| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 7:06:05 PM
|
Police end manhunt, say city is 'safe'
NEWBURYPORT -- Police have suspended their search for a camouflaged and masked man who reportedly pointed a handgun at a city worker in the Crow Lane landfill.
State police and local police, canine units, and a helicopter conducted an extensive search, which began around 2 p.m. when a man allegedly showed, or possibly pointed, a gun at a city worker at Crow Lane Landfill, where residents and the city dump yard waste and leaves. Subsequent reports placed the man at other spots near Hale Street.
Police have been pulling over and questioning motorists who fit the general description of the man.
No facial descriptions have been released yet. The man is reported to walk with a limp.
Police Marshal Tom Howard suspended the search after 6 p.m., saying the man is no longer in the area.
The search covered a large area, roughly from Interstate 95 to the west, to the Low Street neighborhood in the north to Scotland Road in the southeast. The area includes extensive woodlands, swamps, and fields, as well as an industrial park and some residential neighborhoods.
Police have been going door-to-door, asking for information and warning people that the man is being sought.
Police locked down Immaculate Conception School, Opportunity Works, Nock Middle School, Brown Elementary School, River valley Charter School and Bresnahan Elementary School at around 2:30. The lockdown ended about an hour and a half later, and students were allowed to leave. Parents received notification of the lockdown through automated phonecalls.
The Newburyport Public Schools released a statement at 4:15 p.m., saying, "The Newburyport Police have assured us that the cty is now safe. Busses have begun their routes. If you live in the Hale St. area, please meet your child at the bus stop. All other sudents, including walkers, will be held at the school and must be picked up by their parents/guardians."
Businesses in the area, such as Cabot Stains on Hale Street, were warned by police to watch for the man and to secure their buildings.
Police descended on the Bresnahan at around 3 p.m. and prepared to set up a perimeter when they received a report that the gunman was in the school, but the report was quickly deemed to be false.
There are no reports of shots being fired. Early on in the search police noted it is hunting season, but it would be unusual for a hunter to be carrying a handgun.
Police have been given a number of tips on who the man may be and what his motivations are. None of the tips could immediately confirmed.
|
 |
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 7:23:15 PM
|
| Tails....who was the masked gunman....Mayor DeMaria or Thiebault....come on, I know you have a wacky theory to throw out. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 7:27:05 PM
|
I'm just writing to say I'm not dignifying your callous BS with an answer. Your the one that sounds like you live in a fantasy world. I don't have time for nonsense and people that crawl out from the underground just to stir the pot.
|
Edited by - Tails on 10/22/2008 7:28:41 PM |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 7:30:23 PM
|
| BS is posting a completely irrelevant article under this topic. Looking forward to seeing you on the 29th when you can't hide behind your keyboard. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 8:00:12 PM
|
| I would love to go but I'm certainly not going to take time off work for it. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 8:03:24 PM
|
| I will be attending, and I know many who will be, too. I think it could be an interesting evening. |
|
|
|
just wondering
Senior Member
387 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2008 : 8:05:56 PM
|
| must not be an important issue tails.....or is it easier to spit venom without giving your name? |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 08:26:55 AM
|
| Of course it's important. I've done my part, and know plenty of people that will show. "spit venom" you sound very "defensive." Sounds like someone else I know. The underground rein of terror always comes to an end. |
|
|
|
kimmy
Member
32 Posts |
 Posted - 10/23/2008 : 10:44:29 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by just wondering
Tails....who was the masked gunman....Mayor DeMaria or Thiebault....come on, I know you have a wacky theory to throw out.
I havent posted much but have been reading. I dont think they meant Demaria or Thebeault had anything to do with it. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 11:26:59 AM
|
| Of course that was not the intent. Crow lane landfill is closed. No one from New Ventures is there. Everett and Newburyport have an unfortunate connection, and in my opinion, it was coincidence. They are nice people, and I was thinking of their schools, and for anyone to think otherwise, is sadly and rudely mistaken. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 10:50:42 PM
|
I called the DEP and they are fighting tirelessly and contrary to what was said by the Mayor, Wood Waste is going to trial. The DEP said given the complexity of the regulations and the facility's lengthy enforcement history, the matter should be resolved in a full trial. We are awaiting the scheduling of this trial.
See next three posts: |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 10:51:46 PM
|
Dated: June 13,2008
SUFFOLK, ss.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 08-2176C
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
Plaintiff,
v.
WOOD WASTE OF BOSTON, INC., DELLA
THIBEAULT, as trustee of Wood Waste of Boston,
EAST ELM STREET REALTY, LLC,
and OMLC, LLC,
Defendants.
THE PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION
FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PURSUANT TO MRCP 65(b)
The plaintiff the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the "Commonwealth") submits this memorandum in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction under MRCP 65(b), to stop the defendants from unlawflly operating a construction and demolition waste processing facility at 85-87 Boston Road in Everett (the "Everett Facility"), and on adjacent property in Chelsea
(the "Chelsea Parcel"). The purpose of this motion is to prevent the ongoing release of dust and noxious odors (including those associated with hydrogen sulfide gas) from, and intermittent fires in, the processed waste stockpiled at the site. *
The defendants Wood Waste of Boston, Inc. (the "Wood Waste Corporation") and Della
Thibeault, as trustee of Wood Waste of Boston (the "Wood Waste Business Trust;" the Wood
• William Thibeault, the principal of the defendant Wood Waste Corporation, Inc., is
also the principal of New Ventures Associates, LLC, the defendant in Commonweatlh v. New Ventures Associates, LLC, Suff. Sup. Ct. Civ.
