Click image to see full size poster

Not one.

Make of that what you will.

Sirs,

On behalf of Cape Fear River Watch, North Carolina Coastal Federation, Cape Fear Group of the North Carolina Sierra Club, Friends of the Lower Cape Fear, Pender Watch and Audubon North Carolina, I am requesting that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners formally ask the Secretary of the State Department of Natural Resources (DENR) to review and regulate the proposed Carolinas Cement plant along the Northeast Cape Fear River under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA.)  I am further requesting a minimum of 45 minutes at the April 6th, 2009 Commissioners‘ Meeting for myself and representatives of other groups to present their rationale as to why they believe the Commissioners should make this request.

When the Commissioners approved the incentive package to invite Titan America to our county it did so with the understanding that any new mining or manufacturing operation along this beautiful stretch of the river would be subject to complete, thorough and rigorous scrutiny from the state and federal regulating agencies.  The most relevant standards are those of SEPA.  Holding a company to a less rigorous standard, or allowing a company to bypass the most relevant standard, is contrary to the promises made by the Commissioners at the time Titan was formally invited into the community and is frankly an insult to the voters of New Hanover County.

It is appropriate for DENR to regulate Carolinas Cement under SEPA and it is certainly appropriate for the Board to request that the Secretary invoke his authority.

“An environmental document is required when the Secretary determines that”:

(1) Proposed activity may have a potential for significant adverse effects on wetlands; surface waters such as rivers, streams and estuaries; parklands; game lands; prime agricultural or forest lands; or areas of local, state or federally recognized scenic, recreational, archaeological, ecological, scientific research or historical value, including secondary impacts; or would threaten a species identified on the Department of Interior’s or the state’s threatened and endangered species lists; or

 

(2) the proposed activity could cause changes in industrial, commercial, residential, agricultural, or silvicultural land use concentrations or distributions which would be expected to create adverse water quality, in stream flow, air quality, or ground water impacts; or affect long -term recreational benefits, fish, wildlife, or their natural habitats; or

 

(3) the proposed activity has secondary impacts, or is part of cumulative impacts, not generally covered in the approval process for state action, and that may result in a potential risk to human health or the environment;

I look forward to speaking before you on the 6th as you consider this matter.  If you require any additional information, background or action from me, feel free to contact me at 910-602-3862 or by e-mail at dspringer@cfrw.us.

Sincerely,

Doug Springer,

Riverkeeper

Community Selection:
Find a place where you will run into the least opposition ~ target a “Cerrell” community. (21 years ago the California Waste Management Board paid Cerrell Associates half a million dollars to define communities that won’t resist siting of LULUs [ Local Undesirable Land Use]. Cerrell provides important proof that siting is 99% politics and 1% science)
The Cerrell study says:
Least Likely to Resist:

Southern/Midwestern
Rural
Open to promises of economic benefits
Conservative
Above middle age
High school or less education
Low income
Catholics
Not involved in social issues
Old-time residents (20 years +)
“Nature exploitive occupations” (farming, ranching, mining)

Most Likely to Resist:

Northeastern, western, California
Urban
Don’t care or benefits are minor concern
Liberal, welfare state
Young and middle aged
College educated
Middle and upper income
Activist
Residents for 5 – 20 years
Professional occupations

Scope out the opposition:

__ monitor news media to identify community activists
__ assess potential opponents past behavior
__ determine their self-interests and vulnerabilities
__ keep good, up to date files on opponents
__ determine their sources of funding, if any
__ find out who their friends are

Don’t’ waste time or money trying to win over the NIMBYs:

__ follow all of the steps in #2, scoping out the opposition, plus:
__ involve them in the process, painlessly and ineffectively, through devices like Citizens Advisory Committees.
__ take them on trips to see “models” on which our LULU will be based.
__ find out what they need (or would like) and promise it (jobs, money for schools, public services, free trash service, direct grants to the community, increased tax base, donations for community projects, museums, the arts, etc.) Don’t worry about delivery.
__ determine what benefits they will get from the LULU and make sure they understand what’s in it for them.
__ find backers who have “name appeal”, who will sway others.
__ get opinion-shapers and community leaders bought in by offering them shares in the project either at reduced cost or for free, or promise them jobs or business for their companies or economic benefits for the community in general.

