state agencies treating Quemetco so differently? We asked this question of DTSC’s Bindu Kannan at our meeting on August 19 and she told us something surprising. It turns out that DTSC’s Permitting Division does not define Quemetco’s expansion as an “expansion.” Why not? Because no new buildings or new equipment will be added to the facility.
Now, this is very interesting because it is the same argument Quemetco first made to AQMD to defend its position that a full environmental review of its increased battery processing was unnecessary. AQMD didn’t buy it: a 25% increase, they argued back, would have potential significant environmental impacts and a full environmental review of its increased battery processing was needed.
Moreover, Quemetco did install brand new equipment in 2014 to accommodate expanded battery processing. How did DTSC treat Quemetco’s application to add new equipment? As an indication that Quemetco was preparing to expand production? Nope. DTSC treated the new equipment as a simple modification of the current hazardous waste permit that, as a modification, does not require a full environmental review.
With these facts before us, CAC can only conclude that DTSC will do what it can to satisfy Quemetco while avoiding its basic regulatory responsibility to protect the public’s health. DTSC’s motto is “ to protect California’s people and environment from harmful effects of toxic substances by restoring contaminated resources, enforcing hazardous waste laws, reducing hazardous waste generation, and encouraging the manufacture of chemically safer products.”
Really?
At our Town Hall meeting Mohsen Nazemi of the South Coast Air Quality Management District told us that AQMD is currently reviewing Quemetco’s application to expand its battery processing by 25%, going from 1.2 million pounds to 1.5 million pounds of batteries processed each day. At the same meeting, Rizgar Ghazi of the Department of Toxic Substances Control told us that DTSC is reviewing Quemetco’s application to renew its hazardous waste permit without taking into consideration at all the proposed 25% expansion and how this will necessarily increase Quemetco’s generation of hazardous waste.
Why are these two powerful state agencies treating Quemetco so differently? We asked this question of DTSC’s Bindu Kannan at our meeting on August 19 and she told us something surprising. It turns out that DTSC’s Permitting Division does not define Quemetco’s expansion as an “expansion.” Why not? Because no new buildings or new equipment will be added to the facility.
Now, this is very interesting because it is the same argument Quemetco first made to AQMD to defend its position that a full environmental review of its increased battery processing was unnecessary. AQMD didn’t buy it: a 25% increase, they argued back, would have potential significant environmental impacts and a full environmental review of its increased battery processing was needed.
Moreover, Quemetco did install brand new equipment in 2014 to accommodate expanded battery processing. How did DTSC treat Quemetco’s application to add new equipment? As an indication that Quemetco was preparing to expand production? Nope. DTSC treated the new equipment as a simple modification of the current hazardous waste permit that, as a modification, does not require a full environmental review.
With these facts before us, CAC can only conclude that DTSC will do what it can to satisfy Quemetco while avoiding its basic regulatory responsibility to protect the public’s health. DTSC’s motto is “ to protect California’s people and environment from harmful effects of toxic substances by restoring contaminated resources, enforcing hazardous waste laws, reducing hazardous waste generation, and encouraging the manufacture of chemically safer products.”
Really?