Action No.: 06-0790-C, pending in this session.
While the claims are unrelated, material processed at the Everett Facility historically has been used as closure material for the landfill that is the subject of that case.
Waste Business Trust and the Wood Waste Corporation, together the "Wood Waste Defendants" operate the Everett Facility on property owned by the defendant East Elm Street
Realty, LLC ("East Elm Realty"). The Wood Waste Defendants unlawflly are processing and accumulating excessive amounts of construction and demolition debris at the Everett Facility using an inadequate, partially enclosed shed, which leaves the material open to the elements and allows dust and odors to migrate from the site into the adjacent community; and accepting, processing, and storing waste other than construction and demolition debris there, although they
are authorized to accept only construction and demolition waste at the facility.
The Wood Waste Defendants are also using adjacent property in Chelsea (the "Chelsea Parcel"), owned by the defendant OMLC, LLC ("OMLC"), for which they have neither a site assignment nor a permit, as an illegal dumping ground to expand their unlawful operations.
As described by Mark Fairbrother, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ("MassDEP") environmental analyst responsible for monitoring the defendants' conduct, in his affidavit sworn to June 11,2008 (the "Fairbrother Aff."), and by Deputy Chief
Paul E. Calderwood of the Everett Fire Department, in his affidavit sworn to June 12,2008 (the "Calderwood Aff."), each submitted in support of this motion, the defendants have repeatedly
violated administrative orders issued to bring them into compliance with the law, and have compromised the public health and safety, and the environment, by, among other things, causing the release of noxious odors, such as those associated with hydrogen sulfide gas, into the community, and causing fires to which the Everett Fire Department has had to respond, each of which result from the "cooking" of the excessively large volume of processed material
concentrated in the stockpiles there.
2
To address the ongoing threats to the environment and public health resulting from the ongoing statutory violations at the Everett Facility and Chelsea Parcel, the Commonwealth requests that the Court order the defendants to: (i) stop accepting, processing, or disposing of solid waste at the Everett Facility, until the Wood Waste Defendants complete a facility building
in accordance with a valid Authorization to Construct issued by the MassDEP; receive an Authorization to Operate and a Permit from MassDEP that includes an Operation and Maintenance Plan approved by MassDEP for the Everett Facility; (ii) stop accepting, processing,
or disposing of any solid waste or processed material at the Chelsea Parcel; (iii) immediately effectively cover the existing piles of processed construction and demolition waste material made
up of units less than three inches in diameter (such material, the "C&D Fines"), and of the coarser material that remains after processing (such material, the "C&D Residuals"), both at the
Everett Facility and on the Chelsea Parcel, and otherwise act to prevent fugitive emissions;
(iv) within seven days, properly dispose of any unprocessed solid waste stored either at the
Everett Facility or the Chelsea Parcel; (v) within 21 days, remove all C&D Fines and C&D Residuals from the Everett Facility and Chelsea Parcel, while mitigating the release of hydrogen
sulfide and other odoriferous gas and dust; (vi) until the material is removed and properly disposed of, implement stabilization measures to control odors and to ensure that the material removed.
from the site conform to the standards that must be met for the material to be accepted at chosen receiving facilities; (vii) until the material is removed and properly disposed of, prevent the
production of "free draining" liquid on the site; (viii) until the material is removed and properly disposed of, monitor the ambient air on and around the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel
for hydrogen sulfide gas using a Jerome meter; (ix) until the material is removed and properly disposed of, monitor the ambient air on and around the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel
3
for dust and asbestos; (x) provide monitoring data to MassDEP, and notify the Everett Board of Health and MassDEP promptly about all dust and odor complaints; and (xi) allow MassDEP access for inspections at both the Everett Facility and Chelsea ParceL.
The Commonwealth should prevail here because, as we demonstrate below, the defendants are flagrantly violating G.L. c. ill, § 150A and § 150A~, the Massachusetts solid waste management act (the "Solid Waste Act"), and its implementing regulations, in maintaining
and operating their construction and demolition waste processing facility in Everett, and by expanding those operations to the non-site assigned Chelsea Parcel. The MassDEP's efforts to
compel compliance with the law have been unavailing, and the public interest demands
immediate relief.
Facts
The Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel occupy approximately five acres of land in the cities of Everett and Chelsea, Massachusetts. Before 2000, the defendants operated a solid waste handling and processing facility at 141 Boston Street, Everett (the "Old Site"), and that year the defendants moved their operation to its present location, 85-87 Boston Street. Complaint, irir 15 - 17; Fairbrother Aff., ir 6.