Let our allies take on the NIMBYs for us.
Use sophisticated public relations methods:

__ use “quality” public relations materials, the slicker the better.
__ use our greater resources by use of the media through paid ads in local newspapers, television and radio.
__ have good, well-trained people representing us. Recruit tired, disgruntled staff from environmental groups who are tired of working for public interest wages.
__ use quality audio-visual materials (videos, slides, tape, displays, movies.)
__ prepare and distribute quality materials for the children and donate them to local schools. Cartoon or coloring books are an excellent tool.

Keep the debate focused on our agenda and make the NIMBYs react:

__ create a sense of the inevitable with remarks like, “it’s got to go somewhere.”
__ speed up the process, or at least create the impression the process is moving along rapidly to keep the NIMBYs on edge.
__ emphasize every single step of the process so NIMBYs see each stage as a life-or-death situation.
__ bring in and keep in the forefront an array of “bi-lingual” technical experts (who can speak plainly when appropriate, but are good at scientific double talk.)
__ only do battle with the NIMBYs in forums that are either friendly (e.g. government-run public hearings) or controlled by us.
__ have hearings and meetings held in rooms that are much, much larger than the anticipated crowd, it makes it look like not many people are concerned.
__ do all we can to subtly avoid meeting the NIMBYS on their turf, but without running the risk of seeming cowardly.
__ if we must meet the NIMBYs, try to select who and how many of them we meet.
__ make NIMBYs feel they must answer our technical arguments, point by point, by stressing rules of government procedure that require decisions to be made on the legal and technical merits, discounting public sentiments and politics.
__ make arrangements with government hearing officers so our technical experts make
their presentations first. Have our technical experts take their time.
__ dismiss NIMBYs during and after encounters as “emotional, hysterical, selfish, unfactual, irrelevant, selfishly motivated, anti-jobs, tree huggers, socialists (or worse), unrealistic, ignorant, hypocritical” (by focusing on household toxics use and other consumer behavior.)
__ try “sand-bagging” (it’s fun) Get hearing dates changed at the last minute, sinceNIMBYs have little money or access to technical experts and changing a hearing date will make them panic

__ try to get hearings scheduled during the daytime on a working day or during the Thanksgiving to Christmas period.

Use “state of the art” language:

__ start with “state of the art”
__ “acceptable risk” – what our experts, not to mention our accountant, feels would be ok for the turkeys in this community
__ best available technology
__ best available European technology
__ use poly-syllable, hyphenated terms derived from Latin or Greek or explanations like, “the hydro-geological characteristics of these soil strata indicate a excellent permeability co-efficient of ten to the minus 7, meaning that compounds such as VOCs will leach at the rate of less than 1 ug per milliliter per meter per year, but that’s not a problem since our state of the art leachate collection system will capture any ambient discharge that
escapes our double-lined 60-mil polyethylene liner, which as you all know, is the height of the science of such technologies.” Ok?
__ only talk about what we want to talk about, in terms we want to use. If NIMBYs don’t use our language, treat them as ignorant and unworthy of respect, talking down to them is the best way to do this.

Carefully monitor the NIMBYs’ activities:

__ Monitor the media. Keep a good clippings file. Record any television coverage.
__ Have a representative at their meetings. They need not identify themselves, though there could be backlash if discovered. If our rep does identify him or herself, it could have a useful chilling effect on the group or could make the representative a “lightning rod” for anger (which isn’t so bad, since s/he isn’t a policy maker).
__ listen to what people are saying on the street, on radio talk shows, in the letters to the editor column, etc.

Be prepared to get tough with the NIMBYs:

__ When the NIMBYs hold a public meeting, it’s perfectly legal for us to invite our supporters, including employees, to attend in force and speak their minds.
__ if NIMBYs make uncomfortable accusations about us, don’t be bashful about having our lawyer send them a letter warning them of the consequences of breaching libel orslander laws (even if there’s no such breach evident).
__ If, heaven forbid, a member of the NIMBYs works or does business for us, take all necessary steps to remind him/her about basic loyalty and self-interest
__ if the NIMBYs sue us, we’re well without our rights to counter-sue
__ if the NIMBYS sue us, make sure our counsel wages an aggressive defense. Don’t hold back in tactical use of the deposition, interrogatories, etc.
__ use higher authorities. If the NIMBYs block us through local government, see if a higher authority (state, federal or the courts) can override that local decision
__ everybody’s got their price. Determine the price of key NIMBY leaders and be prepared to pay it
__ rough stuff, like getting physical, isn’t nice and could backfire in a real serious way. But be prepared to do damage control should one of our employees view our frustration with the NIMBYs as a signal we want them “dealt with”

Have a back up site in mind, or a Plan B if we fail to defeat the NIMBYs.

