Site search
sponsored by
News
Sports
A hearing before the State Environmental Commission considering Bango Oil’s application to double its facility lasted more than seven hours on Wednesday in Carson City before it was decided to continue the proceeding until next month.
The meeting was an appeal of a decision made Feb. 13 by the Nevada Division of Environmental to approve Bango Oil’s request for a revised Class II Air Quality Operating Permit. Three residents filed appeals with the SEC protesting NDEP’s decision: Lorraine Griffin, Donald Mello and David Mathewson.
Numerous residents living along the Carson Highway have filed complaints of noxious odors they claim comes from the Bango Oil facility
Bango Oil filed an application for a revised permit in late 2008, and a public hearing was held in Churchill County on Jan. 28 to solicit public comments. NDEP approved the request Feb. 13, and the appellants filed separate appeals on Feb. 20 and Feb. 27.
Following opening statements from NDEP, Bango Oil and the three appellants, SEC Chairman Alan Coyner said the commission had three options: to dismiss the appeals, not to dismiss the appeal or to put the matter into abeyance which means the matter is left alive and more information is shared. The commission unanimously decided to put the appeals into abeyance, and all parties presented information.
Despite filing appeals for several reasons, the heart of the matter for the appellants boiled down to the noxious odor complaints.
Greg Remer, bureau chief for NDEP’s Bureau of Air Pollution Control, offered a lengthy testimony and fielded questions from NDEP attorney Bill Frey, Bango Oil’s attorney Denise Kennedy and the appellants.
In his opening arguments, Mathewson claimed information from Lovelock was used in computer modeling for the Bango Oil site to determine how any discharge would be handled in the atmosphere.
Jill Lufrano, NDEP public information officer, said terrain information from the project area was used in the modeling analysis, but meteorological data from the Lovelock area was used because data from Churchill County was unavailable.
Following the lengthy meeting, Coyner conferred with fellow commissioners Jim Gans and Ira Rackley, who both stated they were wrestling with the information and would need time to render a decision. Coyner decided to continue the hearing until another time since it was 7:30 p.m. and deliberations could last up to three more hours.
Mello was in favor of the continuation, especially since Bango Oil replaced a major piece of equipment at the facility last week which should further eliminate any possibility of odors in their product.
“I think we need to let them see how the new equipment will work,” Mello said, acknowledging that Bango Oil has a lot of money invested in the plant and employs two dozen workers. “But we’re fighting for our quality of life, too, and our investments we worked our whole lives for.”
Tom Clark, lobbyist and spokesman for Bango Oil, agreed with the decision to continue the hearing.
“There was a lot of information submitted, a lot of debate and a lot of discussion. To jam a decision in with little time for deliberation wouldn’t have been fruitful,” Clark said.
The hearing will be continued in May or June.
The meeting was an appeal of a decision made Feb. 13 by the Nevada Division of Environmental to approve Bango Oil’s request for a revised Class II Air Quality Operating Permit. Three residents filed appeals with the SEC protesting NDEP’s decision: Lorraine Griffin, Donald Mello and David Mathewson.
Numerous residents living along the Carson Highway have filed complaints of noxious odors they claim comes from the Bango Oil facility
Bango Oil filed an application for a revised permit in late 2008, and a public hearing was held in Churchill County on Jan. 28 to solicit public comments. NDEP approved the request Feb. 13, and the appellants filed separate appeals on Feb. 20 and Feb. 27.
Following opening statements from NDEP, Bango Oil and the three appellants, SEC Chairman Alan Coyner said the commission had three options: to dismiss the appeals, not to dismiss the appeal or to put the matter into abeyance which means the matter is left alive and more information is shared. The commission unanimously decided to put the appeals into abeyance, and all parties presented information.
Despite filing appeals for several reasons, the heart of the matter for the appellants boiled down to the noxious odor complaints.
Greg Remer, bureau chief for NDEP’s Bureau of Air Pollution Control, offered a lengthy testimony and fielded questions from NDEP attorney Bill Frey, Bango Oil’s attorney Denise Kennedy and the appellants.
In his opening arguments, Mathewson claimed information from Lovelock was used in computer modeling for the Bango Oil site to determine how any discharge would be handled in the atmosphere.
Jill Lufrano, NDEP public information officer, said terrain information from the project area was used in the modeling analysis, but meteorological data from the Lovelock area was used because data from Churchill County was unavailable.
Following the lengthy meeting, Coyner conferred with fellow commissioners Jim Gans and Ira Rackley, who both stated they were wrestling with the information and would need time to render a decision. Coyner decided to continue the hearing until another time since it was 7:30 p.m. and deliberations could last up to three more hours.
Mello was in favor of the continuation, especially since Bango Oil replaced a major piece of equipment at the facility last week which should further eliminate any possibility of odors in their product.
“I think we need to let them see how the new equipment will work,” Mello said, acknowledging that Bango Oil has a lot of money invested in the plant and employs two dozen workers. “But we’re fighting for our quality of life, too, and our investments we worked our whole lives for.”
Tom Clark, lobbyist and spokesman for Bango Oil, agreed with the decision to continue the hearing.
“There was a lot of information submitted, a lot of debate and a lot of discussion. To jam a decision in with little time for deliberation wouldn’t have been fruitful,” Clark said.
The hearing will be continued in May or June.