The Wood Waste Defendants accept, process, and store construction and demolition waste as defined in the Solid Waste Act implementing regulations ("C&D Waste") at the Everett Facility, identifying some material to be recycled, some to be disposed of offsite, and some to be processed to be reused as daily cover for, or for shaping and grading of, Massachusetts landfills.
The Wood Waste Defendants process portions of the C&D Waste at the Everett Facility using a three inch screen to produce potentially marketable C&D Fines, material with units less than three
inches in diameter. The remaining coarser screened material is then further processed and sorted.
4
Some of this resulting material may be recovered for recycling or reuse, and the portion that is not
recovered for recycling or reuse is known as "C&D Residuals." Both C&D Fines and C&D Residuals may, in appropriate circumstances, be used to shape and grade Massachusetts landfills before they receive a final cap. Complaint, irir 18 - 19; Fairbrother Aff., irir 7 - 8.
The Wood Waste Defendants also process and store solid waste at the Chelsea Parcel, and currently are storing large amounts of C&D Fines and C&D Residuals there. However, the defendants have never applied for or received a site assignment from the Chelsea Board of Health
or a solid waste management facility permit from MassDEP to maintain or operate a solid waste facility at the Chelsea Parcel, making it an illegal dumping ground. See Complaint, ir 20; Fairbrother Aff., ir 4.
The 1995 ACO
On December 4, 1995, MassDEP issued an Administrative Consent Order and Notice of Noncompliance, ACO-NE-95-4002 (the "1995 ACO"), to the Wood Waste Corporation, with the company's consent, regarding the solid waste operations at the Old Site, which had not received a
site assignment or a facility permit. A true and complete copy of the 1995 ACO is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 1. Complaint, ir 21; Fairbrother Aff., ir 9. The 1995 ACO required that any C&D Waste processing at the Old Site comply with the Commonwealth's solid waste laws and regulations, including that the Wood Waste Corporation
had to apply for and receive a site assignment and solid waste management facility permit to be able to continue to operate there. Complaint, ir 22; Fairbrother Aff., ir 9.
The 1995 ACO also established interim operating requirements for the Old Site pending its receiving a site assignment and facility permit, including that the Wood Waste Corporation: (i) had to implement and comply with a dust control plan to prevent or minimize fugitive dust emissions; (ii) was prohibited from accepting any fuiture, appliances, auto parts, tires, hazardous waste, municipal solid waste,
5
putrescible organic material, or special wastes such as sludge's, industrial waste, or asbestos containing
material; (iii) was required to designate a separate storage area for creosote and pressure treated wood, and to segregate and store temporarily all creosote and pressure treated wood in the designated area pending removal and proper disposal; (iv) was prohibited from
accumulating more than two trailer loads of solid waste there, which had to be temporarily stored in covered trailers; (v) was prohibited from accumulating and storing C&D Fines and C&D
Residuals in piles over 12 feet high; and (vi) was required to process all incoming material within 48 hours of receipt. Complaint, irir 23 - 28; Fairbrother Aff., ir 9.
The 1999 Administrative Order
On October 24, 1997, MassDEP issued another administrative order to compel compliance, Unilateral Administrative Order, UAO-NE-97-4001, and a Notice ofIntent to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty, PAN-NE-97-4001, alleging that the Wood Waste Defendants
violated the 1995 ACO. The Wood Waste Corporation appealed, and on September 10, 1999, the Wood Waste Corporation entered into a settlement agreement (the "1999 Settlement Agreement")
with MassDEP and the City of Everett regarding the violations of the 1995 ACO. The 1999 Settlement Agreement included an enforceable final administrative order dictating how the Wood
Waste Corporation had to handle and process solid waste at the Old Site (the "1999 Administrative Order"). The 1999 Administrative Order became effective on September 30,1999, when the Commissioner of MassDEP signed her Final Decision (the "1999 Final
Decision") in the matter. The 1999 Settlement Agreement, with the 1999 Administrative Order and the 1999 Final Decision, are attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 2. Complaint,
irir 29 - 30; Fairbrother Aff., irir 10 - 11.
Under the 1999 Administrative Order, the Wood Waste Corporation was required to
relocate its waste processing operations from the Old Site to an acceptable
6
alternative location. The acceptable site the Wood Waste Corporation chose was 85-87 Boston
Street, where the Everett Facility began to operate in 2000, and where it continues to operate today. The 1999 Administrative Order incorporated many of the provisions of the 1995 ACO,
and set forth other operations requirements and prohibitions effective pending the Everett Facility's being site assigned and permitted at the 85-87 Boston Street location. Complaint,
irir 31 - 36; Fairbrother Aff., ir II.
The Final Permit and Authorization to Construct the Everett Facility
In April 2000, the Wood Waste Corporation submitted an application to MassDEP for a solid waste management permit for the Everett Facility, along with an application for an Authorization to Construct the new facility, as contemplated by the 1999 Administrative Order.
On July 10, 2000, the City of Everett Board of Health issued a site assignment for the Everett Facility (the site assignment does not apply to the property in Chelsea owned by OMLC where
the Chelsea Parcel is located, which never has been site assigned, and which the defendants are operating as an illegal dumping ground). See Complaint, irir 43 - 44; Fairbrother Aff., irir 4,
11 - 12.