Cape Fear River Watch

Position Statement Summary

Cape Fear River Watch (CFRW) is a non-profit organization dedicated to the protection and improvement the water quality of the Lower Cape Fear River Basin through education, advocacy, and action.  With this mission in mind, we have carefully considered and evaluated the potential impacts associated with Carolina Cement Company’s (Titan America) plans to develop a cement plant and mining operation here in New Hanover County.  Unfortunately we have learned that this proposed industry, which would be situated along the banks of the Northeast Cape Fear, would undoubtedly cause irreplaceable harm to the important natural resources in and around the plant.  Therefore, CFRW has taken a position strongly against the development of this project as it is proposed.

The natural communities in and around the Northeast Cape Fear River in proximity to the proposed cement production facility are widely considered to be pristine.  These communities include vast wetlands, habitats for threatened species, and prime fishing and recreation areas.  CFRW is specifically concerned about the following environmental impacts that would be encountered if this plant to be built:

·      The destruction of up to 600 acres of pristine wetlands, which the Department of the Interior’s U.S. Fish & Wildlife has referred to as a “Resource of National Importance” in their initial comments to the Corp of Engineers. They have agreed with our position that these wetlands aren non-replaceable by indicating that the “impact to these resources may be unmitigable.”

·      The contamination of air and water quality due to emissions of high levels of mercury, Chromium-VI, and other pollutants into waters that are already declared mercury impaired on the Federal 303d list.

·      Dewatering and depletion of the aquifer due to the mining of limestone and the potential to contaminate the aquifers through salt water intrusion or the quarrying process.

·      The direct discharge of sediment and contaminants into the Northeast Cape Fear River.

We have developed the enclosed in-depth statement that outlines in great detail the concerns we have with the development of the Titan America plant. It is extremely important that we do not allow Titan America to bring the pollution and destruction of natural resources associated with their industry to the banks of the Northeast Cape Fear River.

Thank you for your interest in this matter.  Feel free to contact me to discuss further.

Sincerely,

Doug Springer

Cape Fear River Watch Executive Director

RiverKeeper

Click HERE for the full position statement

Titan Site Tagged Aquatic Resource of National Importance  by Marina Giovannelli on WHQR

Titan No Show, Forum Goes On by Keith Barber in Lumina News

Cement Company Eyes Pender by Amanda Hutcheson in Topsail Voice

Following is CFRW’s comments on the matter as submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers as part of the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement.  But first – and even better – have a look at the comments submitted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.   A few excerpts:

“These forests are regularly to irregularly flooded with freshwater lunar or wind tides and there is little or no salinity in the water. Tidal flooding brings seawater-derived nutrients and varying amounts of sediment into the community which probably makes the tidal forests more productive than the non-tidal blackwater subtype of cypress gum swamp.” (page 5)

“Because of the juxtaposition of oceanic saline, mesohaline and oligohaline conditions coupled with the highest diurnal tidal range of any North Carolina estuary, the Cape Fear River estuary, including the tidal portion of the Northeast Cape Fear River, has a high fish species diversity, with in excess of 250 species documented, from 88 families . . . An ecosystem with so many distinct ecological features merits the highest level of conservation measures to ensure its future sustainability.” (page 8 )

and my favorite:

“Given the uniqueness of the fish and wildlife resources at the Castle Hayne site, it is likely that careful analysis will reveal that these anticipated impacts are unmitigable.” (pp. 13-14)

It’s a real SAT word, but now that the US Fish and Wildlife service has broken the ice the word becomes one I’m looking forward to dropping into casual conversation.   Say it out loud: “unmitigable”

And now, with no further ado, CFRW’s own comment letter to the Corps:

July 15, 2008

The report is in 6 parts that are easily downloaded.