Dive Brief:
- Reworld is nearing final approval to update permits and burn biomedical waste at its facility in Bristol, Connecticut. A memo published by the state Department of Energy & Environmental Protection last week recommended final approval from the agency’s commissioner, noting Reworld's applications were consistent with state regulations.
- The memo acknowledged concerns from the community, which have centered around increased air pollution from burning biomedical waste as well as noise issues. Despite the local health district identifying noise violations at the site last year, DEEP staff said they did not note compliance violations related to the current permits in their determination.
- Reworld has made several moves in recent months to expand its Connecticut operations. Last month, it acquired Red Technologies, an environmental services company that operates a rail-served transfer station and handles hazardous and non-hazardous waste.
Dive Insight:
Reworld's plan to change its permits to allow biomedical waste incineration has triggered pushback from community members and local lawmakers alike. Several bills have been introduced into the state legislature to change incinerator rules in response to concerns around the health impacts from air pollution generated by adding biomedical waste to the incinerator’s feedstock.
SB 80 would require incinerators that process any amount of medical waste to meet the U.S. EPA's standards for medical waste incinerators; HB 5108 would establish new, more stringent standards for industrial low-frequency noise pollution; and HB 5107 would issue a moratorium on new medical waste incineration permits.
Community group Bristol Residents for Clean Air, which has been active in providing public feedback on the process, decried the proposed approval. The group said such a decision would make Bristol "the medical waste incineration capital of New England."
A spokesperson for Reworld said the company was pleased with the results of the “exhaustive” permitting process.
“Reworld has served the Bristol community with sustainable waste solutions for over 35 years, and we look forward to continued safe and effective operation in Bristol," Linda Ribakusky, Reworld senior manager of communications, said in an emailed statement.
The company noted several improvements it made to the Bristol facility that it said should alleviate noise issues flagged by residents. And Reworld staff insist that burning the proposed amount of biomedical waste at the facility would not cause any meaningful change in emissions, nor require enhanced monitoring.
The company also burns biomedical waste alongside municipal solid waste at three other locations, including in Lake County, Florida. During the Connecticut permit application process, Reworld submitted data from the Florida facility to show that it expects emissions at Bristol would not significantly change.
In its application, Reworld proposed to keep emissions limits at the same levels they have been for the past few years. It would receive up to 114 tons of special waste per day, including up to 57 tons of biomedical waste per day. That would mean that the facility is burning 8% biomedical waste at any given time, making the majority of burned waste municipal.
Community members have complained about noise at the facility for over a year, triggering violation notices from the Bristol-Burlington Health District, which enforces such issues. Those complaints rise through an enforcement process separate from DEEP. After a noise violation is flagged by a local governing body, the issue can be appealed or sent up to the state's department of public health.
In the memo, signed by hearing officer Kathleen Reiser, DEEP staff noted that they could only consider issues or permit violations in the evidentiary record when considering Reworld’s application. The memo noted: “As part of DEEP staff’s review of the Air Applications, a compliance check was conducted, and no noise violations within DEEP’s jurisdiction were noted pursuant to the existing permits.”
A DEEP spokesperson said in an email that the agency defers to local governments for adoption of noise ordinances and their enforcement. The agency further noted that its “compliance history review does not cover local enforcement actions, like noise violations.”
That perspective persists despite noise provisions baked into Reworld’s state permits, creating a regulatory process that is “dysfunctional if not largely nonfunctional,” Francis Pickering, a community member who has worked with local advocates, said.
"Not only is DEEP not informed about violations, but DEEP has refused to address any violations, claiming they do not have authority to do so. Basically, this is a ‘not my job’ situation," Pickering said in an email.
DEEP held a a public hearing on Nov. 7 to receive public comment on the permit application and accepted written comments. It noted concerns brought by the community about the noise. It also held an evidentiary hearing on Nov. 21 in which experts brought by Reworld and the agency offered testimony on the application.
"If you're the applicant, it's ‘evidence’; if you're anybody else, it's comment," Pickering said.
Reworld, in it capacity as the permit applicant, has the ability to apply for an exception or request an oral hearing over the agency’s proposed decision in the 15 days after it’s released, which began March 7. Pickering expects DEEP will issue its final decision in the next 90 days.