Then, on October 21, 2002, MassDEP issued a Final Permit for the Everett Facility (Permit No.: NESW-PF-057; the "Final Permit"), along with an Authorization to Construct the C&D Waste processing and transfer facility (the "Authorization to Construct;" a copy of the Final Permit and Authorization to Construct is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 4).
The effective date of the Final Permit and the Authorization to Construct was October 21, 2002, and although the approvals required the Wood Waste Corporation to construct the Everett Facility by January 21, 2004, the defendants still have not even begun to do so. Complaint, irir 45, 46, and 56;
Fairbrother Aff., ir 14.
7
The Final Permit required that all processing and storage of C&D Waste and processed material at the Everett Facility, including the area where waste was to be received and handled, had to occur inside a building to be constructed at the center of the property. Separate buildings were to be built for maintaining equipment and storing vehicles, and for offces. Complaint, ir 47;
see copy of the Final Permit and Authorization to Construct attached to the Complaint as
Exhibit 4. The Final Permit allowed the Everett Facility to receive only C&D Waste, and prohibited it from accepting more than 500 tons of waste a day. The Final Permit also prohibited the Everett Facility from receiving waste defined as "special waste" or "municipal solid waste" in the Solid Waste Act implementing regulations, and other banned items, while requiring the operators continuously to monitor the waste received at the Everett Facility to ensure that they
accept no banned solid waste there. Complaint, irir 49 - 52; see copy of the Final Permit and
Authorization to Construct attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 4.
The Authorization to Construct expired on October 22,2005, pursuant to the sunset
provision in 310 C.M.R. 19.041(4).
To date, the Wood Waste Defendants have not built the Everett Facility, and instead of operating within the structures contemplated by the Final Permit, the Wood Waste Defendants are handling, processing, and storing C&D Waste at the Everett Facility using a temporary, partially enclosed structure (the "Waste Shed"), which does not comply with the requirements of the Authorization to Construct or the Final Permit, and are conducting the bulk of their operations, including tipping, handling and storing solid waste,
outside the Waste Shed in open areas. Complaint, irir 55 - 57; Fairbrother Aff., irir 14 - 15.
The 2000 Beneficial Use Determination
On or about February 29,2000, MassDEP issued a beneficial use determination (the "BUD") to the Wood Waste Corporation allowing it to use processed C&D Fines as alternative daily cover and pre-capping and contouring material at Massachusetts landfills, under the
8 conditions set forth in the BUD. The BUD is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 3.
As a result of the BUD, processed C&D Fines generated and used in accordance with the requirements and conditions of the BUD are not regulated as solid waste. However, to protect the integrity of the
resulting processed material, the BUD includes strict inspection and testing requirements for incoming loads of unprocessed C&D Waste, and for the processed material, requirements that the Wood Waste Defendants are ignoring. Complaint, irir 37 - 42; Fairbrother Aff., ir 13.
The Statutory Violations
As documented in the supporting affidavit of Mark Fairbrother, the primary MassDEP environmental analyst for the site, since June 2003 the Wood Waste Defendants have been handling and processing loads of C&D Waste in an unenclosed area outside of the Waste Shed,
and have been accumulating C&D Fines and C&D Residuals there in an uncovered pile much higher than the 12 foot limit. Complaint, irir 58 - 101; Fairbrother Aff.,irir 15 - 21.
Because of the nature and volume of the material accumulated in these piles, noxious hydrogen sulfide gas is being emitted to the surrounding areas, and there have been intermittent fires on the site.
Fairbrother Aff., irir 8, and 18 - 21; see Calderwood Aff., irir 4 -
7.
Moreover, the Everett Facility has no designated area for storing creosote or pressure treated wood received with C&D Waste. And C&D Waste from the Everett Facility has been piled on a portion of the non-site assigned Chelsea ParceL. In addition, recyclable materials and solid waste that had been separated from accepted C&D Waste has been stored in piles and containers on the Chelsea Parcel, and the Wood Waste Defendants have accumulated asphalt,
brick and concrete ("ABC") rubble on the Chelsea property, and have processed it using heavy equipment, including mobile rubble crushing equipment. Throughout this time, the Wood Waste Defendants have not used adequate dust control measures, causing fugitive dust emissions on the streets adjacent to the Everett Facility. In fact, the Wood Waste Defendants never even began to construct the facility buildings contemplated by the Final Permit and the Authorization to
Construct to ensure that the operations at the facility were enclosed, to minimize the likelihood of fugitive emissions. Complaint, irir 58 - 10 I; Fairbrother Aff., irir 15 - 21.
In addition, the Wood Waste Defendants have not been monitoring incoming C&D Waste for prohibited material prior to accepting loads for processing there, including that the Wood Waste Defendants only periodically or intermittently are checking unloaded and accepted waste to determine whether it included prohibited material, such as vinyl sheet flooring that could contain asbestos. ¡d.
Also, the Wood Waste Defendants have not posted required signs at the Everett Facility describing the materials that they are prohibited from accepting at the Everett Facility, nor are they otherwise giving notice that they will reject loads containing suspect material. The Wood Waste Defendants also have been accepting, processing, and storing prohibited material at the Everett Facility including, without limitation, creosote and pressure treated wood, furniture, auto parts, tires, appliances, and municipal solid waste. ¡d.
