• At the January 22, 2013 BOS meeting, Mr. Milde, also the Landfill R-Board Chairman, proposed changing the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process to a “By-Right” permit process for power generating facilities at the landfill; it was seconded by Mr. Snellings, also on the R-Board. That vote was preceded by a motion to suspend By-laws to allow the CUP to By-Right resolution, R-13-37. Both votes were offered, seconded, and approved 6-0 (with one absent) by the same two BOS members. The effect is to eliminate: (1) Public Hearings; (2) advertising in the local newspaper; (3) posting signs at the landfill; (4) mailing public notices to all abutting property owners; and (5) several studies. http://www.co.stafford.va.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/1630 (page 23) and the specific agenda item http://bos.stafford.va.us/01222013/20.pdf.
  • On March 19, 2013, the Stafford Board of Supervisors (BOS) voted 7-0 to change the permit process to “By-Right”. http://www.co.stafford.va.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/1694
  • On April 22, 2013, the R-Board signed an agreement with EEP to build the incinerator. One of the terms was that EEP would have to pay $1M by June 6, 2013, and the first year’s rent of $100,000.
  • On April 23, 2013, the BOS voted 7-0 to eliminate the Machinery and Tools Tax, virtually eliminating any tax that the incinerator would have to pay.
  • On June 4, 2013, Resolution R-13-159 was approved 5-0, with Cord Sterling abstaining and another member absent. It allowed the R-Board to enter into a lease with EEP to build, own, and operate an incinerator at the Eskimo Hill Road Landfill. The lease was not included in the agenda packet and the staff report did not mention that an unlimited amount of tires were to be imported into Stafford for incineration. The Agenda (the link name is misdated):  http://bos.stafford.va.us/06182013/2.pdf (start on page 40, Item 30), and the Minutes: http://bos.stafford.va.us/06042013/30.pdf (also, page 40).
  • On June 19, 2013, EEP and the R-Board signed on a new agreement, giving EEP additional time, until July 26, 2013, to make the $1M payment that Stafford would use towards the $7.3M in road improvements needed. It would result in Stafford residents only having to pay $6.3M to improve roads needed by EEP to ship in tires to be incinerated. No money was ever received from EEP.
  • On July 2, 2013, the Stafford BOS approved a resolution requesting the Governor to take action on the incinerator permit. http://bos.stafford.va.us/07022013/20.pdf
  • On July 9, 2013, the City of Fredericksburg held a Public Hearing to determine whether they should sign the lease, posting the information on their website. Both jurisdictions operate the landfill, but only the City thought it was important to let its citizens know. The City noted that the municipal solid waste (MSW) definition, according to the R-Board, excluded tires, so Stafford could still claim that they weren’t allowing any other jurisdiction’s MSW into the landfill. http://va-fredericksburg.civicplus.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/216?fileID=230
  • The cat was out of the bag! Stafford residents raised a ruckus, despite the misinformation released by some R-Board members, including statements like: (1) there would be no toxic output from the operation (but the lease contained instructions on what to do with toxic by-products, and the tire oil by-product had to be sold to make the plant profitable); (2) the landfill only had 10 months life left (but that was just one cell, with the landfill actually having 30-50 years life left); (3) there would be no “Municipal Solid Waste”  (MSW),  AKA “garbage”, brought in from other localities (but tires were excluded from the MSW definition and no restrictions on quantity could be imposed by the landfill); and, (4) there would be no costs incurred by Stafford residents (but Stafford residents would have to pay $7.4 M in road improvements required to handle increased landfill truck traffic).
  • On August 13, 2103, because of public outcry, the Stafford BOS rescinded the Agreement (lease), and agreed to start over, including changing the permit process back to CUP. The City of Fredericksburg hadn’t taken any action on this, awaiting the outcome in Stafford.
  • Since then, the CUP process has been restored (February 4, 2014 BOS Meeting); a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for a new incinerator was been issued (October 2014), and the public commented on it (most comments were not included) (November 2014); the R-Board authorized issuance of a consulting services contract to bring in incinerator experts (November 22, 2104 R-Board meeting).
  • By February 17, 2014, six consulting services RFP proposals were received to revise the RFP, evaluate proposals that result, and perform an environmental study. Arcadis won, and the draft RFP was revised and presented to the R-Board in their May Meeting.
  • On May 21, 2014, by a 6-0 vote, one absent, the R-Board voted to reissued the RFP (Resolution RB14-02) that could result in an incinerator at the landfill.
  • RFP # 85144 was issued May 30, 2014, with 60 days to respond (August 5, 2014)
  • The Pre-Proposal Bidder’s Conference was held on June 11, 2014
  • Still to occur: the staff provides a preliminary proposal review at the August BOS Meeting; the contract would be awarded in November 2014; and the environmental study would be done (TBD).
  • According to the 5/21/2014 R-Board meeting, there are NO required Public hearings before awarding the contract. The Stafford BOS could hold “public information meetings” if they want to, but there is no requirement to do so. Everyone should contact their Supervisor and demand that they do so.
  • The Pre-Proposal Meeting was held June 11, 2014, including a site visit; I was there. Keith Dayton delivered the briefing and there were lots of questions. I asked about the sulfur acid soil and who would pay for connecting water and sewer to the landfill when the incinerator needs it. The answers: (1) it’s up to the bidder to check out the soil; and (2) no answer. The latter probably means us, Stafford residents.
  • On June 13, 2014, from 6-8 PM, there was a meeting at the St. George’s Episcopal Church, 905 Princess Ann St., Fredericksburg, VA  22401. The people behind this website hosted the event and the Energy Justice Network, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and Urban Ore, spoke. It was very interesting to find out how other jurisdictions handle garbage, reduce landfill costs, and employ people in good-paying jobs.

The new RFP requires the apparent winner to fund an environmental study, and it clearly states that there is no water available at the landfill for operational use, a potentially catastrophic omission in the old lease. However, Arcadis has been selected to review the RFP and evaluate proposals, and then to perform the Environmental Study, which may be a Conflict of Interest. So would they help select a winner and then provide a bad environmental report? That remains to be seen.

So, this website was born to provide an unbiased opinion of the issues. Ok, it is biased. It is against incinerators polluting the air, water, and land, and causing significant health problems to Stafford residents.