Why is public health less vital than money?

In Arkansas codes and regulations, there are two provisions concerning lifting a “stay” during an appeal process. One is in the Arkansas Code and one in the Arkansas Pollution and Control Commission’s Rule 8, addressing an automatic stay during a permit appeal and the lifting of that stay.

• “Substantial prejudice” is defined by Arkansas Code Annotated Section 8-4-205(c)(6) as one of “the following [that] will occur to the party seeking a stay, a modification of the terms of a stay, or the termination of a stay if the request is denied: (a) actual harm to health; or (b) adverse economic impact, including without limitation interruption, curtailment, or deferral of business or increased cost of construction or operation.”

• Rule 8.612(A)(2) says that “during the pendency of a Commission review … the issuance, modification, or revocation of a permit or that part of a permit which is the subject of the appeal shall be stayed. … However, a party may make a request to the Commission Secretary under Commission Rule 8.612(B) for relief from a stay to avoid “substantial prejudice,” and the Commission Chair can grant/deny/modify the request immediately subject to review at the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting, or call a special meeting of the Commission to consider the request.”

Eco-Vista landfill lawyer Michael Heister, in his appeal to lift the automatic stay against the Tontitown landfill, based his argument “on the grounds that Eco-Vista and its customers will suffer substantial prejudice in the form of adverse business impact and increased cost.”

When did financial prejudice begin to outweigh the health and safety of human lives?

The commission continues to ignore and has not investigated the “actual harm to health” portion of Section 8-4-205(c)(6).

It is my belief that testing will eventually demonstrate that citizens are exposed daily to vapors from the Eco-Vista landfill. Preliminary tests have documented the presence of sulfur dioxide, benzene and acrolein in air near the landfill. These are putting the community at risk.

In a Legislative review, Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality Director Caleb Osborne said “We’re going to take a crack at” when he was asked about air quality testing. The nonchalant attitude is frustrating. He made this statement after the stay had been lifted on Eco-Vista’s construction of a Class 1 expansion and after a year of refusing to accept responsibility to test the area the ADEQ is responsible to regulate.

The regulations have not been revised or reviewed by the commission over a decade.

The expansion will rise up above, laying atop/against the original closed landfill area, which doesn’t have a liner under it to stop leachate from entering the karst environment and springs in our community.

There are options to haul all waste to other locations. A pricing quote, already provided by one contractor, totaled only 4% more than current costs.

We don’t need lawyers determining the proper regulations for our environment, which is the current process. KENNETH LOVETT Fayetteville