By 2006, the height of the piles of the processed C&D Fines and C&D Residuals stood approximately 25 feet high, more than twice the allowed height, with portions of the over sized piles completely uncovered, while C&D Waste was still being handled outside the Waste Shed. And the Wood Waste Defendants were stil not using adequate dust control measures, and fugitive dust emissions were visible on and near public streets adjacent to the Everett Facility.
Complaint, irir 80 and 81; see Fairbrother Aff., Ex. 1, Inspection Report & Memorandum to the
Record, 10/27/06 Inspection.
And in 2006, MassDEP began to detect noxious odors, including pungent sour odors and odors associated with hydrogen sulfide gas (the "rotten egg" smell) downwind of the Everett Facility, with MassDEP measuring concentrations of hydrogen sulfide gas on site and in nearby
public areas in concentrations as high as 53 ppb. Complaint, ir 82; see Fairbrother Aff., Ex. 1,
I
nspection Report & Memorandum to the Record, 4/3/08 Inspection. As described in the Fairbrother Aff., irir 18 - 21, these emissions are a serious ongoing concern for the surrounding community.
The Recent Inspections
As described in the Calderwood Aff., during December 2007 and January 2008, ånd at subsequent times, the Everett Fire Department responded to reports of smoke or fires related to
the piles of C&D Fines and C&D Residuals at the Everett Facility.
On December 13,2007, the Everett Fire Department issued a letter, a copy of which is attached to the Complaint as Exhibit 5,
directing the Wood Waste Defendants to reduce the size of the piles of C&D Fines and Residuals to less than 20 feet high (of course, at no time has the Everett Facility been authorized to have
piles exceeding 12 feet high), and to maintain setbacks from the property line and structures of 25 feet. Complaint, ir 98; Calderwood Aff., ir 5. The Deputy Fire Chiefs order went unheeded.
Calderwood Aff., ir 6.
On Januar 16,2008, MassDEP inspected the Everett Facility with Captain Michael Nigro and Lieutenant Anthony Carli of the Everett Fire Department, and thereafter inspected the facility
on February 25 and 26, March 11 and 18, and April 3 and April 7, 2008. Complaint, irir 98 - 100.
As described in the Fairbrother Aff., irir 17 - 22, the Wood Waste Defendants are still, among other things: (i) maintaining an outdoor pile of processed C&D Fines and C&D Residuals exceeding 12 feet high, while they continue to accept and handle incoming C&D Waste without
the permanent structure within which these activities are required to be conducted as set forth in their Final Permit and Authorization to Construct; (ii) storing and processing recyclable materials
and solid waste at the unauthorized Chelsea Parcel; (iii) accepting, processing and storing prohibited material at the Everett Facility, including, without limitation, municipal solid waste,
11
cardboard, furniture, auto parts, and mattresses; (iv) not inspecting incoming loads to prevent the receipt of unacceptable materials; and (v) not collecting or analyzing samples from incoming
C&D Waste and the processed material, the C&D Fines, as set forth in the BUD.
To prevent further harm, the defendants should be required to eliminate wind-blown dust and the emission of noxious odors, including from hydrogen sulfide gas, from the Everett Facilty,
and to prevent the ongoing intermittent fires there.
Argument
THE COURT SHOULD ISSUE AN INJUNCTION BECAUSE THE COMMONWEALTH HAS
DEMONSTRATED THAT THE DEFENDANTS HAVE VIOLATED THE STATE'S SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT LAWS, AND THE REQUESTED RELIEF STRONGLY
PROMOTES THE PUBLIC INTEREST
Under MRCP 65(b), to obtain a preliminary injunction the Commonwealth must demonstrate a likelihood of statutory violations, and that the requested relief either promotes the
public interest or wil not adversely affect the public. Commonwealth v. Mass. CRINC, 392 Mass. 79, 89 (1984). It is not necessary for the Commonwealth to demonstrate irreperable harm
resulting from those violations. ¡d. at 89 - 90. The Commonwealth's proof in this case amply demonstrates that the defendants' waste handling and processing activities, both at the Everett
Facility and on the Chelsea Parcel, violate the Solid Waste Act, G.L. c. 111, § 150A, and its implementing regulations, and that the public interest wil substantially be furthered by requiring
the defendants immediately to stop accepting additional solid waste and remove the existing accumulated processed and unprocessed waste there.
The Statutory Violations are Clear Here, the Wood Waste Defendants and OMLC clearly are violating the Solid Waste Act
by accepting and processing solid waste at the Chelsea Parcel without a site assignment.
The Wood Waste Defendants and East Elm Street Realty are also violating the act by processing
12
and storing solid waste at the Everett Facility without the required permits and approvals to do so, and in violation of the administrative orders issued by MassDEP to bring the facility into
compliance with the law.
The Solid Waste Act, G.L. c. 111, §§ 150A and 150A~, sets forth a comprehensive regulatory scheme governing the assignment of sites for solid waste facilities and how they must operate in Massachusetts to protect human health, safety, welfare and the environment. As such,
the Solid Waste Act, G.L. c. 111, § 150A, prohibits the construction, maintenance, or operation of a solid waste management facility unless it has received a site assignment from the local board
of health pursuant to the site suitability criteria set forth in G.L. c. 111, § 150A~, established by
MassDEP in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. And MassDEP has promulgated the "Site Assignment Regulations for Solid Waste Facilities," 310 C.M.R.
16.00 et seq., and has promulgated regulations implementing the Solid Waste Act, found at 310
C.M.R. 19.000 et seq.
The regulation at 310 C.M.R. 19.020(1) prohibits the construction, operation or maintenance of a facility to store, process, transfer, treat or dispose of solid waste except in
accordance with:
(a) a valid site assignment from the local Board of Health;
(b) a solid waste management facility permit issued by MassDEP in
accordance with 310 C.M.R. 19.000;
(c) an "authorization to construct" the facility issued by MassDEP in
accordance with 310 C.M.R. 19.041; and
(d) an "authorization to operate" the facility issued by MassDEP in
accordance with 310 C.M.R. 19.042.
As set forth in the Faibrother Aff., irir 4, and 9 - 22, by handling C&D Waste, separating
solid waste recyclable material, and storing accumulated C&D Waste and separated material in
13
piles and containers at the Chelsea Parcel, and by accumulating and processing ABC rubble
there, the Wood Waste Defendants accepted, processed, stored, or disposed of solid waste at a
place not assigned as a solid waste facility site in violation of G.L. c. 111, § 150A, 310 C.M.R.
16.06, and 310 C.M.R. 19.020(1)(a), (c) and (d). Moreover, as owners of the Chelsea Parcel,
Elm Street Realty and OMLC maintained, and are maintaining; a solid waste facility at a place
not assigned as a solid waste facility site or permitted as a solid waste management facility by
MassDEP, violating G.L. c. 111, § 150A, 310 C.M.R. 16.06, and 310 C.M.R. 19.020(1)(a), (c),
and (d). As further described in the Fairbrother Aff., irir 14 and 15, the defendants have operated and maintained the Everett Facility since January 21, 2004, without constructing the required
facility to house their operations in accordance with the Authorization to Construct, and without
having received an Authorization. to Operate.
Thus, the defendants are violating the Solid Waste
Act, G.L. c. 111, § 150A, and the regulations 310 C.M.R. 19.042(1),310 C.M.R. 19.020(1)(c),
310 C.M.R. 19.020(1)(d), and 310 C.M.R. 19.015.
In addition, the Wood Waste Corporation has violated the 1995 ACO and the 1999
Administrative Order, and so has violated the Solid Waste Act, by: (i) accepting more than 500 tons of waste per day at the Everett
Facility at various times between 2004 and 2007; (ii)
accepting, processing and storing at the Everett Facility material prohibited by the 1995 ACO, including, without limitation, creosote and pressure treated wood, furniture, tires, appliances,
auto parts, and municipal solid waste; (iii) failing to monitor incoming and unloaded C&D Waste at the Everett Facility for prohibited material before accepting the waste for processing or
processing it; (iv) failing to post signs at appropriate locations at the Everett Facility giving adequate notice that the Everett Facility does not accept prohibited material and that loads
containing prohibited material would be rejected; and (v) operating mobile waste grinding and
14
shredding equipment at the Everett Facility outside, and not within an approved enclosed
structure. Fairbrother Aff., irir 15 - 22.
Thus, the Commonwealth has demonstrated the requisite likelihood of statutory violations, and the Court should grant the Commonwealth's motion for a preliminary injunction to require the defendants to address their ongoing violations.
The Requested Relief Clearly Will Benefit the Public
The Commonwealth also has amply shown that issuing an injunction wil promote and protect the public interest. The defendants' demonstrated history of noncompliance with the Commonwealth's environmental laws and regulations, and with MassDEP's administrative directives, adversely affects the public interest in the protection of public health and safety, and the environment. Here, the defendants are flouting the laws and regulations meant to protect
communities and the Commonwealth from the potential adverse effects of solid waste processing operations, including the release of noxious odors and the creation of fire hazards, and as a result
the surrounding areas of Everett and Chelsea are being placed at risk. See Fairbrother Aff., irir 15
- 22; Calderwood Aff., irir 4 - 7.
As described in the Fairbrother Aff., ir 8, because of the Wood Waste Defendants' failures to heed the operating requirements in the 1995 ACO and the 1999 Final Permit, the waste piles at
the Everett Facility are "cooking," that is the material is degrading leading to the buildup of excessive heat in the piles, and causing the release of significant amounts of hydrogen sulfide gas
from the piles. This has led to complaints from those who live and work in the surrounding community, including from Michael Mekonnen, City Counselor in Chelsea (Fairbrother Aff.,
ir 18), and from Richard Lewin, whose business is located nearby, and who complained that the
odors from the Everett Facility are "foul, unpleasant and nauseating" (Fairbrother Aff., ir 21).
15
The defendants' past and present violations of the Solid Waste Act demonstrate a patent disregard for the law. Their five year record of noncompliance shows that without immediate
court intervention the defendants wil continue to violate the law, exacerbating the environmental
damage to the community already caused by the ilegal operations at the Everett Facility and on
the Chelsea Parcel.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the Commonwealth respectfully requests that the Court grant the Commonwealth's motion for a preliminary injunction.
Dated: June 13,2008
. ew Goldber 0 # 608
Astistant Attorney General
Environmental Protection Division
One Ashburon Place, 18th Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02108
617-727-2200
h:\woodwaste\pimem
16
|
Edited by - Tails on 10/23/2008 11:23:19 PM |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 10:58:22 PM
|
SUFFOLK, ss.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 08-2176C
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
Plaintiff,
v.
WOOD WASTE OF BOSTON, INC., DELLA
THIBEAULT, as trustee of Wood Waste of Boston,
EAST ELM STREET REALTY, LLC,
and OMLC, LLC,
Defendants.
ORDER
Upon hearing, the motion for a preliminary injunction of the plaintiff the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the "Commonwealth") is hereby ALLOWED in its entirety. Accordingly, the defendants are hereby
ORDERED:
(i) immediately to stop accepting, processing, or disposing of any solid waste, including, without limitation, construction and demolition waste as defined by 310 C.M.R. 16.02
("C&D Waste"), and processed C&D Waste made up of units less than three inches in diameter (such material, "C&D Fines"), and of the coarser material that remains after processing (such material, "C&D Residuals"), at the property located in Chelsea, Massachusetts (the "Chelsea Parcel") adjacent to the construction and demolition waste processing and storage facility located at 85-87 Boston Street, Everett, Massachusetts (the "Everett Facility"), or at any other location that does not have a site assignment;
(ii) immediately to stop accepting, processing, or disposing of any solid waste, including, but not limited to, C&D Waste (including C&D Fines and C&D Residuals), at the Everett Facility, unless and until the defendant Wood Waste of Boston, Inc. (the "Wood Waste Corporation"), or other authorized person: (a) completes construction of a permanent facility building on the site of the Everett Facility in accordance with a valid Authorization to Construct issued by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ("MassDEP") pursuant to
310 C.M.R. 19.041 ;
(b) receives an Authorization to Operate and a Permit from MassDEP
pursuant to 310 C.M.R. 19.000, et seq. for such a facility on the site of the Everett Facility; (c)
has submitted a revised Operation and Maintenance Plan, prepared in accordance with 310
C.M.R. 19.000, et seq ., including, without limitation, the requirements of 31 0 C.M.R. 19.011,
310 C.M.R. 19.017,310 C.M.R. 19.030(3)(c)(4), and 310 C.M.R. 19.200 through 19.207,
for such a facility on the site of the Everett Facility; and (d) is otherwise in full compliance with all applicable administrative enforcement orders, including the Beneficial Use Determination issued
by MassDEP in 2000, and with the Commonwealth's solid waste management laws and regulations, for the facility on the site of the
Everett Facility;
(iii) immediately effectively to cover the existing piles of C&D Fines and C&D Residuals, both at the Everett Facility and on the Chelsea Parcel, to prevent fugitive emissions;
(iv) within seven days of
the date of this Order, lawfully to dispose of any
unprocessed solid waste present either at the Everett Facility or the Chelsea Parcel;
(v) within 21 days of the date of this Order, to remove all C&D Fines and C&D Residuals from the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel and lawfully to dispose of, or otherwise lawfully use, the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals. In doing so, the defendants shall
comply with 310 C.M.R. 19.207(1) and 310 C.M.R. 7.01(1), including, without limitation,
2
during the removal and loading of the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals from the stockpiles, mitigating and controlling the generation and release of hydrogen sulfide and other odiferous
gas, and dust, from the stockpiled C&D Fines and C&D Residuals, by:
(a) placing an effective
cover on the piles and working areas at the end of each working day;
(b) limiting to the greatest
feasible extent the active face of the stockpile working area; and
(c) spraying water mist on the
load out areas during loading activities and otherwise as needed;
(vi) until the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals are removed from the
Everett Facility, to implement stabilization measures both to mitigate and control the generation of odors and hydrogen sulfide gas on the site, and to ensure that the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals
transported from the site conform to the standards that must be met for the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals to be accepted by the facility which will be receiving them.
Such stabilizing measures may include, without limitation: (a) mixing the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals with soil; and (b) stabilizing the stockpiled C&D Fines and C&D Residuals with a stabilizing agent, such as by applying liquid lime slurr and powdered lime, or otherwise as approved by MassDEP;
(vii) all stabilization and dust control activities undertaken pursuant to this Order shall be conducted in a way that prevents the production of "free draining" liquid, including that the
defendants shall place and maintain staked hay bales to contain any liquid that may be generated as a result of the methods used to stabilize the stockpiles and control dust;
(viii) from the date of this Order until the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals are removed from the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel in accordance with this Order, during the load
out of stockpiles continuously to monitor the ambient air on and around the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel, including the load but areas, for hydrogen sulfide gas using a Jerome meter;
(ix) to develop and implement a program for monitoring the ambient air on and
3
around the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel for particulate matter (dust and asbestos) during the load out of the stockpiles from the date of this Order until the C&D Fines and C&D Residuals are removed from the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel in accordance with this Order.
Such program shall be conducted under the supervision and direction of an independent professional engineer qualified to perform real time ambient air particulate monitoring at construction and waste remediation sites in the Commonwealth, and shall include the following:
(a) using real time monitors located at the perimeter of the Everett Facility; (b) using personal monitors within the load out areas; (c) daily collecting and analyzing all pariculate samples for
Total Particulates (TSP/PM); (d) collecting and analyzing asbestos monitoring samples not less than twice daily from the load out areas when material is being loaded; and (e) immediately
reporting to the MassDEP the detection of asbestos in any of the particulate samples;
(x) to provide all monitoring data to MassDEP immediately upon request, and notify
MassDEP and the Everett Board of Health by telephone within one hour of receiving a complaint
of dust or odor coming from the Everett Facility or the Chelsea Parcel; and (xi) to allow MassDEP personnel and contractors access during regular business hours to enter the Everett Facility and the Chelsea Parcel to conduct inspections, to evaluate
compliance with this Order and with the Solid Waste Management Act, G.L. c. 111, § 150A, and
4
its implementing regulations, and to examine the Everett Facility's records related to solid waste management activities at the Everett Facility and the Chelsea ParceL.
Approved:
Justice, Superior Court Date
Attest:
Assistant Clerk
h: \woodwaste \piorder3
5
|
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 11:02:22 PM
|
June 13, 2008
SUFFOLK, ss.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 08-2176C
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS,
Plaintiff,
v.
WOOD WASTE OF BOSTON, INC., DELLA
THIBEAULT, as trustee of Wood Waste of Boston,
EAST ELM STREET REALTY, LLC,
and OMLC, LLC,
Defendants.
THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
PURSUANT TO MRCP 65(b)
The plaintiff the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the "Commonwealth") hereby requests that the Court grant its motion for a preliminar injunction pursuant to MRCP 65(b), and issue an order in the form attached hereto requiring the defendants, among other things, to
stop accepting solid waste at their processing and storage facility in Everett and at their adjacent parcel in Chelsea, and promptly remove the solid waste and the processed construction and
demolition material currently stockpiled there. The Commonwealth is seeking this relief because the defendants' solid waste processing and storage activities that are the subject of this action are
violating G.L. c. 111, § 150A, the Massachusetts solid waste management act, and its implementing regulations, and are threatening the public interest in the protection of public health and safety, and the environment.
In support of its motion, the Commonwealth relies on the complaint in this action, filed on May 14,2008 (the "Complaint"); the affidavit of Mark Fairbrother, environmental analyst with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ("MassDEP"), with exhibits,
sworn to June 11,2008; and the affidavit of Deputy Chief Paul E. Calderwood, of the Everett Fire Department, with exhibits, sworn to June 12,2008.
On May 14, 2008, the Commonwealth filed its Complaint commencing suit against the
defendants for their ongoing violations of the state's solid waste management laws and
regulations, and served the defendants the same day. The defendants own and operate a construction and demolition waste processing and storage facility in Everett, where the
defendants unlawflly are:
(i) processing and accumulating excessive amounts of construction
and demolition debris using an inadequate, partially enclosed shed, which leaves the material open to the elements and allows dust and noxious odors to migrate from the site into the adjacent
community; and:
(ii) accepting, processing, and storing waste other than construction and demolition debris, although they are authorized to accept only construction and demolition waste at the facility.
The defendants are also using their adjoining property in Chelsea, which has not received a site assignment or a permit, to expand their unlawful operations.
In doing so, the defendants have repeatedly violated administrative orders issued to bring them into compliance with the law, and have compromised the public health and safety, and the environment, by,
among other things, causing releases of noxious odors, including those associated with hydrogen sulfide gas, into the community, and causing fires in the stockpiled material to which the Everett
Fire Department has had to respond.
2
The Commonwealth hereby requests an expedited hearing on this motion under Superior
Court Rule 9A(c).
Dated: June 13, 2008
h:\woodwaste\pimot
3
|
Edited by - Tails on 10/23/2008 11:25:07 PM |
|
|
|
Cruller DaVille
Senior Member
148 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 08:51:49 AM
|
Tails, thanks so much. You are oh, so right. DEP, EPA, and other federal regulators are looking to reel him in. Its SOOOOO unfortunate for us; however, that the truth is not being told.
There is also talk that one of the subsidiaries of Wood Waste (a Maine based company also owned by Thibeault) has been indicted for illegal dumping in the state of Maine.
I've been trying to get my hands on a copy; nothing yet. Not sure which company name it is in.
Its very scary....... Everett is at a crossroad..... we can either florish and grow (this will take a competent and able leader and a city government ABOVE being paid off) or we will go the way of Chelsea and be told what we're going to do. All the, while the Evil Oval Bandito and his goon crew and associates will laugh all the way to the bank while our property values diminish and our city crumbles (but oh boy, we'll have pretty flowers).
"Cruller DaHville"
 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Wood Waste
